Ron Paul
-
- Hi, I'm new.
- Posts: 3
Ron Paul
I'm going to explain a little bit, and then ask a question. I was at BYU-Idaho and was walking through the library. I then felt compelled to stop and look at the books. I was drawn to the book The Law by Frederic Bastiat and felt the Spirit tell me to read it. As I was reading it I felt that it was inspired from God. I also had never been taught these things. I also had never heard of this book before.
Shortly after I was at my grandparents home. And this was during the 2008 campaign. I was standing in my grandparent's kitchen and heard on Fox News Ron Paul speaking in a debate. I right away felt the Spirit and was drawn to what he was saying. I had again that same pure clarity of thought and knew what he was saying was correct. I could also discern that the other debaters including Romney were wrong and very much off the mark or even dishonest. At that time in the kitchen I had never heard of of Ron Paul until then.
I am now very much interested in studying economics and natural rights. And I feel I am learning important things and that that Lord is actually interested in me knowing this and that it is important. Another interesting fact is I feel the Spirit when I teach liberty as well. I have many thoughts and concluded some things and would like to talk about them. But my question now is what do you think about most LDS people rejecting Ron Paul? I am not sure exactly what to think about this. My initial thoughts are that it is disturbing and concerning. But I mean this in all sincerity, how can they be so blind? Sorry if this seems prideful, but I'm really thinking this and you can call me out on it if you want. But I want to know what people here think because to me it seems so plainly obvious that it's like how can people deny that the day is day with the sun right in their face?
Shortly after I was at my grandparents home. And this was during the 2008 campaign. I was standing in my grandparent's kitchen and heard on Fox News Ron Paul speaking in a debate. I right away felt the Spirit and was drawn to what he was saying. I had again that same pure clarity of thought and knew what he was saying was correct. I could also discern that the other debaters including Romney were wrong and very much off the mark or even dishonest. At that time in the kitchen I had never heard of of Ron Paul until then.
I am now very much interested in studying economics and natural rights. And I feel I am learning important things and that that Lord is actually interested in me knowing this and that it is important. Another interesting fact is I feel the Spirit when I teach liberty as well. I have many thoughts and concluded some things and would like to talk about them. But my question now is what do you think about most LDS people rejecting Ron Paul? I am not sure exactly what to think about this. My initial thoughts are that it is disturbing and concerning. But I mean this in all sincerity, how can they be so blind? Sorry if this seems prideful, but I'm really thinking this and you can call me out on it if you want. But I want to know what people here think because to me it seems so plainly obvious that it's like how can people deny that the day is day with the sun right in their face?
- mes5464
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 29570
- Location: Seneca, South Carolina
Re: Ron Paul
God warned us about this very phenomenon.
People, even LDS, seem to think that it is okay to use the force of government to bring about righteousness. Thank in fact is false. Righteousness can only be accomplished by accepting Jesus Christ, repentance and baptism. No force of government will ever bring about Zion.
People have the mistaken idea that it is always okay to criminalize all sin, and that is just dangerous. Murder is a crime because it denies another their right to life. Wearing a seat belt while driving never is a crime because it doesn't deny anyone else a right of their own.D&C 121 wrote: 39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
People, even LDS, seem to think that it is okay to use the force of government to bring about righteousness. Thank in fact is false. Righteousness can only be accomplished by accepting Jesus Christ, repentance and baptism. No force of government will ever bring about Zion.
- sonofliberty
- captain of 100
- Posts: 177
- Location: Wherever Freedom is threatened
Re: Ron Paul
THEREDFOXISQUICK,
We know from the scriptures that in the last days, the very elect will be decieved.
And how are they decieved? They fail to understand what the war in heaven was fought over - the agency of mankind. Unless man demonstrates through the exercise of his agency that he is able to abide the celestial law, he cannot obtain the celestial kingdom. Because of this, Satan is doing all in his power to restrict the agency of mankind on the Earth today. Satan does so primarily through the use of government.
On another note, your impressions of Bastiat's The Law are spot on. You are probably aware of this, but if not, President Ezra Taft Benson quotes from Bastiat's The Law quite extensively in his talk The Proper Role of Government.
It is important to remember the words of D&C 121:
We know from the scriptures that in the last days, the very elect will be decieved.
For in those days there shall also arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch, that, if possible, they shall deceive the very elect, who are the elect according to the covenant." Joseph Smith Matthew 1:22
And how are they decieved? They fail to understand what the war in heaven was fought over - the agency of mankind. Unless man demonstrates through the exercise of his agency that he is able to abide the celestial law, he cannot obtain the celestial kingdom. Because of this, Satan is doing all in his power to restrict the agency of mankind on the Earth today. Satan does so primarily through the use of government.
On another note, your impressions of Bastiat's The Law are spot on. You are probably aware of this, but if not, President Ezra Taft Benson quotes from Bastiat's The Law quite extensively in his talk The Proper Role of Government.
see: http://www.latterdayconservative.com/ez ... overnment/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;In a primitive state, there is no doubt that each man would be justified in using force, if necessary, to defend himself against physical harm, against theft of the fruits of his labor, and against enslavement of another. This principle was clearly explained by Bastiat:
“
“Each of us has a natural right – from God – to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but and extension of our faculties?” (The Law, p.6)
”
Indeed, the early pioneers found that a great deal of their time and energy was being spent doing all three – defending themselves, their property and their liberty – in what properly was called the “Lawless West.” In order for man to prosper, he cannot afford to spend his time constantly guarding his family, his fields, and his property against attach and theft, so he joins together with his neighbors and hires a sheriff. At this precise moment, government is born. The individual citizens delegate to the sheriff their unquestionable right to protect themselves. The sheriff now does for them only what they had a right to do for themselves – nothing more. Quoting again from Bastiat:
“
“If every person has the right to defend – even by force – his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right -its reason for existing, its lawfulness – is based on individual right.” (The Law, p. 6)
”
So far so good. But now we come to the moment of truth. Suppose pioneer “A” wants another horse for his wagon, He doesn’t have the money to buy one, but since pioneer “B” has an extra horse, he decides that he is entitled to share in his neighbor’s good fortune, Is he entitled to take his neighbor’s horse? Obviously not! If his neighbor wishes to give it or lend it, that is another question. But so long as pioneer “B” wishes to keep his property, pioneer “A” has no just claim to it.
If “A” has no proper power to take “B’s” property, can he delegate any such power to the sheriff? No. Even if everyone in the community desires that “B” give his extra horse to “A”, they have no right individually or collectively to force him to do it. They cannot delegate a power they themselves do not have. This important principle was clearly understood and explained by John Locke nearly 300 years ago:
“
“For nobody can transfer to another more power than he has in himself, and nobody has an absolute arbitrary power over himself, or over any other, to destroy his own life, or take away the life of property of another.” (Two Treatises of Civil Government, II, 135; P.P.N.S. p. 93)
It is important to remember the words of D&C 121:
You may also want to take a look at the following for some addtional insight: http://www.connorboyack.com/images/weig ... atters.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;34 Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen?
35 Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson—
36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.
37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2502
- Location: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
- Contact:
Re: Ron Paul
Seat Belt Laws hold an individual responsible for risky behavior. Because it is the law, and you assume the privilege of driving a car, you are responsible to know that your safety is your accountability, especially with a seat belt, in which you assume responsibility for a measure which, in the majority of automobile accidents, actually drastically reduces the chance that the car crash will kill you. The law is there so that if someone has an accident and comes to the State government with the intent to sue, well, sorry, because you drove that car, you took the driver's ed and defensive driving, and you were responsible for whether or not you had that seatbelt on. Again, personal responsibility for one's own actions is something that if better observed, we wouldn't need as many laws, but then again, there are those jerks who love to blame someone else, so the rule is in place to protect others from their selfish, and highly immature, attitude.mes5464 wrote:God warned us about this very phenomenon.
People have the mistaken idea that it is always okay to criminalize all sin, and that is just dangerous. Murder is a crime because it denies another their right to life. Wearing a seat belt while driving never is a crime because it doesn't deny anyone else a right of their own.D&C 121 wrote: 39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
People, even LDS, seem to think that it is okay to use the force of government to bring about righteousness. Thank in fact is false. Righteousness can only be accomplished by accepting Jesus Christ, repentance and baptism. No force of government will ever bring about Zion.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2502
- Location: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
- Contact:
Re: Ron Paul
The majority of the Twelve Apostles will not be deceived to the point of leading the entire Church Astray. That's a founding promise of the restored church. So, with that being said, seriously use the direction ruled by 7 or more of the 12 apostles as a guideline should the church ever see some serious doctrinal dispute. Even when Thomas Marsh apostatized, the Majority of the Twelve, did not, and replaced him in the office of Apostle. Even when Lyman Wright was excommunicated, the remainder of the Twelve found someone else to replace him. If the Lord, has to, he will allow chastisement of the church to redirect whatever false direction it is going in, or to eventually, and I stress eventually, expose the deceivers within.sonofliberty wrote:THEREDFOXISQUICK,
We know from the scriptures that in the last days, the very elect will be decieved.
For in those days there shall also arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch, that, if possible, they shall deceive the very elect, who are the elect according to the covenant." Joseph Smith Matthew 1:22
And how are they decieved? They fail to understand what the war in heaven was fought over - the agency of mankind. Unless man demonstrates through the exercise of his agency that he is able to abide the celestial law, he cannot obtain the celestial kingdom. Because of this, Satan is doing all in his power to restrict the agency of mankind on the Earth today. Satan does so primarily through the use of government.
On another note, your impressions of Bastiat's The Law are spot on. You are probably aware of this, but if not, President Ezra Taft Benson quotes from Bastiat's The Law quite extensively in his talk The Proper Role of Government.
see: http://www.latterdayconservative.com/ez ... overnment/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;In a primitive state, there is no doubt that each man would be justified in using force, if necessary, to defend himself against physical harm, against theft of the fruits of his labor, and against enslavement of another. This principle was clearly explained by Bastiat:
“
“Each of us has a natural right – from God – to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but and extension of our faculties?” (The Law, p.6)
”
Indeed, the early pioneers found that a great deal of their time and energy was being spent doing all three – defending themselves, their property and their liberty – in what properly was called the “Lawless West.” In order for man to prosper, he cannot afford to spend his time constantly guarding his family, his fields, and his property against attach and theft, so he joins together with his neighbors and hires a sheriff. At this precise moment, government is born. The individual citizens delegate to the sheriff their unquestionable right to protect themselves. The sheriff now does for them only what they had a right to do for themselves – nothing more. Quoting again from Bastiat:
“
“If every person has the right to defend – even by force – his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right -its reason for existing, its lawfulness – is based on individual right.” (The Law, p. 6)
”
So far so good. But now we come to the moment of truth. Suppose pioneer “A” wants another horse for his wagon, He doesn’t have the money to buy one, but since pioneer “B” has an extra horse, he decides that he is entitled to share in his neighbor’s good fortune, Is he entitled to take his neighbor’s horse? Obviously not! If his neighbor wishes to give it or lend it, that is another question. But so long as pioneer “B” wishes to keep his property, pioneer “A” has no just claim to it.
If “A” has no proper power to take “B’s” property, can he delegate any such power to the sheriff? No. Even if everyone in the community desires that “B” give his extra horse to “A”, they have no right individually or collectively to force him to do it. They cannot delegate a power they themselves do not have. This important principle was clearly understood and explained by John Locke nearly 300 years ago:
“
“For nobody can transfer to another more power than he has in himself, and nobody has an absolute arbitrary power over himself, or over any other, to destroy his own life, or take away the life of property of another.” (Two Treatises of Civil Government, II, 135; P.P.N.S. p. 93)
It is important to remember the words of D&C 121:You may also want to take a look at the following for some addtional insight: http://www.connorboyack.com/images/weig ... atters.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;34 Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen?
35 Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson—
36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.
37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
- Jason
- Master of Puppets
- Posts: 18296
Re: Ron Paul
Yeah I voted for him in 2008 as well as donating to the cause. Later I was challenged in that paradigm by another member of this forum. In my efforts to disprove the comments by this forum member...I came to realize that he was indeed telling the truth (at least to the best of my perception and research). A sample of which I will include here -theredfoxisquick wrote:I'm going to explain a little bit, and then ask a question. I was at BYU-Idaho and was walking through the library. I then felt compelled to stop and look at the books. I was drawn to the book The Law by Frederic Bastiat and felt the Spirit tell me to read it. As I was reading it I felt that it was inspired from God. I also had never been taught these things. I also had never heard of this book before.
Shortly after I was at my grandparents home. And this was during the 2008 campaign. I was standing in my grandparent's kitchen and heard on Fox News Ron Paul speaking in a debate. I right away felt the Spirit and was drawn to what he was saying. I had again that same pure clarity of thought and knew what he was saying was correct. I could also discern that the other debaters including Romney were wrong and very much off the mark or even dishonest. At that time in the kitchen I had never heard of of Ron Paul until then.
I am now very much interested in studying economics and natural rights. And I feel I am learning important things and that that Lord is actually interested in me knowing this and that it is important. Another interesting fact is I feel the Spirit when I teach liberty as well. I have many thoughts and concluded some things and would like to talk about them. But my question now is what do you think about most LDS people rejecting Ron Paul? I am not sure exactly what to think about this. My initial thoughts are that it is disturbing and concerning. But I mean this in all sincerity, how can they be so blind? Sorry if this seems prideful, but I'm really thinking this and you can call me out on it if you want. But I want to know what people here think because to me it seems so plainly obvious that it's like how can people deny that the day is day with the sun right in their face?
For example - Copyright ©2009-2012 ZeroHedge.com/ABC Media, LTD.
Note to readers… Many will turn away from the following facts before finishing this research project simply because it creates in oneself a sense of cognitive dissonance – the emotional feeling and knowing that ones beliefs are misguided, and yet believing in them anyway, no matter how undeniably overwhelming the opposing facts are to ones set of beliefs. This tool (the theory of cognitive dissonance) is paramount in the struggle to keep the people under control through advertising, entertainment, media, corporate religions, and political happenstance so that the average and even above-average person is continuously and hopelessly bound… not by facts but by belief in anti-fact. I would only ask that, as in any good scientific experiment, you consider the following well-documented evidence even if it goes against your beliefs, as one must consider all positive and negative variables in any equation before the truth can ever become clear. I promise that by the end of this article, you will have indisputable proof of corruption and subterfuge proving the Audit The Fed bill to be a fraud, and will better understand the Federal Reserve System and its actual power and authority. Consider this a challenge!
http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2012 ... -ron-paul/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
....and one is hard pressed to call Ron Paul ignorant...
Ron Paul - The American Power Structure (1988)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 6735&hl=en" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Is the libertarian claim that market based money is freedom true? Wouldn't the implementation of that policy via "legalizing the Constitution" further the aims of the bankers? Does it take a rocket scientist to figure out who's on who's side???
When known bad guys are hitched to the same wagon???
This -
Legalize the Constitution!
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/01 ... stitution/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
and this -
Legalize Currency Competition
http://lewrockwell.com/paul/paul766.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
are supported by guys who support this -
Money and the coming World Order
http://www.thegoldstandardnow.org/image ... -Order.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Plan To Return America To the Gold Standard Set To Be Offered at Washington
http://www.nysun.com/national/plan-to-r ... set/87495/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
— Ron Paul, Congressional Record, March 13, 2001The ultimate solution will only come with the rejection of fiat money worldwide, and a restoration of commodity money. Commodity money if voluntarily and universally accepted could give us a single world currency requiring no money managers, no manipulators orchestrating a man-made business cycle with rampant price inflation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dH3_Lcf ... r_embedded" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Fiat money is money that derives its value from government regulation or law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
No more government regulation or law concerning money? Who then makes the rules?
Does that really get us out of the man-made business cycle....or is that just another blatant lie from a sith lord???
Is there any substantial deviations between Ron Paul's earlier work with Lewis Lehrman, Lehrman's derivative works, and Ron Paul's current agenda???
Notice how Lew Rockwell and entourage (like Alex Jones) only give you half truths....oh they are manipulating gold prices but its the government that is doing it (only to depress prices) and keep the dollar artificially inflated....so buy more gold from our sponsor Midas Resources who is also a main sponsor of C4L...
If they can depress prices....can't they increase them as well to create other paradigms? Like Ben Bernanke's discussion last month in Jackson Hole about the Federal Reserve asset purchase program to keep prices high and the inflation theory alive???
http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevent ... 20831a.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Large-scale asset purchases can influence financial conditions and the broader economy through other channels as well....Such signaling can also increase household and business confidence by helping to diminish concerns about "tail" risks such as deflation.
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north983.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Fast forward almost 70 years. Ron Paul announces at the Heritage Foundation that the government should sell its gold to reduce the national debt.
http://www.garynorth.com/public/8028.cfm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... f_Ron_Paul" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Paul has long held that land owned by the government should be sold to private developers.[193][194][195] In addition to closing the Department of the Interior, his "Restore America" budget plan proposes selling off at least $40 billion worth of public lands such as national parks, and other federal assets, between 2013 and 2016.
http://www.goldfixing.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;On the 12th September 1919 at 11.00am the first Gold Fixing took place.
The original five founding members were: N M Rothschild & Sons; Mocatta & Goldsmid; Samuel Montagu & Co.; Pixley & Abell; and Sharps & Wilkins.
For over 80 years we have been fixing the price of gold providing market users with the opportunity to buy and sell gold at a single quoted price. It also provides a published benchmark price that is widely used as a pricing medium by producers, consumers, investors and central banks.
The fix is carried out twice a day by the 5 members via a dedicated conference call facility.
Gold Fixings
http://www.lbma.org.uk/pages/index.cfm? ... ld_fixings" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.silverfixing.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The first Silver Fixing took place in 1897 at the office of Sharps & Wilkins.
For over 110 years we have been fixing the price of silver providing market users with the opportunity to buy and sell silver at a single quoted price. It also provides a published benchmark price that is widely used as a pricing medium by producers, consumers and investors.
The fix is carried out once a day at 12 noon by the 3 members via telephone conference.
Silver Fixings
http://www.lbma.org.uk/pages/index.cfm? ... er_fixings" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_bullion_market" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The London bullion market is a wholesale over-the-counter market for the trading of gold and silver. Trading is conducted amongst members of the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA), loosely overseen by the Bank of England. Most of the members are major international banks or bullion dealers and refiners.
http://iamthewitness.com/books/Eustace% ... eserve.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The control over Federal Reserve System decisions is also founded in another unique situation. Each day, representatives of four other London banking firms meet in the offices of N.M. Rothschild Company in London to fix the price of gold for that day. The other four bankers are from Samuel Montagu Company, which ranks Number 5 on the list of seventeen London merchant banking firms, Sharps Pixley, Johnson Matheson, and Mocatta and Goldsmid.
Despite the huge tide of paper pyramided currency and notes which are now flooding the world, at some point, every credit extension must return to be based, in however minuscule a fashion, on some deposit of gold in some bank somewhere in the world. Because of this factor, the London merchant bankers, with their power to set the price of gold each day, become the final arbiters of the volume of money and the price of money in those countries which must bow to their power. Not the least of these is the United States. No official of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, or of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, can command the power over the money of the world which is held by these London merchant bankers. Great Britain, while waning in political and military power, today exercises the greatest financial power. It is for this reason that London is the present financial center of the world.
From November, 1910, when the conspirators met on Jekyll Island, Georgia, to the present time, the machinations of the Federal Reserve bankers have been shrouded in secrecy. Today, that secrecy has cost the American people a three trillion dollar debt, with annual interest payments to these bankers amounting to some three hundred billion dollars per year, sums which stagger the imagination, and which in themselves are ultimately unpayable. Officials of the Federal Reserve System routinely issue remonstrances to the public, much as the Hindu fakir pipes an insistent tune to the dazed cobra which sways its head before him, not to resolve the situation, but to prevent it from striking him. Such was the soothing letter written by Donald J. Winn, Assistant to the Board of Governors in response to an inquiry by a Congressman, the Honorable Norman D. Shumway, on March 10, 1983. Mr. Winn states that "The Federal Reserve System was established by an act of
Congress in 1913 and is not a ‘private corporation’." On the next page, Mr. Winn continues, "The stock of the Federal Reserve Banks is held entirely by commercial banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System." He offers no explanation as to why the government has never owned a single share of stock in any Federal Reserve Bank, or why the Federal Reserve System is not a "private corporation" when all of its stock is owned by "private corporations"."
The Jekyll Island Club was chosen as the place to draft the plan for control of the money and credit of the people of the United States, not only because of its isolation, but also because it was the private preserve of the people who were drafting the plan. The New York Times later noted, on May 3, 1931, in commenting on the death of George F. Baker, one of J.P. Morgan’s closest associates, that "Jekyll Island Club has lost one of its most distinguished members. One-sixth of the total wealth of the world was represented by the members of the Jekyll Island Club." Membership was by inheritance only.
Why all this secrecy? Why this thousand mile trip in a closed railway car to a remote hunting club? Ostensibly, it was to carry out a program of public service, to prepare banking reform which would be a boon to the people of the United States, which had been ordered by the National Monetary Commission. The participants were no strangers to public benefactions. Usually, their names were inscribed on brass plaques, or on the exteriors of buildings which they had donated. This was not the procedure which they followed at Jekyll Island. No brass plaque was ever erected to mark the selfless actions of those who met at their private hunt club in 1910 to improve the lot of every citizen of the United States.
In fact, no benefaction took place at Jekyll Island. The Aldrich group journeyed there in private to write the banking and currency legislation which the National Monetary Commission had been ordered to prepare in public. At stake was the future control of the money and credit of the United States. If any genuine monetary reform had been prepared and presented to Congress, it would have ended the power of the elitist one world money creators. Jekyll Island ensured that a central bank would be established in the United States which would give these bankers everything they had always wanted.
Both parties included a monetary reform bill in their platforms: The Republicans were committed to the Aldrich Plan, which had been denounced as a Wall Street plan, and the Democrats had the Federal Reserve Act. Neither party bothered to inform the public that the bills were almost identical except for the names.
To further confuse the American people and blind them to the real purpose of the proposed Federal Reserve Act, the architects of the Aldrich Plan, powerful Nelson Aldrich, although no longer a senator, and Frank Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank, set up a hue and cry against the bill. They gave interviews whenever they could find an audience denouncing the proposed Federal Reserve Act as inimical to banking and to good government.
The bugaboo of inflation was raised because of the Act’s provisions for printing Federal Reserve notes. The Nation, on October 23, 1913, pointed out, "Mr. Aldrich himself raised a hue and cry over the issue of government "fiat money", that is, money issued without gold or bullion back of it, although a bill to do precisely that had been passed in 1908 with his own name as author, and he knew besides, that the ‘government’ had nothing to do with it, that the Federal Reserve Board would have full charge of the issuing of such moneys."
Senator Root raised the problem of inflation, claiming that under the Federal Reserve Act, note circulation would always expand indefinitely, causing great inflation. However, the later history of the Federal Reserve System showed that it not only caused inflation, but that the issue of notes could also be restricted, causing deflation, as occurred from 1929 to 1939.
It is interesting to note how many assassinations of Presidents of the United States follow their concern with the issuing of public currency; Lincoln with his Greenback, non-interest-bearing notes, and Garfield, making a pronouncement on currency problems just before he was assassinated.
We now begin to understand why such a lengthy campaign of planned deception was necessary, from the secret conference at Jekyll Island to the identical "reform" plans proposed by the Democratic and Republican parties under different names. The bankers could not wrest control of the issuance of money from the citizens of the United States, to whom it had been designated through its Congress by the Constitution, until the Congress granted them their monopoly for a central bank.
Therefore, much of the influence exerted to get the Federal Reserve Act passed was done behind the scenes, principally by two shadowy, non-elected persons: The German immigrant, Paul Warburg, and Colonel Edward Mandell House of Texas.
Congressman Lindbergh said on that historic day, to the House:
"This Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this bill, the invisible government by the Monetary Power will be legalized. The people may not know it immediately, but the day of reckoning is only a few years removed. The trusts will soon realize
that they have gone too far even for their own good. The people must make a declaration of independence to relieve themselves from the Monetary Power. This they will be able to do by taking control of Congress. Wall Streeters could not cheat us if you Senators and Representatives did not make a humbug of Congress. . . . If we had a people’s Congress, there would be stability. The greatest crime of Congress is its currency system. The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking bill. The caucus and the party bosses have again operated and prevented the people from getting the benefit of their own government."
The "unprecedented speed" with which the Federal Reserve Act had been passed by Congress during what became known as "the Christmas massacre" had one unforeseen aspect. Woodrow Wilson was taken unaware, as he, like many others, had been assured the bill would not come up for a vote until after Christmas. Now he refused to sign it, because he objected to the provisions for the selection of Class B. Directors. William L. White relates in his biography of Bernard Baruch that Baruch, a principal contributor to Wilson’s campaign fund, was stunned when he was informed that Wilson refused to sign the bill. He hurried to the White House and assured Wilson that this was a minor matter, which could be fixed up later through "administrative processes". The important thing was to get the Federal Reserve Act signed into law at once. With this reassurance, Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act on December 23, 1913. History proved that on that day, the Constitution ceased to be the governing covenant of the American people, and our liberties were handed over to a small
group of international bankers.
A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.
— Woodrow Wilson (after signing the 1913 Federal Reserve Act)
Lewis Lehrman's derivative work with Project for the New American Century (PNAC) -
Money and the coming World Order
http://www.thegoldstandardnow.org/image ... -Order.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Any difference between Lewis Lehrman's take, Ron Paul's, and the rest of the libertarian movement?
Is this history true concerning the role of private money in global economics?
The International Banking Cartel (I)
http://www.presstv.ir/Program/272398.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The International Banking Cartel (II)
http://www.presstv.ir/Program/273928.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Is this history true concerning private money funding the libertarian philosophy?
Mr. Anonymous & The Libertarian Movement
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0812/S ... vement.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Eyes on the Prize (Sidebar to Mr. Anonymous)
http://www.thebellforum.com/content.php ... -the-Prize" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
— Ron Paul, Congressional Record, March 13, 2001The ultimate solution will only come with the rejection of fiat money worldwide, and a restoration of commodity money. Commodity money if voluntarily and universally accepted could give us a single world currency requiring no money managers, no manipulators orchestrating a man-made business cycle with rampant price inflation.
Where do Ron Paul's ideas come from?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Unkun3a ... r_embedded" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Ron Paul is a Voluntarist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... oUrrlbDoVs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
References
http://vforvoluntary.com/ron-paul/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Ron Paul Flip Flops On His Newsletter
http://conservativesamizdat.blogspot.co ... -flops-on-.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
"There’s nothing to fear from globalism, free trade and a single worldwide currency…"
— Ron Paul, Congressional Record, March 13, 2001
"TO OUR SURPRISE, Paul's financial disclosures reveal no holdings of physical gold, gold coins, or gold equivalents like certain exchange-traded gold funds, which is confounding, given his strident advocacy of the metal as an insurance policy against the almost-certain debasement of the currency by politicians and central bankers. So we dug around a little. In his financial-disclosure form for the years 1994 through 2002, Paul reported holding "semi-numismatic" coins worth between $100,001 and $250,000. But from 2003 onward, they were never mentioned again. Rachel Mills, the congressman's press spokesperson, said Paul, who generally is garrulous on the topic of hard money, did not wish to comment."
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB500 ... 5161142897.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
http://blogs.wsj.com/totalreturn/2012/0 ... auls-gold/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Let's be Realistic about Ron Paul
http://www.henrymakow.com/ron_paul.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Is it just a coincidence that CIA insider and member of the Bilderberg steering committee, Peter Thiel, is investing in Ron Paul all while being a co-founder of PayPal (the world's leading digital money company)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palantir_Technologies" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;"Palantir was founded in 2004 by Peter Thiel, Dr. Alex Karp,[2] Joe Lonsdale,[3] Stephen Cohen, and Nathan Gettings. Early investments came in the form of $2 million from the CIA's venture arm In-Q-Tel and $30 million from Thiel and his firm, The Founders Fund.[4][5][6][7] Dr. Alex Karp is Palantir’s CEO.[8] Palantir’s name comes from the "seeing stones" in the Lord of the Rings."
http://www.nationalreview.com/agenda/28 ... ihan-salam" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;"Thiel, who sits on the board and is an avowed libertarian, says civil liberties advocates should welcome Palantir. “We cannot afford to have another 9/11 event in the U.S. or anything bigger than that,” he says. “That day opened the doors to all sorts of crazy abuses and draconian policies.” In his view, the best way to avoid such scenarios in the future would be to provide the government the most cutting-edge technology possible and build in policing systems to make sure investigators use it lawfully."
Thiel wrote: "I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Ron-Pa ... 6-100.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Government of, by, and for the People is what CONSTITUTES democracy itself. The undeniable fact that government is broken exists not because it IS government, but because it's permeated by the cancer of corporatism. You don't treat cancer by removing the good flesh and feeding the cancer.
Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.
—Mayer Amschel Rothschild
Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls energy can control whole continents; who controls money controls the world.
— Dr. Henry Kissinger
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, First by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.
—Thomas Jefferson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... f_Ron_Paul" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;2010 Paul said, "You should never restrict lobbying because the Constitution is rather clear about the people being allowed to petition Congress, and whether you're an individual or you belong to a [special interest group] ... you should be allowed to do that."[108] He argues that corporations should be able to spend their money in any way that they want.[108]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-IvckPz ... re=channel" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Is the "right to petition Congress" one and the same with professional lobbying???
http://www.pattonboggs.com/files/News/b ... slpr23.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Is this like saying that Enron wasn't the result of poor government legislation lobbied into place by a corporation....but just a bad corporation?
Why is Ron Paul the King of Pork while being the "NO" man? Wouldn't the King of Pork logically be a "YES" man? Seriously....how does a person whom supposedly doesn't compromise and has a nasty record of getting one bill passed in 35 years manage to get HIS pork in everyone else's bills???
Why would Ron Paul complain (and seek legislation) about market manipulation of precious metal prices but want to turn the power of money regulation over to the market?
Like renovating an old movie theater in Edna that has been closed for 30+ years? Prepare graduate students for faculty roles? Repair bus facilities? Maintain local communities (who can't maintain it themselves - i.e. what's the difference between this and Medicare/Medicaid)? Are any of these programs permitted, or mandated, by the Constitution? Enabling a deepening dependence on the federal government at home? One of just four House Republicans who refused to abide by their party's voluntary earmarks ban? Shrink government...just not at home...and make sure its on someone else's dime?
Practical for whom? What's considered wasteful? What's considered practical?
Anyone anywhere can come up with ideas to spend "free" money on what they consider to be "practical" projects. The great question is why does Ron Paul get the lion's share of the money when he is supposedly the one who refuses to be a cog in the wheel???
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... nding-pork" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;In Paul's early days in Congress, when he lambasted O'Neill for riding around Washington in an expensive, state-issued Lincoln Town Car. Well, the last time Paul showed up at his house, Struthwolf tells me with a chuckle, he showed up in, yes, an official Lincoln Town Car. (Paul's spokeswoman said the car could have belonged to someone else). "Tip O'Neill," Struthwolf says, "is probably laughing in his grave."
http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/0 ... jects.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://news.yahoo.com/ron-pauls-hypocri ... 00440.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Ron Paul is a fraud. He's another tool in the political arena to mislead and ultimately sell an outcome that isn't in alignment with God or righteous principles. He's also bought and paid for by the big bankers who have funded the Libertarian ideology and propaganda from nearly the beginning of the origination of that thought pattern.
The core issue with the Libertarians is that they are just more of the same old deception.
The Constitution and the government it was designed to create...is reliant on a righteous moral people. Both as representatives in office as well as the people whom the representatives are supposed to represent. The libertarians as a whole (or party) aren't advocating that.
You don't resolve a private banking problem with more private banking. Rather than strive to improve government the Libertarians instead seek to destroy it by removing the last remaining controls over currency via their competing currency bandwagon. Sure its chocolate and roses...but that's the ultimate intent. Turn the control over to those with the gold/silver buying up private armies and tyrants who will rein with blood and horror upon the earth.
The focus on PM's vs. fiat is another detractor. The bankers have long waged their currency control war with gold. The gold vs. silver battles of the late 1800's highlight this. At the heart of the battle is interest. Bankers want interest because that inherently means that over time they end up owning everything. The biggest threat to them is interest free money created by government (by the people for the people). Hence the tremendous threat of Lincoln's greenbacks and the efforts to remove him and his money....and anyone else who even remotely proposed anything similar...as well as a massive propaganda campaign focused on attacking Lincoln and rewriting the history books with regard to his contribution to mankind (search Lincoln references in Conference talks for an opposing view to Libertarian propaganda).
Anyone who proposes that Congress take back their Constitutional stance on the creation of money is violently attacked by the libertarian propaganda machine. Things that make you go hmmm....
The Articles of Confederation was a disaster. May as well call for anarchy. Wonder if that's not the intent....hmmm...
Elder Oaks was quite blatant about the disaster called the "Articles of Confederation" in his address on the Constitution...think you could convince him to go back to that?
Anyways whilst clamoring ardently for liberty the Libertarians are in fact working to destroy it. Perhaps at a greater speed than the Democrats or Republicans??? While one can try and support the party they deem to be moving along at the slowest pace...
The reality is we need people of high moral caliber and of the highest integrity. Both in office and out of office. The ultimate cure is righteousness (obedience to God's commandments and seeking to emulate His son - inherently being good honest decent human beings who strive to abide by higher and higher laws). Anything else is a detraction. Anyone who tries to propose compromise to that agenda (justification or support of sin - disobedience)...has sold short...and definitely isn't proposing a path to liberty. The adversary is all about chains....
Last edited by Jason on November 18th, 2013, 8:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- moonwhim
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4251
Re: Ron Paul
Oh boy! Legion is back with his printing press money. Hey, theredfoxisquick, don't get too upset about Legion's Ron Paul bashing....he floods you with quotes and websites, etc, trying to show that Ron Paul is controlled by the Globalists.......he also said that Ron Paul is a tool of Satan......and Legion voted for Mitt Romney, which should give you a warning. Check out the Bill Still school of econ that Legion is advocating. But you know what, a basket of paper money issued by the Federal Reserve or the Treasury is still just a basket of paper, seems like a basket of gold is what I would prefer.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2502
- Location: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
- Contact:
Re: Ron Paul
Yep Ron Paul loves taking a disproportionately large share of the Congressional funding to Texas, loved this little talk to Tim Russert:moonwhim wrote:Oh boy! Legion is back with his printing press money. Hey, theredfoxisquick, don't get too upset about Legion's Ron Paul bashing....he floods you with quotes and websites, etc, trying to show that Ron Paul is controlled by the Globalists.......he also said that Ron Paul is a tool of Satan......and Legion voted for Mitt Romney, which should give you a warning. Check out the Bill Still school of econ that Legion is advocating. But you know what, a basket of paper money issued by the Federal Reserve or the Treasury is still just a basket of paper, seems like a basket of gold is what I would prefer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s66bTshO1jM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
So basically, Ron Paul didn't think straight about what he said. Anyways, him talking to Tim Russert, shows the man needs to just retire and let someone else take up the mantle of the libertarian? He's old and senile, needs a little rest, isn't up to the activity and stress of political life anymore.
-
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Ron Paul
I want to give a short version in answer.theredfoxisquick wrote:I'm going to explain a little bit, and then ask a question. I was at BYU-Idaho and was walking through the library. I then felt compelled to stop and look at the books. I was drawn to the book The Law by Frederic Bastiat and felt the Spirit tell me to read it. As I was reading it I felt that it was inspired from God. I also had never been taught these things. I also had never heard of this book before.
Shortly after I was at my grandparents home. And this was during the 2008 campaign. I was standing in my grandparent's kitchen and heard on Fox News Ron Paul speaking in a debate. I right away felt the Spirit and was drawn to what he was saying. I had again that same pure clarity of thought and knew what he was saying was correct. I could also discern that the other debaters including Romney were wrong and very much off the mark or even dishonest. At that time in the kitchen I had never heard of of Ron Paul until then.
I am now very much interested in studying economics and natural rights. And I feel I am learning important things and that that Lord is actually interested in me knowing this and that it is important. Another interesting fact is I feel the Spirit when I teach liberty as well. I have many thoughts and concluded some things and would like to talk about them. But my question now is what do you think about most LDS people rejecting Ron Paul? I am not sure exactly what to think about this. My initial thoughts are that it is disturbing and concerning. But I mean this in all sincerity, how can they be so blind? Sorry if this seems prideful, but I'm really thinking this and you can call me out on it if you want. But I want to know what people here think because to me it seems so plainly obvious that it's like how can people deny that the day is day with the sun right in their face?
1. Most LDS's think voting for the lesser of two evils is right. Not so.
2. Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist, and is in favor of man keeping his privileges offered in the Constitution.
3. LDS's do not follow the Lord's command to choose honest, wise, and good candidates for office. Most do not.
4. LDS's take for granted the freedoms they have, some even voting for men that will take them away.
5. We are told in scripture to uphold and defend the Constitutional law of the land, even the Constitution. Thousands of members do not.
6. Many LDS's adopt the idea that all is well in Zion, therefore giving no thought to the chipping away of our freedom and liberty.
7. Ron Paul was deliberately smashed by the media as a ploy so Obama could win. Many people thought Paul dropped out of the campaign.
8. We are to read the Constitution so we will know where our gov, officials are robbing us of certain freedoms.
9. Many LDS's do not follow the counsel to not let secret combinations get above us. We're now close to going under.
There are more but these are top of my list.
Read:
A Glorious Standard : for all mankind by Christopher Bentley
A Witness and a Warning http://www.zionsbest.com/warning.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Last edited by freedomforall on November 19th, 2013, 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- LDSguy
- captain of 100
- Posts: 625
- Location: The Republic of Texas
Re: Ron Paul
I personally believe that while not an LDS member Ron Paul's views are closer to the true law of agency and personal accountability and Christ's "golden rule" than any other politician in our dispensation! I liken him to the founding fathers, who were moved upon by the Holy Ghost and were utilized for a great cause. One reason why I think Ron Paul was not want to have ties to the LDS Church despite his views aligning so well to the topics of agency, accountability and self-sufficiency, is so that he can appeal to a much wider audience. I believe his mission in life has been to essentially be a watchman on the tower of American politics and warn us all. Those warnings have been made and the consequences are being realized. I'm grateful to see so any people starting to "wake up" and I'm certain that this would not be the case had there never been a Congressman Ron Paul.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2536
Re: Ron Paul
moonwhim wrote:Oh boy! Legion is back with his printing press money. Hey, theredfoxisquick, don't get too upset about Legion's Ron Paul bashing....he floods you with quotes and websites, etc, trying to show that Ron Paul is controlled by the Globalists.......he also said that Ron Paul is a tool of Satan......and Legion voted for Mitt Romney, which should give you a warning. Check out the Bill Still school of econ that Legion is advocating. But you know what, a basket of paper money issued by the Federal Reserve or the Treasury is still just a basket of paper, seems like a basket of gold is what I would prefer.
Hey " theredfoxisquick, pay very close attention to Legion! He is right on. I also voted for Romney, shouldn't we all have? Ask
yourself that question.
- LDSguy
- captain of 100
- Posts: 625
- Location: The Republic of Texas
Re: Ron Paul
:ymapplause: :ymapplause:freedomforall wrote:1. Most LDS's think voting for the lesser of two evils is right. Not so.
2. Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist, and is in favor of man keeping his privileges offered in the Constitution.
3. LDS's do not follow the Lord's command to choose honest, wise, and good candidates for office. Most do not.
4. LDS's take for granted the freedoms they have, some even voting for men that will take them away.
5. We are told in scripture to uphold and defend the Constitutional law of the land, even the Constitution. Thousands of members do not.
6. Many LDS's adopt the idea that all is well in Zion, therefore giving no thought to the chipping away of our freedom and liberty.
7. Ron Paul was deliberately smashed by the media as a ploy so Obama could win. Many people thought Paul dropped out of the campaign.
8. We are to read the Constitution so we will know where our gov, officials are robbing us of certain freedoms.
9. Many LDS's do not follow the counsel to not let secret combinations get above us. We're now close to going under.
There are more but these are top of my list.
Read:
A Glorious Standard : for all mankind by Christopher Bentley
A Witness and a Warning http://www.zionsbest.com/warning.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- firebaptismglory
- captain of 100
- Posts: 102
- Location: Earth
- Contact:
Re: Ron Paul
Why in the world should anyone vote for Romney?Bee Prepared wrote:moonwhim wrote:Oh boy! Legion is back with his printing press money. Hey, theredfoxisquick, don't get too upset about Legion's Ron Paul bashing....he floods you with quotes and websites, etc, trying to show that Ron Paul is controlled by the Globalists.......he also said that Ron Paul is a tool of Satan......and Legion voted for Mitt Romney, which should give you a warning. Check out the Bill Still school of econ that Legion is advocating. But you know what, a basket of paper money issued by the Federal Reserve or the Treasury is still just a basket of paper, seems like a basket of gold is what I would prefer.
Hey " theredfoxisquick, pay very close attention to Legion! He is right on. I also voted for Romney, shouldn't we all have? Ask
yourself that question.
Below is a link to a interesting viewpoint about Romney. You'd do well in reading it.
http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2012/ ... ormon.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- LDSguy
- captain of 100
- Posts: 625
- Location: The Republic of Texas
Re: Ron Paul
:ymapplause: :ymapplause:firebaptismglory wrote:Why in the world should anyone vote for Romney?Bee Prepared wrote:moonwhim wrote:Oh boy! Legion is back with his printing press money. Hey, theredfoxisquick, don't get too upset about Legion's Ron Paul bashing....he floods you with quotes and websites, etc, trying to show that Ron Paul is controlled by the Globalists.......he also said that Ron Paul is a tool of Satan......and Legion voted for Mitt Romney, which should give you a warning. Check out the Bill Still school of econ that Legion is advocating. But you know what, a basket of paper money issued by the Federal Reserve or the Treasury is still just a basket of paper, seems like a basket of gold is what I would prefer.
Hey " theredfoxisquick, pay very close attention to Legion! He is right on. I also voted for Romney, shouldn't we all have? Ask
yourself that question.
Below is a link to a interesting viewpoint about Romney. You'd do well in reading it.
http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2012/ ... ormon.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Around these parts there was a Brother Attaboy who was in that same line of work. He got a number of his ward members into what turned out to just be a ponzi scheme and they all lost their money, Heisman Trophy winner Ty Detmer was among them. There are some ravenous members of the church. And I was screaming at the top of my lungs before the primaries that Mitt would be "no different than the presidencies of Clinton, Bush, and Obama", of that I am 100% certain. But it would likey have been a black eye on the church itself. I believe that he was allowed to run that far to help break down some misconceptions about the church, but I don't think it was in the cards for him to win.
-
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Ron Paul
Absolutely not.Bee Prepared wrote:moonwhim wrote:Oh boy! Legion is back with his printing press money. Hey, theredfoxisquick, don't get too upset about Legion's Ron Paul bashing....he floods you with quotes and websites, etc, trying to show that Ron Paul is controlled by the Globalists.......he also said that Ron Paul is a tool of Satan......and Legion voted for Mitt Romney, which should give you a warning. Check out the Bill Still school of econ that Legion is advocating. But you know what, a basket of paper money issued by the Federal Reserve or the Treasury is still just a basket of paper, seems like a basket of gold is what I would prefer.
Hey " theredfoxisquick, pay very close attention to Legion! He is right on. I also voted for Romney, shouldn't we all have? Ask
yourself that question.
-
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Ron Paul
If anyone desires to know what some of us thought about Mitt R go back through all the threads. You'll find plenty of reasons to have not voted for him. This topic was hashed over intensely prior to the last POTUS election.
- LDSguy
- captain of 100
- Posts: 625
- Location: The Republic of Texas
Re: Ron Paul
Folks we've gone over this over and over and over around the election... A vote for Romney was a vote for Obama. A vote for Romney was a vote for more Bush failed policies.The American two-party system is just one team, wearing two uniforms, playing the same game!freedomforall wrote:Absolutely not.Bee Prepared wrote:moonwhim wrote:Oh boy! Legion is back with his printing press money. Hey, theredfoxisquick, don't get too upset about Legion's Ron Paul bashing....he floods you with quotes and websites, etc, trying to show that Ron Paul is controlled by the Globalists.......he also said that Ron Paul is a tool of Satan......and Legion voted for Mitt Romney, which should give you a warning. Check out the Bill Still school of econ that Legion is advocating. But you know what, a basket of paper money issued by the Federal Reserve or the Treasury is still just a basket of paper, seems like a basket of gold is what I would prefer.
Hey " theredfoxisquick, pay very close attention to Legion! He is right on. I also voted for Romney, shouldn't we all have? Ask
yourself that question.
http://ivn.us/2012/07/17/100-ways-mitt- ... ack-obama/
There are a number of these and images/memes as well.
-
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Ron Paul
Thanks LDSGuy,LDSguy wrote::ymapplause: :ymapplause:freedomforall wrote:1. Most LDS's think voting for the lesser of two evils is right. Not so.
2. Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist, and is in favor of man keeping his privileges offered in the Constitution.
3. LDS's do not follow the Lord's command to choose honest, wise, and good candidates for office. Most do not.
4. LDS's take for granted the freedoms they have, some even voting for men that will take them away.
5. We are told in scripture to uphold and defend the Constitutional law of the land, even the Constitution. Thousands of members do not.
6. Many LDS's adopt the idea that all is well in Zion, therefore giving no thought to the chipping away of our freedom and liberty.
7. Ron Paul was deliberately smashed by the media as a ploy so Obama could win. Many people thought Paul dropped out of the campaign.
8. We are to read the Constitution so we will know where our gov, officials are robbing us of certain freedoms.
9. Many LDS's do not follow the counsel to not let secret combinations get above us. We're now close to going under.
There are more but these are top of my list.
Read:
A Glorious Standard : for all mankind by Christopher Bentley
A Witness and a Warning http://www.zionsbest.com/warning.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I wish someone would expound on all these key points, with references...but, I just plain...well...don't feel like it. Every single point given has one or more. A Glorious Standard has a lot of them. The scriptures have some, and some news websites have some concerning Ron Paul's hidden campaign strategy by the news media. Like I said, previous threads have the answers as well.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2536
Re: Ron Paul
Mitt Romney would have been a great president. His business and financial experience would have made for a leader like no other in our nation's history--someone who doesn't view the country's problems from an ideological or political standpoint, but from an analytical perspective. He would've balanced the budget and shored up the economy regardless of whether Congress helped or impeded him, just like he did in Massachusetts as Governor.
But sadly, Obama's team of Chicago thugs succeeded in caricaturing a good, decent family man as a ruthless cartoon villain. Congratulations to them--they have laid the groundwork for an America that rejects and vilifies success. In reelecting President Obama--and, more importantly, in NOT electing Mitt Romney--America spat on her founding fathers and their values. I truly hope we as a nation can come back from this.
But sadly, Obama's team of Chicago thugs succeeded in caricaturing a good, decent family man as a ruthless cartoon villain. Congratulations to them--they have laid the groundwork for an America that rejects and vilifies success. In reelecting President Obama--and, more importantly, in NOT electing Mitt Romney--America spat on her founding fathers and their values. I truly hope we as a nation can come back from this.
-
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Ron Paul
If you are for Obamacare then you would have for Romneycare. Obama patterned the UN-constitutional ripoff socialized medicine after Mitt Romney's in Mass. Romney spoke out of both sides of his mouth, saying whatever he felt like to appease his listeners. A genuine flip-flopper.Bee Prepared wrote:Mitt Romney would have been a great president. His business and financial experience would have made for a leader like no other in our nation's history--someone who doesn't view the country's problems from an ideological or political standpoint, but from an analytical perspective. He would've balanced the budget and shored up the economy regardless of whether Congress helped or impeded him, just like he did in Massachusetts as Governor.
But sadly, Obama's team of Chicago thugs succeeded in caricaturing a good, decent family man as a ruthless cartoon villain. Congratulations to them--they have laid the groundwork for an America that rejects and vilifies success. In reelecting President Obama--and, more importantly, in NOT electing Mitt Romney--America spat on her founding fathers and their values. I truly hope we as a nation can come back from this.
The scriptures direct us to choose...HONEST...WISE, and GOOD leaders. Was Mitt honest, seldom. Was he wise, no...he wasn't willing to stand , to uphold and defend the Constitution any more than does Obama. Good, in some things, but the way he runs his household is not the same as running a country.
Those who like Romney will most likely overlook every crumby thing he does just to get him elected, giving no thought to the fact that it is the Constitution that is the Supreme Law of the Land, not who is President. This is why the country has gone down the pooper as it is.
Most Mormons have totally ignored the many warnings given by our prophets to eschew socialism, abate secret combinations, read the Constitution, vote correctly, not the lesser of two evils, and to WAKE UP AMERICANS TO OUR AWFUL SiTUATION.
President Benson said that the Constitution will be saved but not in Washington.
This stuff has been hashed over ad nauseam.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2536
Re: Ron Paul
BTW, I am not suggesting Romney would have been the perfect president either. Not at all. There is no such thing. But we could have done better. Much better than the habitual liar we have to cope with for now.freedomforall wrote:If you are for Obamacare then you would have for Romneycare. Obama patterned the UN-constitutional ripoff socialized medicine after Mitt Romney's in Mass. Romney spoke out of both sides of his mouth, saying whatever he felt like to appease his listeners. A genuine flip-flopper.Bee Prepared wrote:Mitt Romney would have been a great president. His business and financial experience would have made for a leader like no other in our nation's history--someone who doesn't view the country's problems from an ideological or political standpoint, but from an analytical perspective. He would've balanced the budget and shored up the economy regardless of whether Congress helped or impeded him, just like he did in Massachusetts as Governor.
But sadly, Obama's team of Chicago thugs succeeded in caricaturing a good, decent family man as a ruthless cartoon villain. Congratulations to them--they have laid the groundwork for an America that rejects and vilifies success. In reelecting President Obama--and, more importantly, in NOT electing Mitt Romney--America spat on her founding fathers and their values. I truly hope we as a nation can come back from this.
The scriptures direct us to choose...HONEST...WISE, and GOOD leaders. Was Mitt honest, seldom. Was he wise, no...he wasn't willing to stand , to uphold and defend the Constitution any more than does Obama. Good, in some things, but the way he runs his household is not the same as running a country.
Those who like Romney will most likely overlook every crumby thing he does just to get him elected, giving no thought to the fact that it is the Constitution that is the Supreme Law of the Land, not who is President. This is why the country has gone down the pooper as it is.
Most Mormons have totally ignored the many warnings given by our prophets to eschew socialism, abate secret combinations, read the Constitution, vote correctly, not the lesser of two evils, and to WAKE UP AMERICANS TO OUR AWFUL SiTUATION.
President Benson said that the Constitution will be saved but not in Washington.
This stuff has been hashed over ad nauseam.
- LDSguy
- captain of 100
- Posts: 625
- Location: The Republic of Texas
Re: Ron Paul
To that I agree.
yes, we survived 8 years with George W Bush, we would have survived 4-8 years with Mitt Romney. I honestly believe that Romney would have been like Bush's experience in virtually every way except slightly better in business/economy. If that's what you like then that's great, but if there was something even better, something purer, wouldn't that have been great?
Let's look at it like this: There is this thing called the the U.S. Constitution. Let's compare that for a second to the fullness of the gospel.
Now let's look at it this way: Obama is Atheism, Bush is Catholicism, Romney is Protestantism. Prolly not the greatest comparison but hear me out... We all know atheism is not the way to go, Catholicism and Protestantism both have good parts to it but many wrong parts to it - they are very similar in many ways but still missing many key points of the fullness. There are good people in all three of those groups, some who mean very well, who are loyal, who honestly think they have the best they can have in this life, and who will defend their viewpoints "till the cows come home."
Now what if there was a religion with tenets much closer to the "fullness", someone who's ideologies are much closer to the "fullness" of the Constitution?
yes, we survived 8 years with George W Bush, we would have survived 4-8 years with Mitt Romney. I honestly believe that Romney would have been like Bush's experience in virtually every way except slightly better in business/economy. If that's what you like then that's great, but if there was something even better, something purer, wouldn't that have been great?
Let's look at it like this: There is this thing called the the U.S. Constitution. Let's compare that for a second to the fullness of the gospel.
Now let's look at it this way: Obama is Atheism, Bush is Catholicism, Romney is Protestantism. Prolly not the greatest comparison but hear me out... We all know atheism is not the way to go, Catholicism and Protestantism both have good parts to it but many wrong parts to it - they are very similar in many ways but still missing many key points of the fullness. There are good people in all three of those groups, some who mean very well, who are loyal, who honestly think they have the best they can have in this life, and who will defend their viewpoints "till the cows come home."
Now what if there was a religion with tenets much closer to the "fullness", someone who's ideologies are much closer to the "fullness" of the Constitution?
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2536
Re: Ron Paul
I like the idea of someone who ideologies are much closer to the fullness of the Constitution. But what if that person doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of winning? Do you ahead and vote for someone who can't win and allow Obama to complete what he’s doing and turn America into the Socialized States of America? Do that rather than vote for a man who has good character and hopefully will be open to being pulled back to the right? I don’t get it. That IS de facto supporting Obama. Do you really want to do that? …just so you can keep you precious “principles”? Sometimes arrogance is frightening! ( including mine) :pLDSguy wrote:To that I agree.
yes, we survived 8 years with George W Bush, we would have survived 4-8 years with Mitt Romney. I honestly believe that Romney would have been like Bush's experience in virtually every way except slightly better in business/economy. If that's what you like then that's great, but if there was something even better, something purer, wouldn't that have been great?
Let's look at it like this: There is this thing called the the U.S. Constitution. Let's compare that for a second to the fullness of the gospel.
Now let's look at it this way: Obama is Atheism, Bush is Catholicism, Romney is Protestantism. Prolly not the greatest comparison but hear me out... We all know atheism is not the way to go, Catholicism and Protestantism both have good parts to it but many wrong parts to it - they are very similar in many ways but still missing many key points of the fullness. There are good people in all three of those groups, some who mean very well, who are loyal, who honestly think they have the best they can have in this life, and who will defend their viewpoints "till the cows come home."
Now what if there was a religion with tenets much closer to the "fullness", someone who's ideologies are much closer to the "fullness" of the Constitution?
A write in candidate has never been elected for President, and never will.
- LDSguy
- captain of 100
- Posts: 625
- Location: The Republic of Texas
Re: Ron Paul
Yes.Bee Prepared wrote:I like the idea of someone who ideologies are much closer to the fullness of the Constitution. But what if that person doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of winning? Do you ahead and vote for someone who can't win and allow Obama to complete what he’s doing and turn America into the Socialized States of America? Do that rather than vote for a man who has good character and hopefully will be open to being pulled back to the right? I don’t get it. That IS de facto supporting Obama. Do you really want to do that? …just so you can keep you precious “principles”? Sometimes arrogance is frightening! ( including mine) :p
A write in candidate has never been elected for President, and never will.
Created by our fearless forum admin, BrianM:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4484
Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.
John Quincy Adams
-
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
Re: Ron Paul
Even if our vote stands alone, we must vote for someone who will stand up for our Constitution. I voted for a Constitutionalist last election. Our vote is never wasted when done by God's standards. After all, it is our salvation we mostly need be concerned with. Voting for anyone that may chip away our freedom and liberty doesn't help matters, don't you agree?Bee Prepared wrote:BTW, I am not suggesting Romney would have been the perfect president either. Not at all. There is no such thing. But we could have done better. Much better than the habitual liar we have to cope with for now.freedomforall wrote:If you are for Obamacare then you would have for Romneycare. Obama patterned the UN-constitutional ripoff socialized medicine after Mitt Romney's in Mass. Romney spoke out of both sides of his mouth, saying whatever he felt like to appease his listeners. A genuine flip-flopper.Bee Prepared wrote:Mitt Romney would have been a great president. His business and financial experience would have made for a leader like no other in our nation's history--someone who doesn't view the country's problems from an ideological or political standpoint, but from an analytical perspective. He would've balanced the budget and shored up the economy regardless of whether Congress helped or impeded him, just like he did in Massachusetts as Governor.
But sadly, Obama's team of Chicago thugs succeeded in caricaturing a good, decent family man as a ruthless cartoon villain. Congratulations to them--they have laid the groundwork for an America that rejects and vilifies success. In reelecting President Obama--and, more importantly, in NOT electing Mitt Romney--America spat on her founding fathers and their values. I truly hope we as a nation can come back from this.
The scriptures direct us to choose...HONEST...WISE, and GOOD leaders. Was Mitt honest, seldom. Was he wise, no...he wasn't willing to stand , to uphold and defend the Constitution any more than does Obama. Good, in some things, but the way he runs his household is not the same as running a country.
Those who like Romney will most likely overlook every crumby thing he does just to get him elected, giving no thought to the fact that it is the Constitution that is the Supreme Law of the Land, not who is President. This is why the country has gone down the pooper as it is.
Most Mormons have totally ignored the many warnings given by our prophets to eschew socialism, abate secret combinations, read the Constitution, vote correctly, not the lesser of two evils, and to WAKE UP AMERICANS TO OUR AWFUL SiTUATION.
President Benson said that the Constitution will be saved but not in Washington.
This stuff has been hashed over ad nauseam.