I love this guy. I left the country but if he wins I would come back. I hope and pray for his protection. I feel the same thing will happen to him as lincoln and kennedy and any one else who stood up to the elites.
I think the news people are going to be surprised , they are trying to lead the people away from Paul , I have to vote my conscience and that's Paul , I WANT MY CONSTITUTION BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ron Paul is a REAL Christian, he is fighting against Obama's quest for a one world government. Liberal Obama has no problem spending billions in U.S. tax dollars to invade sovereign nations in the middle east, forcing them to accept democracy as form of government. It's time to take care of America first; stop spending the money on wars and use it to create new jobs and heal our weak economy.
Wow - we are occupying Libya? We have 100,000 forces in there?
We should have left Iraq in the mess that Bush made?
Ever read up on Paul's support of energy sustainability?
How will you stay on oil and avoid war now that all the cheap oil is gone?? Imagine we fail to switch and oil gets to be $2oo a barrel. Who will be the superpower then?
The PoPE is the anti Christ, he changed the Sabbath day form Saturday to Sunday, he claimed God gave him this right. Daniel said the anti Christ would think to change Gods times and laws. The pope burned and tortured millions of Christians, Daniel said the anti Christ would kill Gods saints and overpower them. the pope came out of the divided roman empire and called himself God and the vicar of Christ. Daniel said the anti Christ would exault himself as high as JESUS the anointed one.
Did any of you "Christians" notice Paul would give the right to states to legalize all drug use and prostitution?
He also supports the Elite/Bilderberger/COrporate Power Grid owning the vast majority of our wealth (today it's 93%, rising every year).... and give them no rules and no one to oversee them.
@HopeForPeaceNow no he doesnt yout lying sir . he believes in people having the choice to do drugs. drug prices are high because its illegal so people turn to prostition because they need money. bilderberger group he hate you fool.
@rtljmc Ok, so you can't even construst a correct sentence, not sure that helps your opinion.
Prostitution, abortion, legal gambling and legal heroin are an abomination to our culture and society with ZERO benefit. In fact, he hopes to remove all rules and supervision from the Elite who own 93% of AMerica. You are a perfect example of the lack of logic he embodies. Learn to spell before you offer an opnion.
@HopeForPeaceNow ok well let me put it like this. he gets rid of laws that are used to help the global elite, ie the federal reserve causing the economic down turn.
if its against the american constitution he wont approve it.
well considering that heroin was sold as a cough medicine in pharmacys.
prostitution as i said would be lower because drug prices from gangs would be lower. in fact cannabis would be sold in shop. gambling isnt bad people bet on loads of things. check mate
@HopeForPeaceNow well it looks like you like having the government tell you what to do. in your mind people cant make there own judgement . if drugs were legal would you take them? no. so why would you care if someone else is taking drugs? hardly your problem.right?
Yea, legalizing heroin, crack, meth, prostitution, gambling and all abortion is NOT going to make any of that easier to get. Just like alcohol being legal makes it harder to get.
DO you wonder what has happened to America when Pat Robertson says Jesus supports the legalization of immorrality and his followers get online to argue for heroin and hookers?
End times, man, end times. You are ALL OBVIOUSLY serving satan!
@HopeForPeaceNow well i dont believe in any god or devil i am an atheist . so i dont need a book to get my morals unlike some brainwashed little sheep like you .
My point here is why is Pat Robertson plugging immorality by supporting Ron Paul? You are free to choose any path you like.
I think Robertson proports to be a "christian", so questioning his support of a candidate who promotes the idea that states should be free to legalize abortion, gambling, hookers and heroin, and who supports the Elite having no rules and no supervision, is a valid question.
@HopeForPeaceNow thats fine too. but as an atheist i have had to learn the bible in school. and i dont see anywhere that is says drugs are illegal in fact in the middle east cannabis is used alot. and so is opium . ron paul think we should treat drug addicts as sick people and help them. instead of putting them in prison. it seems to me that the christian view of helping people would support his views. putting drug addicts in prison doesnt solve anything . in fact makes it worse.
@HopeForPeaceNow If you were a real Christian, you would stop supporting Obama's liberal quest for a one world government. For what you mentioned, it's the responsibility of each state government to handle those issues. Ron Paul realizes that globalists such as Obama and Bush use the issues of gay marriage and drugs as a distraction from the truly important issues. It's time to stop spending billions on wars in the middle east, that money should be used to create new jobs and heal our economy.
AS A "Christian" Ron Paul follows the economic policy of an avowed atheist (Ayn Rand). "His platform is a very traditional Republican platform of free markets and individual liberty at home" I realize they have brainwashed Christians into believing that leaving the Elite (who own 93% of our wealth) should be left alone with no rules and no supervision. While these elite slowly own more and more of our country, we're told Jesus would support that? He is a fraud. look into liassez faire.
@HopeForPeaceNow Are you a Christian?! What matters more? The killing of hundreds of thousands of people in the middle east or where Ron's economics policies come from? He is the ONLY candidate who is ANTI-war. The ONLY one. Besides you are just wrong, he follows Austrian economists, not Ayn for economic policy. Another benefit of not having those wars? Taking care of people back home. And he is ANTI-corporatism - the stuff that keeps the elite untouched. You are wrong in every possible way.
@HopeForPeaceNow I think you are just confused. You don't have to choose between the two. Ron's policies would both stop the killing AND would improve the economy (kinda handy having trillions of dollars spent in the States instead of on bombs, no?) And your argument is a total fabrication: where has Ron ever suggested removing ALL rules and supervisions?! Evidence for this? So far we have you on: being pro-killing and lying. Again, are you a Christian?!
@HopeForPeaceNow Where has RON PAUL ever suggested that there should be a removal of all supervision and rules? WHY. ARE. YOU. MAKING. UP. CRAP. Sorry - provide evidence or get out of here with your lies. You have already been caught lying about Ayn Rand, so now provide evidence of Ron Paul EVER suggesting no rules....
YOU have NO idea WHAT you are voting for! "In economics, laissez-faire describes an environment in which transactions between private parties are free from state intervention, including restrictive regulations, taxes, tariffs and enforced monopolies."
Are you claiming that Austrain economics leaves regulation and supervision in place?
You have no idea what I'm talking about, you call me a liar. Though it is obvious what I said is true, Paul & AYn are AE, you call me a lair.
Have you studies Austrian Economics? DO you understand what he stands for?
The ELite OWN 93% of US financial wealth.
Paul would remove all rules and supervision from the financial markets THEY built, own and run. This is ANTI-Conrporate for you?? Really? What more could the ELite want?
@HopeForPeaceNow So at least you admit to lying about Ayn being the source of his policies. Thanks for that. Next, are you that daft to not realize that CORPORATISM is what props up the elite? Ron has stated MANY times that he is anti-corporatism. Additionally, unlike Obama and the other Republicans, he would not have stood by and bailed out all of these billionaires who got us into this mess. You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. If it wasn't so sad, it would almost be funny.
@HopeForPeaceNow LOL - now you are just guessing: Ayn Rand was asked on her views on Austrian economics and her reply was "I think they are a school that has a great deal of truth and proper arguments to offer about capitalism...but I certainly don't agree with them in every detail, and particularly not in their alleged philosophical premises. They don't have any, actually. They attempt - von Mises particularly - to substitute economics for philosophy. That cannot be done". Keep lying.
@HopeForPeaceNow Where has Ron Paul SAID ONCE he stands for no rules or regulations? Instead of (embarrassingly at this stage) mindlessly repeating laissez-faire, laissez-faire - how about providing some evidence for your assertions that he is for no rules and regulations. Otherwise, I guess, we are stuck calling you a liar....
"Republican U.S. congressman Ron Paul is a firm believer in Austrian school economics and has authored six books on the subject. Paul's former economic adviser, Peter Schiff, is an adherent of the Austrian school"
@HopeForPeaceNow Yes, and then you take a logical leap that he must therefore believe in no rules and regulations? Ron Paul if anything is a PRAGMATIST. e.g. he knows medicare is bankrupt and unconstitutional, but he is not for ending it tomorrow - he realizes many depend on it. So he has alternatives. That is the point you keep missing - just because Austrian economics has a laissez-faire approach, it does not mean Ron Paul believes in no rules and regulations <--- that is your logical leap.
@HopeForPeaceNow I really think you are just guessing who Ron Paul is. You really have no idea. You will NOT find a greater OPPONENT of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae than Ron Paul. So when you talk about the Fannie Farce, just google "Ron Paul: Abolish Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac". He offers a great solution to the Fannie Farce!!!!
Sorry, youre wrong. In fact, I'm writing a screenplay on the FCIC report. Heard of it? Doubt it. Again, the simple proof that DEregualtion is the issue - NOT REGulation - is the private subprime market and derivatives.
I see you can't answer that. 1. Yes, Paul supports removal of all regulation and supervision. 2) DEregulated instruments caused the meltdown, clear proof of your error. 3. Fannie and Freddie were regulated. They had less than 1/2 the default rate as the private.
@HopeForPeaceNow "1. Yes, Paul supports removal of all regulation and supervision. " LOL - he supports getting rid of them all together, that is something VERY different from having them and not regulating them or supervising them :D
@expat4paul "1. Yes, Paul supports removal of all regulation and supervision. " LOL - he supports getting rid of them all together, that is something VERY different from having them and not regulating them or supervising them " Removing all regulation is not regulating regulation. Thanks for that.
Yes, removal of all rules and supervision is different from having rules and supervision.
"where has Ron Paul SAID ONCE he stands for no rules or regulations? Instead of (embarrassingly at this stage) mindlessly repeating laissez-faire, laissez-faire " you
"Yes, Paul supports removal of all regulation and supervision. " you
@HopeForPeaceNow Holy crap. That was YOUR quote that I was laughing at. So don't cite that as "me" that was what YOU said, not me FFS. It is like debating a child: a. you have no idea what he stands for b. you make stuff up about him c. you now make stuff up about me (even quoting what you said as me!). Again, try to understand this: Abolishing them is something that would not have allowed the subprime crisis to have happened. That seems like an even better solution than REGulation. Jeez.
@HopeForPeaceNow No. Is that simple enough? If you have ANY evidence to the contrary, then POST IT. Stop spreading lies.
If you are saying he is influenced by Austrian economics, well done! He is also influenced by Christianity! And he follows Constitution! So please stop guessing what he is for with regards to regulation - just go show me ONE instance where he has said there should be no rules or regulations. Just ONE. Or stop lying.
Getting rid of FANNIE and FREDDIE. Pay attention, please.
"Abolishing them is something that would not have allowed the subprime crisis to have happened."
Really? Private subprimes and derivative had zero, ZERO, 0, (none, zip, nada, ought) regulation - no regulation. Can you understand what I am saying? No regulation. None. They were UNregulated.
Abolishing regulation from 100% UNregulated products is the answer?
@HopeForPeaceNow I am actually finished chatting about this with you. You have absolutely no idea what Ron believes in, and are just guessing about EVERYTHING. Bottom line: with Ron Paul policies (especially with regards to the fed) the financial crisis would NOT have happened. So keep blathering on about unregulated or whatever. Would. not. have. happened. He has predicted and offered solutions for each of the crashes so far (burst of housing bubble, financial markets, impending dollar crisis)
@expat4paul That's what I thought. I know WAY MORE about this subject than you do. No doubt you want out.
You have no idea yourself, no simple yes or no. YOu can't answer how UNregulated products prove that regulation is a failure. Neither can any Con. There is no answer. LACK OF REGULATION, NOT regulation caused the meltdown.
COns blame it on regulation for a good reason, they are a front for Corps and the ELite. Why then does Paul blame regulation when there was none? Same reason??
@HopeForPeaceNow You know NOTHING about this subject and Ron Paul. That is what I am debating. You are debating "Cons" or whoever they are and the financial crisis. But that is irrelevant here. Ron Paul is not a "con". This has F all to do with regulation - this has everything to do with GOVERNMENT POLICIES and the FED making interest rate absurdly low. Maybe do research on Ron Paul and what he has had to say about the cause of the financial crisis. Instead of guessing here - it's embarrassing.
Funny, you sit there and tell me I know nothing, yet you can only parrot Paul lines and, it seems, you don't even realize what his economic policy is.
"Maybe do research on Ron Paul "
Friend, I know 20x what you do about Austrian Economics. The man has written 6 books on it.
@HopeForPeaceNow Um, yeah, he has written books... and? Have you read any of them? Do they cover "liassez faire" extensively? :D :D Embarrassing. Still waiting for a single example of him saying there should be no regulations. Just one. Instead of blabbing endlessly about his desire for no regulations, just show me one example. Too hard?
'Just one. Instead of blabbing endlessly about his desire for no regulations, just show me one example. Too hard?"
I found 7 in 1/2 an hour.
you might try reading.
I'll send you the cites.
Go, read up. YOU GO find ME where Paul SUPPORTS financial regulation of Corps!
HE SUPPORTS the REMOVAL of ALL regulation and supervision - what you failed to see is THAT IS "Free Market". Paul AND ALL Cons support it. REgardless of UNregulated Swaps and subprimes that blew us up!
@expat4paul "Bottom line: with Ron Paul policies (especially with regards to the fed) the financial crisis would NOT have happened."
Why and how? If you can't answer that, you have no business voting for the removal of all regulation and supervision.
Just be logical... When you leave the Elite alone with no rules and no supervision... what. you think they'll just "behave"? Did they in 2007? IBGYBG - "I'll be gone, you'll be gone" was their opinion - do you know about this? Nah.
@HopeForPeaceNow Wow. Why are you SO slow? Where did I say get rid of rules and supervision? Where did Paul? The government and the fed were largely responsible here. If you want, get rid of the fed. That would be a GREAT start. Again, you have no idea about Ron Paul. Everything you write has nothing to do with him at all. His policies would NOT have resulted in the financial crisis. He PREDICTED it and would have tried to PREVENT it.
@HopeForPeaceNow Exactly - your logic is entirely faulty. You have not in ANY WAY proved that Ron Paul believes in no regulation. You have provided NO evidence at all from anything he has written or said to support this. The source of your logical inadequacy is that you think Ron Paul is ONLY influenced by Austrian economics. He also is a constitutionalist. And a Christian. And many other things. They also influence his policies. How can you not get this? Simply amazing.
@expat4paul "Exactly - your logic is entirely faulty. You have not in ANY WAY proved that Ron Paul believes in no regulation. "
Dude, this is hilarious. For God's sake - read up a bit. The article I sent you lays out his opinions. Let me go out online for you and see if I can find a good quote.
Removal of all rules and supervision is his economic policy. The rest of his followers know this - ask one of them. Go ask Schiff, He''ll tell ya.
@HopeForPeaceNow YES - PRAISE THE LORD - now you are getting it! Evidence instead of lies! Amazing! Please find ONE quote by Ron Paul saying he believes in no regulation. Just one. Instead of running around in circles and making insinuations or assumptions about Ron Paul, Austrians and "liassez faire", how about showing me a direct quote from Ron Paul saying he wants no regulations. How can you not get this? Embarrassing.
@expat4paul "Please find ONE quote by Ron Paul saying he believes in no regulation." you
"He has an opposition to virtually all federal interference with the market process."
"“Paul also states that he has an opposition to virtually all federal interference with the market process”
"The congressman said that the market should play the main role in regulation. “The market is a great regulator, I don’t think we need regulators. " Paul
@expat4paul "Please find ONE quote by Ron Paul saying he believes in no regulation. Just one. "
I sent you quotes on Paul's desire for pure Free markets. It's a common theme in Con/Libitar economic policy - removal of ALL rules and supervision from financial markets.
It's the DEFINITION of Free Markets.
Sorry - read up and come back when you are mentally armed and tell me WHY removal of all rules and supervision from those who OWN 93% of our wealth is a great idea.
@HopeForPeaceNow Wow - you can google articles. Now try to read them. "Regulation can actually benefit big business and corporate greed, while simultaneously killing small businesses that are the backbone of our now faltering economy. This is why I get so upset every time someone claims regulation can resolve the crisis that we are in. Rather, it will only exacerbate it."
@HopeForPeaceNow So we are at an impasse; Paul believes that free markets were NOT to blame, but rather, amongst other things, government policies and the Fed (as I keep saying) were largely to blame. And you keep saying free markets were to blame. You have studied this for 2 years. He has studied this for 50. I think I will just leave it at that; I trust someone who has studied the subject for a long period of time over someone who just learned how to spell "Laissez".
@HopeForPeaceNow Couldn't answer? I have answered again and again and again. If you cannot understand what I am saying, do you honestly expect a debate in youtube comments?! Let me repeat one last time: it was not UNregulated markets that were behind the financial crisis - it was the government and the Fed in particular. So quit your whining about more regulation to fix the problem, the government WAS the problem in that case. Go reread his article on Moral Hazard.
Where/are derivatives and the private subprime market regulated?
Easy yes or no.
Swaps alone, the Wall Street sold as insurance on CDOs were valued at %60 trillion, that's the world GDP. Private subprimes were over $1 trillion.
Regulated?
Again, you fall for the logic that we should remove all rules and supervision from the elite who own 93% of America and built, run and own our F. markets.
@HopeForPeaceNow Did the government policies and the fed have nothing to do with this? Easy yes or no. You put ALL blame on "free markets" and "no regulation" - but fail to put any blame at all on the government or the Fed. What you complaining about was NOT caused "free markets". It was primarily brought about by the government and the Federal reserve.
No, I'm sure you can't answer me, but I CAN answer you..
Did CRA impact the crisis? No. Try the Harvard study, or Georgetown, or Yale. In fact, even the 3 Republican dissent on FCIC admits CRA had 0 impact. It applied to a total of 7% of SPs.
Fannie and Freddie (the "right's fav punching bag) were/are REGULATED. They could NOT BUY the most toxic loans. "Conforming" was coined in relation to F&F.
@expat4paul The "stated income" loan was invented, along with the rest of the destructive ALT_A loans OUTSIDE F&F, in the private market. F&F could NOT buy them, as they had restrictions. The private market had NO regulation. Their default rate was 4X F&F's default rate.
ALL in my video. Try it. Charts and everything.
Fed setting interest rate? The 3 Repubs claim the meltdown happened from the flood of outside capital that hit in early 2000. Too much supply COULD have dropped rates even lower.
Paul also blames fiat $. Research ? gold exists in AMerica compared to liquid cash. Have you studied return to the gold standard? There isn't enough. It will shrink our economy by nearly half, limit growth.
The ability of the ELite to remove the wealth of the middle class is excelling. We lost another 2% thru the crash. $11 TRillion in losses! Rebubs wanted to remove the word Wall Street and deregulation FROM the FCIC report. They are bent on taking Wall Street off the hook. You help.
@expat4paul "It was primarily brought about by the government and the Federal reserve."
This when $60+ TRILLION was UNREGULATED and blew up. Did the gov sell the world DP ($60 Trillion) in Swaps? No, they did what you are asking them to do, LOOK the Other way! Corps made bank selling Swaps, hoping they could pawn off the hot potato before they got burnt. Entire countries went under from Swaps. Bet you've nver heard of swaps.
Then Cons pawn off this story that leaves the entire $60 Trillion OUT!
@expat4paul I agree with you. OWS blames the "free market " and the lack of "regulation". To get to this you have to ignore the fact that Gov. and FED have been controlling the market for a long time thru regulations. This has not helped everyone, only a select few, that includes the mother companies that started the privately owned FED. We haven't had a truly free market for around 100 years. Keynesian economics requires government intervention in the markets.
TO be clear, let me re-iterate: "He also supports the Elite/Bilderberger/COrporate Power Grid owning the vast majority of our wealth (today it's 93%, rising every year).... and give them no rules and no one to oversee them.".
What is "Free Market"? "A market in which there is no economic intervention and regulation.. "
SO, again WHY would you remove all RULES and supervision from the Elite who OWN 93% of our wealth and built own and run our financial system?
Friend, you are typical of Cons and Paulers, sorry, they all behave this way, that I have met so far, anyway.
YOU have NO idea WHAT his policy is - yet you badger, mock and belittle ME!
Wanna test knowledge? What is the FCIC report? Who is Wallison? What's a natural business cycle? What is liassez faire? What did Edward Pinto contribute? Arnell? Royce? Why did AEi sponsor Wallison?
You can't answer one, I bet, yet you mock my knowledge!
@HopeForPeaceNow Well you are right that I cannot talk about "liassez faire" because it is actually laissez-faire. And please, don't whine about a "typo" - you have repeated this error many times. So much for your "knowledge". Just embarrassing. I only mock you because you want to come off as some economic expert - and yet cannot even spell the economic term you keep using.
"I only mock you because you want to come off as some economic expert - and yet"
I DON"T mock you - yet you can't answer one question I asked. You think I'm wrong due to a typo - I think youre wrong due to the fact that you can't answer one question.
HOW did Unregulated products prove regulation is errant? Come on, try.
@HopeForPeaceNow It was not a typo. It was ignorance. Maybe once or twice, it could be a typo - in nearly every post you wrote? Ignorance. I have answered all your questions with respect to Ron Paul. Maybe you are talking financial crisis with respect to "cons". Just watch the youtube video "Ron Paul on the Global Financial Crisis" if you want to know his views. Then you can stop making stuff up about him.
@expat4paul What's the difference between these two?
“A free market is a market in which there is no economic intervention and regulation by the state, except to enforce taxes, private contracts, and the ownership of property.”
“In economics, Laissez-faire describes an environment in which transactions between private parties are free from state intervention, including restrictive regulations, taxes, tariffs and enforced monopolies.”
Cons blame the meltdown on regulation and the government. Look up Wallison in the FCIC report, or watch Fox Business for an hour. Same line you are using "Abolishing them ..."
Yet, the markets that blew up - private subprimes and derivatives were 100% UNregulated.
Claiming that the regulations in UNregulated markets blew us up is silly. YOu shouldn't fall for it. Do some research.
@HopeForPeaceNow Cons or RON PAUL? What on earth are you debating here? The government (and the federal reserve in particular) was RESPONSIBLE for the subprime crisis - interest rates were artificially low due to government policies and Fed manipulation. The free market did not come up with such a low interest rate, that was all gov/fed. Do some thinking.
Wrong. In truth, interest rates could have been LOWER, we experienced a flood of outside capital 1999-2004... IF the Fed NOT held the rate forces could have driven it LOWER (FCIC report Repub dissent 1).
In fact, A. Econ is based on natural business cycles. It says that natural forces alone create a healthy market. Fact easily debunks that. IF the market HAD been left alone, rates could have been much lower. Supply and demand alone sets price in AE.
I'm daft enough to realize that OWNING 93% of financial wealth props up the ELite. They OWN America. OWN it. 80% on the bottom own 7%. If you think removing all rules and supervision from the markets they built, own and run is going to ruin them, you might want to think that over.
@HopeForPeaceNow Look up corporatism. Why do you think they own 93%? Hello? This is NOT free market capitalism! Both parties are in bed with corporations; both parties are paid off by corporations; gov gives them huge tax breaks, huge subsidies, they even bail them out when they fail. So if you want to know why the elite exist it is BECAUSE of the current system. Paul would not tolerate this evil government-corporation partnership. Free markets have not caused the mess we are in today.
@HopeForPeaceNow Ok well, I cannot help your ignorance on the matter. Just google Ron Paul and subprime crisis for example. It is government meddling (and the fed in particular) and corporatism that has got us into the mess we are in, not free market capitalism. Repeat: the GOVERNMENT is responsible, as much as you like to think that they are helping with all of the "rules and regulations" you love to talk about. (How useful are these rules and regulations if they make everything worse?!)
"Free markets have not caused the mess we are in today."
Hmmm. US Corps sold $60 trillion The world GDP) in Swaps that were 100% FREE market. 100% Unregulated. Did that have any impact on our crisis?
The PRIVATE mortgage market is 100% Unregulated. We had Robo signers, stated income loans and Alt A invented in that market. Much impact in the meltdown??
"Obama's liberal quest for a one world government." This is a lie they have taught you to cover up for the fact that the GOP is a front for the corporate agenda. CAlling all NON-conservatives socialists has been their attack plan for centuries. It is silly in this case particularly. Ever wonder WHY they throw that indoctrination out at you every day? To get you to support the removal of all rules and supervision from the Elite. Libs want GOOD gov, not No gov! GOP wants to KILL gov!
@HopeForPeaceNow As a Christian, Ron Paul leads by example, instead of preaching to people or wasting his time getting caught in distractive debates on drugs. Look at the bigger picture and the true immorality in our world; there are bigger problems than those issues that need to be addressed with greater urgency than your distractive hot button topics. Ron Paul is the only politician fighting against a one world government and a one world currency.
Ron Paul stands for a FREE AMERICA!!! NO Patriot act whih is legalized spying on Americans PLEASE READ IT THEE IS MORE! Restore habeus corpus the right to a free trial!!! STOP THE FED FROM BANKRUPTING THIS COUNTRY!!! IF YOU LIKE INFLATION VOTE OTHER THAN RON PAUL BUT IF YOU WANT SOUND MONEY ECONOMY SRONG AMERICA SAVING AMERICA FROM SECRET COMMUNIST SOCIETIES VOTE RON PAUL SAVE AMERICA FROM THE NEO CON COMMUNIST SOCIALISTIC AGENDA!
What a hit piece on Ron Paul. Listen to how that pulpit prostitute Pat Robertson ends it with "well see what he does; whether he plays the role of spoiler "who will he take votes away from? Will it be McCain?" This phony Christian endorsed pro-abortionist Rudolph Guiliani over pro-life Paul. WHat a New World Order Lap dog Roberston is.
Going For Gold moneybomb still needs over 3m to hit target by Feb 5th !! Please donate today. No amount is too small. Spread the word. ronpaul2008 dot com
Anyone who can implement less taxes and I'll be happy. I'm sick of people on welfare and disability making more than those who ACTUALLY WORK as well. Cut that stuff out.
On the January 2, 2007 broadcast of The 700 Club, Robertson said that God spoke to him and told him that "mass killings" were to come during 2007, due to a terrorist attack on the United States. He added "The Lord didn't say nuclear. But I do believe it will be something like that."[80] No terrorist attacks against the United States in general, or its interests, ever occurred in 2007.-wikipedia
Are there false Christians? I just thought you were a Christian or you were not. Of course, since Christians can't even decide on what the bible says I suppose it doesn't matter. I also don't see a lot of Christians chopping off hands and plucking out eyes so......
I thought you were talking about Pat, I was commenting on you're mentioning "true Christians" because I don't see how there are false Christians. If you take a literal interpretation of scripture then you should be chopping off hands and plucking out eyes if they offend thee(Jesus said this). If you take a metaphorical view then anyone can have the scripture mean whatever they think, therefore making them just as much a Christian as anyone else. See the problem?
Mat 5:29-30. You WILL say this is out of context, no Christian wants to do this...or this>>>(Deut ch.13)Put that into context for me then. Any time there is a verse that is not easy or does not match up to what most people think they ignore it or say "out of context" or that its not literal, which opens up a new can of worms! Some words are obviously literal and have an obvious meaning but accepting them is hard. If its not literal then its up to mean ANYTHING!
Okay, remember that Deut. chapter 13 is the OLD testiment. Remember that today's Christian's are no longer under the Old Testement law. (Romans 6:14; Romans 7:4; Galatians 5:18; Romans 7:6; Galatians 3:24-25; Corinthians 3:11; Corinthians 3:13; Colossians 2:14;)
Okay now onto Matthew 5:29-30. Of course Jesus did not mean it literally! He's using an example. Suppose a women has breast cancer and the only way she'll live is by removing of one of her breasts. Wouldn't you say that she should go ahead and do it? Well, Jesus means that if you have a sin that you like, you should remove it because it's not worth it to go to hell. Oh, so I can't say that you took that verse out of context. That's like me asking you "What's 2 plus 2 and you can't say 4!"
So how do you know its not literal? Is the creation story not literal? How about the Garden of Eden or Noah and the flood? This means anyone can interpret the bible however they wish and its just as valid as anyone else. I think that the verse would be literal because it WOULD be better to pluck out you're eyes in this life in order to make it to heaven, no?
Ooooh So its up to the individual to decide? OK, so what of the flood, jonah and the whale, talking snakes, resurrection? Because common sense would tell me that there was no flood and jonah would be dead and that there are no talking snakes and nobody gets up after they are dead. So tell me what you think is literal and how you KNOW that it is.
Actually Jonah and the flood would be true because sometime in the 1800s a man (sorry I forgot his name) got swallowed by a whale and survived for three days in it until some fishermen caught the whale and found him alive. We also use evidence. Now to your question....
"So tell me what you think is literal and how you KNOW that it is."
Well I don't know where to start. There are many things that I take literally so I'd advise you to read a Bible to look at the context.
LMAO! It was Noah and the flood and Jonah and the whale...2 different stories....have you read the bible AT ALL??? I don't believe it...you know, stomach acids or lack of air the esophagus closes unless you are eating LOL You should have googled a little deeper. Context has nothing to do with whether or not it literally happened, context is about what the words MEAN. You crack me up! You are alright with me. :)
Okay, yes I did made a mistake but hey, I had only gotten 3 hours of sleep last night! Yes it did happen, I found out his name was James Bartley. I do know that his face and hands were bleached to a deadly whiteness, and the skin was wrinkled giving the man the appearance of having been parboiled.... That might have something to do with stomach acids but I'm no expert on whales. Yes context is about what words MEAN, so therefore you can tell what someone MEANS and whether he MEANS it literally.
@slometal64 Ron Paul is a Christian and has defended the rights of the gay community because a person's lifestyle is nobody's business and God doesn't want us to pass judgment on each other.
I think Ron Paul is interesting. I have differing views and solutions then Paul. My problem is with the supporters. He seems to appeal to a segment of the population. To me that is the sadness here; That people feel his message is the answer. That's just sad to me.
If you mean the Constitution, I fail to see how that isn't the answer. He isn't perfect, but considering the track record of the last 100 years of our government, it's not too bad
How about: return to the gold standard, abolition of the federal reserve banking system, destruction of the federal government and federal protection of civil rights, attack of women's right to control their reproductive system...
He's a fringe candidate looking to turn America back to the 1870s, the era of robber-baron capitalism. Your utopia, not mine.
No, he's a timeless humanitarian and statesman that recognizes there are truths in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence that would serve us now as well as ever.
Are you seriously against a currency backed by something? Or the idea that private bankers shouldn't run the money supply? Or that people that own property, be it a bar or their own bodies, should be the only one's to decide what happens to it, as long as that action doesn't hurt anyone else?
In point of fact the Robber Barons you hate so much became the Federal Reserve and all their names are right at the top of the pyramid that you see on your dollar bill: Rothschild, Morgan, Rockefeller, Warburg, Roosevelt, Kennedy, Bush, Goldman Sachs to name but a few. The Fed is controlled by all the investment banks who print the money they lend to your government and make gargantuan profits from the interest that YOU pay in YOUR income taxes.
CBN trying to be cunning. A slam piece designed as a seemingly even-handed.
The polling is hilariously innacurate. All CBN is trying to do is frame Paul as a quixotic candidate with no chance, just as many other old media outlets have been doing.
The shock will continue when Paul starts racking up primary wins.
All I say is doubt more, because it will be fun to watch your faces in the next couple months.
Pat is no Christian. How could he call himself a man of God and support the kind of man that Rudy Ghouliani is? Most(not all) of these God TV people are total cons.
This guy (RP) has a chance to make a 'big boom' on voting day. I can't stand Pat Robertson and am not religious anyhow. Please view searchword wilburjr-thanks.
Pat Robertson is not allowed to be part of the revolution. He endorsed Rudy Giuliani, Neo-Con and pro-abortion. However, I am happy that Ron Paul got exposure on his network. The info in this video was incorrect... says 37,000 donors... actual is 60,000+. $6 million in 1 week? No, it was $6 million in ONE DAY!!! go to -> r o n p a u l 2 0 0 8 do t c o m
Mr Robertson claims that Ron Paul will be the spoiler then questions from whom Ron will be taking votes. Hmmm, think about this one---isn't that democracy in action? Who OWNS the votes that Ron will be taking? Isn't the idea that the candidate that RECEIVES the votes wins? It just shows how corrupt our system is today---that a true, honest candidate can be accused of "taking" votes from the other candidates. Don't we all know by now that only the vote-machine programers can do that?
I was wondering what CBN thought about Ron Paul! It's nice to get away from the secular economic videos for a while.
MONOPOLY35 3 months ago
I love this guy. I left the country but if he wins I would come back. I hope and pray for his protection. I feel the same thing will happen to him as lincoln and kennedy and any one else who stood up to the elites.
mkent8083 4 months ago in playlist Ron Paul
I think the news people are going to be surprised , they are trying to lead the people away from Paul , I have to vote my conscience and that's Paul , I WANT MY CONSTITUTION BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
jhunted7667 7 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Let's just bring this back to the video and Ron Paul and Christianity.
In your mind, which point of view would Jesus be in favor of:
1. less government involvement in financial markets and the stopping of killing of 100s of thousands of people, or
2. more government involvement but the killing continues?
Let us see some intellectual honesty for a change. If you think financial regulation trumps life, you are very confused.
expat4paul 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
New world order shill.
TruthSmack 8 months ago
Ron Paul is a REAL Christian, he is fighting against Obama's quest for a one world government. Liberal Obama has no problem spending billions in U.S. tax dollars to invade sovereign nations in the middle east, forcing them to accept democracy as form of government. It's time to take care of America first; stop spending the money on wars and use it to create new jobs and heal our weak economy.
hectorsalinasisback 9 months ago
@hectorsalinasisback
Wow - we are occupying Libya? We have 100,000 forces in there?
We should have left Iraq in the mess that Bush made?
Ever read up on Paul's support of energy sustainability?
How will you stay on oil and avoid war now that all the cheap oil is gone?? Imagine we fail to switch and oil gets to be $2oo a barrel. Who will be the superpower then?
HopeForPeaceNow 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As they said. Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul!!!!!
brad238899 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The PoPE is the anti Christ, he changed the Sabbath day form Saturday to Sunday, he claimed God gave him this right. Daniel said the anti Christ would think to change Gods times and laws. The pope burned and tortured millions of Christians, Daniel said the anti Christ would kill Gods saints and overpower them. the pope came out of the divided roman empire and called himself God and the vicar of Christ. Daniel said the anti Christ would exault himself as high as JESUS the anointed one.
lacatuscovalschi 1 year ago
Ron Paul Revolution 2012! End the Fed!
Leftovervictim1991 1 year ago 2
Did any of you "Christians" notice Paul would give the right to states to legalize all drug use and prostitution?
He also supports the Elite/Bilderberger/COrporate Power Grid owning the vast majority of our wealth (today it's 93%, rising every year).... and give them no rules and no one to oversee them.
Is any of that the platform Jesus would run on?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow no he doesnt yout lying sir . he believes in people having the choice to do drugs. drug prices are high because its illegal so people turn to prostition because they need money. bilderberger group he hate you fool.
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc Ok, so you can't even construst a correct sentence, not sure that helps your opinion.
Prostitution, abortion, legal gambling and legal heroin are an abomination to our culture and society with ZERO benefit. In fact, he hopes to remove all rules and supervision from the Elite who own 93% of AMerica. You are a perfect example of the lack of logic he embodies. Learn to spell before you offer an opnion.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow ok well let me put it like this. he gets rid of laws that are used to help the global elite, ie the federal reserve causing the economic down turn.
if its against the american constitution he wont approve it.
well considering that heroin was sold as a cough medicine in pharmacys.
prostitution as i said would be lower because drug prices from gangs would be lower. in fact cannabis would be sold in shop. gambling isnt bad people bet on loads of things. check mate
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc So, you have 700 Club supporting legalizing drugs. Cute. I am sure no one notices
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow well it looks like you like having the government tell you what to do. in your mind people cant make there own judgement . if drugs were legal would you take them? no. so why would you care if someone else is taking drugs? hardly your problem.right?
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc
Yea, legalizing heroin, crack, meth, prostitution, gambling and all abortion is NOT going to make any of that easier to get. Just like alcohol being legal makes it harder to get.
DO you wonder what has happened to America when Pat Robertson says Jesus supports the legalization of immorrality and his followers get online to argue for heroin and hookers?
End times, man, end times. You are ALL OBVIOUSLY serving satan!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow one word "retard" its not your problem is someone wants to inject heroin or smoke crack. why do you care?
rtljmc 1 year ago
You support the legaliazation of immorality in the name of "jesus" (Robertson proports to be a "christian")...
Yet you call me a retard.
You prove my point.
May this stand as a beacon for any real Christians.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow well i dont believe in any god or devil i am an atheist . so i dont need a book to get my morals unlike some brainwashed little sheep like you .
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc That's fine.
My point here is why is Pat Robertson plugging immorality by supporting Ron Paul? You are free to choose any path you like.
I think Robertson proports to be a "christian", so questioning his support of a candidate who promotes the idea that states should be free to legalize abortion, gambling, hookers and heroin, and who supports the Elite having no rules and no supervision, is a valid question.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow thats fine too. but as an atheist i have had to learn the bible in school. and i dont see anywhere that is says drugs are illegal in fact in the middle east cannabis is used alot. and so is opium . ron paul think we should treat drug addicts as sick people and help them. instead of putting them in prison. it seems to me that the christian view of helping people would support his views. putting drug addicts in prison doesnt solve anything . in fact makes it worse.
rtljmc 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow If you were a real Christian, you would stop supporting Obama's liberal quest for a one world government. For what you mentioned, it's the responsibility of each state government to handle those issues. Ron Paul realizes that globalists such as Obama and Bush use the issues of gay marriage and drugs as a distraction from the truly important issues. It's time to stop spending billions on wars in the middle east, that money should be used to create new jobs and heal our economy.
hectorsalinasisback 9 months ago
hector:
AS A "Christian" Ron Paul follows the economic policy of an avowed atheist (Ayn Rand). "His platform is a very traditional Republican platform of free markets and individual liberty at home" I realize they have brainwashed Christians into believing that leaving the Elite (who own 93% of our wealth) should be left alone with no rules and no supervision. While these elite slowly own more and more of our country, we're told Jesus would support that? He is a fraud. look into liassez faire.
HopeForPeaceNow 9 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Are you a Christian?! What matters more? The killing of hundreds of thousands of people in the middle east or where Ron's economics policies come from? He is the ONLY candidate who is ANTI-war. The ONLY one. Besides you are just wrong, he follows Austrian economists, not Ayn for economic policy. Another benefit of not having those wars? Taking care of people back home. And he is ANTI-corporatism - the stuff that keeps the elite untouched. You are wrong in every possible way.
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul "What matters more? The killing of hundreds of thousands of people in the middle east or where Ron's economics policies come from?"
Obviously not appropriate to be in a political reality where we have to choose between those two.
The fact that he will remove all rules and supervision from financial markets SHOULD tell you about him as a person and politician.
It seems to me the left has been anti war for 60 years. Did you want us to screw up Iraq and then walk away?
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow I think you are just confused. You don't have to choose between the two. Ron's policies would both stop the killing AND would improve the economy (kinda handy having trillions of dollars spent in the States instead of on bombs, no?) And your argument is a total fabrication: where has Ron ever suggested removing ALL rules and supervisions?! Evidence for this? So far we have you on: being pro-killing and lying. Again, are you a Christian?!
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul
"And your argument is a total fabrication: where has Ron ever suggested removing ALL rules and supervisions?! '
Removal of all supervision and rules (regulation and intervention) is THE definition of liassez faire.
You are wrong. As, I believe, are 100% of Paul's followers. Sorry. Read up on Misses, Rothbard, Hayek.
Paul is lying for a reason. Please read up on Austrian Economics before you vote!
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Where has RON PAUL ever suggested that there should be a removal of all supervision and rules? WHY. ARE. YOU. MAKING. UP. CRAP. Sorry - provide evidence or get out of here with your lies. You have already been caught lying about Ayn Rand, so now provide evidence of Ron Paul EVER suggesting no rules....
expat4paul 8 months ago
l Look it up!
YOU have NO idea WHAT you are voting for! "In economics, laissez-faire describes an environment in which transactions between private parties are free from state intervention, including restrictive regulations, taxes, tariffs and enforced monopolies."
Are you claiming that Austrain economics leaves regulation and supervision in place?
You have no idea what I'm talking about, you call me a liar. Though it is obvious what I said is true, Paul & AYn are AE, you call me a lair.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul
I'm sorry, it is you who are wrong.
Have you studies Austrian Economics? DO you understand what he stands for?
The ELite OWN 93% of US financial wealth.
Paul would remove all rules and supervision from the financial markets THEY built, own and run. This is ANTI-Conrporate for you?? Really? What more could the ELite want?
WHY?? Ask yourself why?
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
Are you familiar with Austrian liassez faire?
Know how natural business cycles alone will regulate a market where the top 400 Corps create 70% of GDP?
I'm not trying to be sassy, I just don;t think one of his followers knows what his true economic policy is.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Austrian economics is NOT pro-corporatism. Can you be any more clueless?! It is pro-individual...
expat4paul 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@expat4paul
"Austrian economics is NOT pro-corporatism."
AE is DEFINED by the removal of all regulation and intervention by the government.
I am sorry. You are in error. Read a bit on liassez fiare before you post again.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow So at least you admit to lying about Ayn being the source of his policies. Thanks for that. Next, are you that daft to not realize that CORPORATISM is what props up the elite? Ron has stated MANY times that he is anti-corporatism. Additionally, unlike Obama and the other Republicans, he would not have stood by and bailed out all of these billionaires who got us into this mess. You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. If it wasn't so sad, it would almost be funny.
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul
I said "l follows the economic policy of an avowed atheist (Ayn Rand)."
Paul follows Austrian Economics.
Ayn did also.
It is you who are confused and driven to call one who is not a liar.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow LOL - now you are just guessing: Ayn Rand was asked on her views on Austrian economics and her reply was "I think they are a school that has a great deal of truth and proper arguments to offer about capitalism...but I certainly don't agree with them in every detail, and particularly not in their alleged philosophical premises. They don't have any, actually. They attempt - von Mises particularly - to substitute economics for philosophy. That cannot be done". Keep lying.
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul
Wow - you are clueless.
Does Paul support liassez faire? Any Pauler should know this stuff. You are ignorant and calling ME a liar!
Typical.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Where has Ron Paul SAID ONCE he stands for no rules or regulations? Instead of (embarrassingly at this stage) mindlessly repeating laissez-faire, laissez-faire - how about providing some evidence for your assertions that he is for no rules and regulations. Otherwise, I guess, we are stuck calling you a liar....
expat4paul 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@expat4paul
I did. Do you read?
If you are claiming that Ron Paul's economic policy is not Austrian Economics, your ignorance will stand here for all to see.
If you are claiming Austrian economics is not liassez faire, the same is true.
We are, in fact, for all to see, stuck calling you ignorant and refusing to read.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul
"Republican U.S. congressman Ron Paul is a firm believer in Austrian school economics and has authored six books on the subject. Paul's former economic adviser, Peter Schiff, is an adherent of the Austrian school"
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Yes, and then you take a logical leap that he must therefore believe in no rules and regulations? Ron Paul if anything is a PRAGMATIST. e.g. he knows medicare is bankrupt and unconstitutional, but he is not for ending it tomorrow - he realizes many depend on it. So he has alternatives. That is the point you keep missing - just because Austrian economics has a laissez-faire approach, it does not mean Ron Paul believes in no rules and regulations <--- that is your logical leap.
expat4paul 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@expat4paul
"Yes, and then you take a logical leap that he must therefore believe in no rules and regulations?"
??????
That IS his platform, do you really not know that? I just schooled you on it. You should read up a a bit and come back.
Again, how did 2 markets 100% UNregulated blowing up prove that regulation caused the crisis?
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul
Gotta run, off to work. Happy reading. Try reading the FCIC report. Watch my video - "The Fannie Farce"
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow I really think you are just guessing who Ron Paul is. You really have no idea. You will NOT find a greater OPPONENT of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae than Ron Paul. So when you talk about the Fannie Farce, just google "Ron Paul: Abolish Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac". He offers a great solution to the Fannie Farce!!!!
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul
Sorry, youre wrong. In fact, I'm writing a screenplay on the FCIC report. Heard of it? Doubt it. Again, the simple proof that DEregualtion is the issue - NOT REGulation - is the private subprime market and derivatives.
I see you can't answer that. 1. Yes, Paul supports removal of all regulation and supervision. 2) DEregulated instruments caused the meltdown, clear proof of your error. 3. Fannie and Freddie were regulated. They had less than 1/2 the default rate as the private.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow "1. Yes, Paul supports removal of all regulation and supervision. " LOL - he supports getting rid of them all together, that is something VERY different from having them and not regulating them or supervising them :D
expat4paul 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@expat4paul "1. Yes, Paul supports removal of all regulation and supervision. " LOL - he supports getting rid of them all together, that is something VERY different from having them and not regulating them or supervising them " Removing all regulation is not regulating regulation. Thanks for that.
Yes, removal of all rules and supervision is different from having rules and supervision.
Glad you got that.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul
"where has Ron Paul SAID ONCE he stands for no rules or regulations? Instead of (embarrassingly at this stage) mindlessly repeating laissez-faire, laissez-faire " you
"Yes, Paul supports removal of all regulation and supervision. " you
Having a little trouble there?
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Holy crap. That was YOUR quote that I was laughing at. So don't cite that as "me" that was what YOU said, not me FFS. It is like debating a child: a. you have no idea what he stands for b. you make stuff up about him c. you now make stuff up about me (even quoting what you said as me!). Again, try to understand this: Abolishing them is something that would not have allowed the subprime crisis to have happened. That seems like an even better solution than REGulation. Jeez.
expat4paul 8 months ago
Lets see if you can answer a strait up question. It looked o me like you answered it here: "he supports getting rid of them all together," ...
Does Ron Paul support the removal of all rules and supervision from financial markets that the ELite, who own 93% of America, built, own and run?
Simple.
Yes or no.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow No. Is that simple enough? If you have ANY evidence to the contrary, then POST IT. Stop spreading lies.
If you are saying he is influenced by Austrian economics, well done! He is also influenced by Christianity! And he follows Constitution! So please stop guessing what he is for with regards to regulation - just go show me ONE instance where he has said there should be no rules or regulations. Just ONE. Or stop lying.
Getting rid of FANNIE and FREDDIE. Pay attention, please.
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul Holy Crap!
"Abolishing them is something that would not have allowed the subprime crisis to have happened."
Really? Private subprimes and derivative had zero, ZERO, 0, (none, zip, nada, ought) regulation - no regulation. Can you understand what I am saying? No regulation. None. They were UNregulated.
Abolishing regulation from 100% UNregulated products is the answer?
I'm thinking you can reason that one out?
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow I am actually finished chatting about this with you. You have absolutely no idea what Ron believes in, and are just guessing about EVERYTHING. Bottom line: with Ron Paul policies (especially with regards to the fed) the financial crisis would NOT have happened. So keep blathering on about unregulated or whatever. Would. not. have. happened. He has predicted and offered solutions for each of the crashes so far (burst of housing bubble, financial markets, impending dollar crisis)
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul That's what I thought. I know WAY MORE about this subject than you do. No doubt you want out.
You have no idea yourself, no simple yes or no. YOu can't answer how UNregulated products prove that regulation is a failure. Neither can any Con. There is no answer. LACK OF REGULATION, NOT regulation caused the meltdown.
COns blame it on regulation for a good reason, they are a front for Corps and the ELite. Why then does Paul blame regulation when there was none? Same reason??
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow You know NOTHING about this subject and Ron Paul. That is what I am debating. You are debating "Cons" or whoever they are and the financial crisis. But that is irrelevant here. Ron Paul is not a "con". This has F all to do with regulation - this has everything to do with GOVERNMENT POLICIES and the FED making interest rate absurdly low. Maybe do research on Ron Paul and what he has had to say about the cause of the financial crisis. Instead of guessing here - it's embarrassing.
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul
Funny, you sit there and tell me I know nothing, yet you can only parrot Paul lines and, it seems, you don't even realize what his economic policy is.
"Maybe do research on Ron Paul "
Friend, I know 20x what you do about Austrian Economics. The man has written 6 books on it.
You should read one yourself.
It's embarrassing.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Um, yeah, he has written books... and? Have you read any of them? Do they cover "liassez faire" extensively? :D :D Embarrassing. Still waiting for a single example of him saying there should be no regulations. Just one. Instead of blabbing endlessly about his desire for no regulations, just show me one example. Too hard?
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul
'Just one. Instead of blabbing endlessly about his desire for no regulations, just show me one example. Too hard?"
I found 7 in 1/2 an hour.
you might try reading.
I'll send you the cites.
Go, read up. YOU GO find ME where Paul SUPPORTS financial regulation of Corps!
HE SUPPORTS the REMOVAL of ALL regulation and supervision - what you failed to see is THAT IS "Free Market". Paul AND ALL Cons support it. REgardless of UNregulated Swaps and subprimes that blew us up!
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul "Bottom line: with Ron Paul policies (especially with regards to the fed) the financial crisis would NOT have happened."
Why and how? If you can't answer that, you have no business voting for the removal of all regulation and supervision.
Just be logical... When you leave the Elite alone with no rules and no supervision... what. you think they'll just "behave"? Did they in 2007? IBGYBG - "I'll be gone, you'll be gone" was their opinion - do you know about this? Nah.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Wow. Why are you SO slow? Where did I say get rid of rules and supervision? Where did Paul? The government and the fed were largely responsible here. If you want, get rid of the fed. That would be a GREAT start. Again, you have no idea about Ron Paul. Everything you write has nothing to do with him at all. His policies would NOT have resulted in the financial crisis. He PREDICTED it and would have tried to PREVENT it.
expat4paul 8 months ago
"Wow. Why are you SO slow? Where did I say get rid of rules and supervision? "
Ok, so for 2 days we have been at this. It's sad for me that I fail to get the basic premise across to you.
1. Liassez faire is the removal of all regulation and supervision of financial markets.
2. As I demonstrated in at least 3 direct quotes - Ron Paul and Austrian Economics IS liassez faire.
Paul = removal of all regulation and supervision of financial markets.
You seemed to get that at one point.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Exactly - your logic is entirely faulty. You have not in ANY WAY proved that Ron Paul believes in no regulation. You have provided NO evidence at all from anything he has written or said to support this. The source of your logical inadequacy is that you think Ron Paul is ONLY influenced by Austrian economics. He also is a constitutionalist. And a Christian. And many other things. They also influence his policies. How can you not get this? Simply amazing.
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul "Exactly - your logic is entirely faulty. You have not in ANY WAY proved that Ron Paul believes in no regulation. "
Dude, this is hilarious. For God's sake - read up a bit. The article I sent you lays out his opinions. Let me go out online for you and see if I can find a good quote.
Removal of all rules and supervision is his economic policy. The rest of his followers know this - ask one of them. Go ask Schiff, He''ll tell ya.
How can you not get this? Simply amazing.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow YES - PRAISE THE LORD - now you are getting it! Evidence instead of lies! Amazing! Please find ONE quote by Ron Paul saying he believes in no regulation. Just one. Instead of running around in circles and making insinuations or assumptions about Ron Paul, Austrians and "liassez faire", how about showing me a direct quote from Ron Paul saying he wants no regulations. How can you not get this? Embarrassing.
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul "Please find ONE quote by Ron Paul saying he believes in no regulation." you
"He has an opposition to virtually all federal interference with the market process."
"“Paul also states that he has an opposition to virtually all federal interference with the market process”
"The congressman said that the market should play the main role in regulation. “The market is a great regulator, I don’t think we need regulators. " Paul
"The Moral Hazard of Regulation" by Ron Paul
Embarrassing.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul "Please find ONE quote by Ron Paul saying he believes in no regulation. Just one. "
I sent you quotes on Paul's desire for pure Free markets. It's a common theme in Con/Libitar economic policy - removal of ALL rules and supervision from financial markets.
It's the DEFINITION of Free Markets.
Sorry - read up and come back when you are mentally armed and tell me WHY removal of all rules and supervision from those who OWN 93% of our wealth is a great idea.
Got logic?
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Wow - you can google articles. Now try to read them. "Regulation can actually benefit big business and corporate greed, while simultaneously killing small businesses that are the backbone of our now faltering economy. This is why I get so upset every time someone claims regulation can resolve the crisis that we are in. Rather, it will only exacerbate it."
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul
"Now try to read them. " you
"whereas I have studied that subject for the past 2 years" me.
"....regulation .... will only exacerbate it." Paul
Yes, you make MY point. Thanks. Again, Swaps and private subprimes were 100% UNregulated.
How did regulation make it worse when there was no regulation?
As I said.
Did you have a thought on the difference between laissez faire and free markets?
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow So we are at an impasse; Paul believes that free markets were NOT to blame, but rather, amongst other things, government policies and the Fed (as I keep saying) were largely to blame. And you keep saying free markets were to blame. You have studied this for 2 years. He has studied this for 50. I think I will just leave it at that; I trust someone who has studied the subject for a long period of time over someone who just learned how to spell "Laissez".
expat4paul 8 months ago
Yep. Couldn't answer?
HOW do UNregulated markets prove that regulation is a failure? Ever hear him mention that? nah.
None of his followers know what they are voting for, as I said.
His economic policy, if you take time to study it - is remove all regulation and supervision from the Elite who OWN 93% of America.
It's a plain fact that none of his followers have a clue about.
Again, read the FCIC report - many blame gov alone for the meltdown.
Why? Gets Wall Street off the hook!
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Couldn't answer? I have answered again and again and again. If you cannot understand what I am saying, do you honestly expect a debate in youtube comments?! Let me repeat one last time: it was not UNregulated markets that were behind the financial crisis - it was the government and the Fed in particular. So quit your whining about more regulation to fix the problem, the government WAS the problem in that case. Go reread his article on Moral Hazard.
expat4paul 8 months ago
"not UNregulated markets"
Where/are derivatives and the private subprime market regulated?
Easy yes or no.
Swaps alone, the Wall Street sold as insurance on CDOs were valued at %60 trillion, that's the world GDP. Private subprimes were over $1 trillion.
Regulated?
Again, you fall for the logic that we should remove all rules and supervision from the elite who own 93% of America and built, run and own our F. markets.
Can you tell why that's a good idea?
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Did the government policies and the fed have nothing to do with this? Easy yes or no. You put ALL blame on "free markets" and "no regulation" - but fail to put any blame at all on the government or the Fed. What you complaining about was NOT caused "free markets". It was primarily brought about by the government and the Federal reserve.
expat4paul 8 months ago 2
@expat4paul
You bet, I'll answer you when you answer me!
No, I'm sure you can't answer me, but I CAN answer you..
Did CRA impact the crisis? No. Try the Harvard study, or Georgetown, or Yale. In fact, even the 3 Republican dissent on FCIC admits CRA had 0 impact. It applied to a total of 7% of SPs.
Fannie and Freddie (the "right's fav punching bag) were/are REGULATED. They could NOT BUY the most toxic loans. "Conforming" was coined in relation to F&F.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul The "stated income" loan was invented, along with the rest of the destructive ALT_A loans OUTSIDE F&F, in the private market. F&F could NOT buy them, as they had restrictions. The private market had NO regulation. Their default rate was 4X F&F's default rate.
ALL in my video. Try it. Charts and everything.
Fed setting interest rate? The 3 Repubs claim the meltdown happened from the flood of outside capital that hit in early 2000. Too much supply COULD have dropped rates even lower.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
Paul also blames fiat $. Research ? gold exists in AMerica compared to liquid cash. Have you studied return to the gold standard? There isn't enough. It will shrink our economy by nearly half, limit growth.
The ability of the ELite to remove the wealth of the middle class is excelling. We lost another 2% thru the crash. $11 TRillion in losses! Rebubs wanted to remove the word Wall Street and deregulation FROM the FCIC report. They are bent on taking Wall Street off the hook. You help.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul "It was primarily brought about by the government and the Federal reserve."
This when $60+ TRILLION was UNREGULATED and blew up. Did the gov sell the world DP ($60 Trillion) in Swaps? No, they did what you are asking them to do, LOOK the Other way! Corps made bank selling Swaps, hoping they could pawn off the hot potato before they got burnt. Entire countries went under from Swaps. Bet you've nver heard of swaps.
Then Cons pawn off this story that leaves the entire $60 Trillion OUT!
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
Comment removed
MrPscotta 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@expat4paul I agree with you. OWS blames the "free market " and the lack of "regulation". To get to this you have to ignore the fact that Gov. and FED have been controlling the market for a long time thru regulations. This has not helped everyone, only a select few, that includes the mother companies that started the privately owned FED. We haven't had a truly free market for around 100 years. Keynesian economics requires government intervention in the markets.
MrPscotta 2 months ago
@expat4paul
TO be clear, let me re-iterate: "He also supports the Elite/Bilderberger/COrporate Power Grid owning the vast majority of our wealth (today it's 93%, rising every year).... and give them no rules and no one to oversee them.".
What is "Free Market"? "A market in which there is no economic intervention and regulation.. "
SO, again WHY would you remove all RULES and supervision from the Elite who OWN 93% of our wealth and built own and run our financial system?
??
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul
"Again, you have no idea about Ron Paul."
Friend, you are typical of Cons and Paulers, sorry, they all behave this way, that I have met so far, anyway.
YOU have NO idea WHAT his policy is - yet you badger, mock and belittle ME!
Wanna test knowledge? What is the FCIC report? Who is Wallison? What's a natural business cycle? What is liassez faire? What did Edward Pinto contribute? Arnell? Royce? Why did AEi sponsor Wallison?
You can't answer one, I bet, yet you mock my knowledge!
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Well you are right that I cannot talk about "liassez faire" because it is actually laissez-faire. And please, don't whine about a "typo" - you have repeated this error many times. So much for your "knowledge". Just embarrassing. I only mock you because you want to come off as some economic expert - and yet cannot even spell the economic term you keep using.
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul
"I only mock you because you want to come off as some economic expert - and yet"
I DON"T mock you - yet you can't answer one question I asked. You think I'm wrong due to a typo - I think youre wrong due to the fact that you can't answer one question.
HOW did Unregulated products prove regulation is errant? Come on, try.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow It was not a typo. It was ignorance. Maybe once or twice, it could be a typo - in nearly every post you wrote? Ignorance. I have answered all your questions with respect to Ron Paul. Maybe you are talking financial crisis with respect to "cons". Just watch the youtube video "Ron Paul on the Global Financial Crisis" if you want to know his views. Then you can stop making stuff up about him.
expat4paul 8 months ago
@expat4paul
"in nearly every post you wrote? Ignorance" you Ignorance? Again, that's what I find with all Paulers/Cons...
.... you have no idea HOW laissez faire is used by the guy you are ready to vote for...
.... whereas I have studied that subject for the past 2 years and can debate you under the table ....
...... but if I misspell it - I'm the ignorant one.
Fully typical
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul What's the difference between these two?
“A free market is a market in which there is no economic intervention and regulation by the state, except to enforce taxes, private contracts, and the ownership of property.”
“In economics, Laissez-faire describes an environment in which transactions between private parties are free from state intervention, including restrictive regulations, taxes, tariffs and enforced monopolies.”
I think we found your problem.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul
Cons blame the meltdown on regulation and the government. Look up Wallison in the FCIC report, or watch Fox Business for an hour. Same line you are using "Abolishing them ..."
Yet, the markets that blew up - private subprimes and derivatives were 100% UNregulated.
Claiming that the regulations in UNregulated markets blew us up is silly. YOu shouldn't fall for it. Do some research.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Cons or RON PAUL? What on earth are you debating here? The government (and the federal reserve in particular) was RESPONSIBLE for the subprime crisis - interest rates were artificially low due to government policies and Fed manipulation. The free market did not come up with such a low interest rate, that was all gov/fed. Do some thinking.
expat4paul 8 months ago
"interest rates were artificially low "
Wrong. In truth, interest rates could have been LOWER, we experienced a flood of outside capital 1999-2004... IF the Fed NOT held the rate forces could have driven it LOWER (FCIC report Repub dissent 1).
In fact, A. Econ is based on natural business cycles. It says that natural forces alone create a healthy market. Fact easily debunks that. IF the market HAD been left alone, rates could have been much lower. Supply and demand alone sets price in AE.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul
Still curious how regulation cause dthe meltdown when Swaps & subprimes were UNregulated?
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul "He offers a great solution to the Fannie Farce"
Yes, do you realize this will end the 30 year mortage and stifle homeownership? Nah.
Look it up.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@expat4paul
I'm daft enough to realize that OWNING 93% of financial wealth props up the ELite. They OWN America. OWN it. 80% on the bottom own 7%. If you think removing all rules and supervision from the markets they built, own and run is going to ruin them, you might want to think that over.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Look up corporatism. Why do you think they own 93%? Hello? This is NOT free market capitalism! Both parties are in bed with corporations; both parties are paid off by corporations; gov gives them huge tax breaks, huge subsidies, they even bail them out when they fail. So if you want to know why the elite exist it is BECAUSE of the current system. Paul would not tolerate this evil government-corporation partnership. Free markets have not caused the mess we are in today.
expat4paul 8 months ago
"This is NOT free market capitalism"
Ummmm.... yes, we have MIXED markets - we have regulation. Regulation is NOT the reason the Elite own 93%. It may be the reason they DON"T own 97%.
Free MArket IS a market free of regulation and supervision, come on, you know that, right?.
Yes, Paul would remove all gov regulation and supervision. This will leave the elite alone with the 93% they OWN and no rules and no supervision.
Were derivatives regulated? Was the private subprime mkt regulated?
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Ok well, I cannot help your ignorance on the matter. Just google Ron Paul and subprime crisis for example. It is government meddling (and the fed in particular) and corporatism that has got us into the mess we are in, not free market capitalism. Repeat: the GOVERNMENT is responsible, as much as you like to think that they are helping with all of the "rules and regulations" you love to talk about. (How useful are these rules and regulations if they make everything worse?!)
expat4paul 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@expat4paul
Really? If government meddling created the meltdown -
WHY are the TWO area where we MELTED - derivatives (bet you have never heard of them) AND private subprimes...
..... 100% UNREGULATED?? UN regulated means 100% free market. NO rules. No supervision.
There WERE NO RULES. Corps wrote $60 Trillion, made bank, blew up the global economy, and blamed government rules!! THERE WERE NO RULES!!! LOOk it UP!
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@expat4paul "(How useful are these rules and regulations if they make everything worse?!)"
So, you cry that Paul is not against removal of regulation, then you cry regulation makes everything worse!!!!
See how they have you trained???
SO - riddle me - Swaps (derivatives) at $60 Trillion, private market subprimes were $1 trillion...
...all 100% UNregulated.
How then did regulation cause the meltdown??
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@expat4paul
"Free markets have not caused the mess we are in today."
Hmmm. US Corps sold $60 trillion The world GDP) in Swaps that were 100% FREE market. 100% Unregulated. Did that have any impact on our crisis?
The PRIVATE mortgage market is 100% Unregulated. We had Robo signers, stated income loans and Alt A invented in that market. Much impact in the meltdown??
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
@hectors:
"Obama's liberal quest for a one world government." This is a lie they have taught you to cover up for the fact that the GOP is a front for the corporate agenda. CAlling all NON-conservatives socialists has been their attack plan for centuries. It is silly in this case particularly. Ever wonder WHY they throw that indoctrination out at you every day? To get you to support the removal of all rules and supervision from the Elite. Libs want GOOD gov, not No gov! GOP wants to KILL gov!
HopeForPeaceNow 9 months ago
@HopeForPeaceNow As a Christian, Ron Paul leads by example, instead of preaching to people or wasting his time getting caught in distractive debates on drugs. Look at the bigger picture and the true immorality in our world; there are bigger problems than those issues that need to be addressed with greater urgency than your distractive hot button topics. Ron Paul is the only politician fighting against a one world government and a one world currency.
hectorsalinasisback 9 months ago
I WANTED TO VOTE FOR HIM IN 08 - BUT HE WAS NOT ON MY BALLOT !!!
THEY ROBBED HIM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HOW MANY OTHERS COULD NOT VOTE FOR HIM???
Others tell me they don't want to vote for him for fear it will be a waste of their vote.
But HOW can we get him in if we don't vote for him!!??
I WANT HIM ON THE NEXT BALLOT !!!!!
PLEASE MAKE SURE HE IS ON IT!!
Mine was in Broward county Florida, and he was not on it.
ladyjeani 1 year ago
4:38 - He was #1 in individual military contributions.
jbutte 2 years ago
ANNIHILATE RELIGION!
nightoftheshape 3 years ago
So any document is living then.
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago
There is so much inflation out there, I dought theres enough gold, sliver, and copper to make it worth anything
wg40504 3 years ago
Get Ready! Check out Campaign For Libery dotcom
roseagain2 3 years ago
"No Charisma"? What the hell??? He has charisma. He just isn't a PR Politican!
destinyson23 3 years ago 3
We won't go away.
tedsmith45 3 years ago
Ron Paul stands for a FREE AMERICA!!! NO Patriot act whih is legalized spying on Americans PLEASE READ IT THEE IS MORE! Restore habeus corpus the right to a free trial!!! STOP THE FED FROM BANKRUPTING THIS COUNTRY!!! IF YOU LIKE INFLATION VOTE OTHER THAN RON PAUL BUT IF YOU WANT SOUND MONEY ECONOMY SRONG AMERICA SAVING AMERICA FROM SECRET COMMUNIST SOCIETIES VOTE RON PAUL SAVE AMERICA FROM THE NEO CON COMMUNIST SOCIALISTIC AGENDA!
moreoverunity 3 years ago 3
Pat Robertson joined the NWO sometimes in the 90s
madmaxx721 3 years ago
What a hit piece on Ron Paul. Listen to how that pulpit prostitute Pat Robertson ends it with "well see what he does; whether he plays the role of spoiler "who will he take votes away from? Will it be McCain?" This phony Christian endorsed pro-abortionist Rudolph Guiliani over pro-life Paul. WHat a New World Order Lap dog Roberston is.
clayrains 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Going For Gold moneybomb still needs over 3m to hit target by Feb 5th !! Please donate today. No amount is too small. Spread the word. ronpaul2008 dot com
comtoket 4 years ago
Regardless of what happens I will write Ron Paul's name in my ballot if I have to. He's the ONLY one in this race with anything to say.
dantrenner 4 years ago 10
im sick of the defense industries being on welfare- THAT is the black hole where the trillions are going...and going...and going and gone
gennx30 4 years ago 2
Anyone who can implement less taxes and I'll be happy. I'm sick of people on welfare and disability making more than those who ACTUALLY WORK as well. Cut that stuff out.
ferretshockey 4 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
~~~PASTE THIS EVERYWHERE!!~~~
Jan 8th NATIONWIDE SIGN BOMB
signbomb08 dot com
JAN 21ST MONEYBOMB
freeatlast2008 dot com/
RON PAUL 08--FREEDOM, LIBERTY, PROSPERITY
jackmemorkel 4 years ago
On the January 2, 2007 broadcast of The 700 Club, Robertson said that God spoke to him and told him that "mass killings" were to come during 2007, due to a terrorist attack on the United States. He added "The Lord didn't say nuclear. But I do believe it will be something like that."[80] No terrorist attacks against the United States in general, or its interests, ever occurred in 2007.-wikipedia
anishinaabe 4 years ago 2
Happy New year Pat! If I were god I'd lie to you too.
anishinaabe 4 years ago
Almost every true Christian knows he's a heritic.
Calvinist4Christ 3 years ago
Are there false Christians? I just thought you were a Christian or you were not. Of course, since Christians can't even decide on what the bible says I suppose it doesn't matter. I also don't see a lot of Christians chopping off hands and plucking out eyes so......
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago
Oh sorry, I was talking about Pat Robertson not Ron Paul. Chopping off hands? Plucking out eyes?
Calvinist4Christ 3 years ago
I thought you were talking about Pat, I was commenting on you're mentioning "true Christians" because I don't see how there are false Christians. If you take a literal interpretation of scripture then you should be chopping off hands and plucking out eyes if they offend thee(Jesus said this). If you take a metaphorical view then anyone can have the scripture mean whatever they think, therefore making them just as much a Christian as anyone else. See the problem?
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago
Would you mind giving me scripture? I'd say that 95% of unbelievers (especially Atheists) take scripture out of the context.
Calvinist4Christ 3 years ago
Mat 5:29-30. You WILL say this is out of context, no Christian wants to do this...or this>>>(Deut ch.13)Put that into context for me then. Any time there is a verse that is not easy or does not match up to what most people think they ignore it or say "out of context" or that its not literal, which opens up a new can of worms! Some words are obviously literal and have an obvious meaning but accepting them is hard. If its not literal then its up to mean ANYTHING!
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago
Okay, remember that Deut. chapter 13 is the OLD testiment. Remember that today's Christian's are no longer under the Old Testement law. (Romans 6:14; Romans 7:4; Galatians 5:18; Romans 7:6; Galatians 3:24-25; Corinthians 3:11; Corinthians 3:13; Colossians 2:14;)
Calvinist4Christ 3 years ago
Okay now onto Matthew 5:29-30. Of course Jesus did not mean it literally! He's using an example. Suppose a women has breast cancer and the only way she'll live is by removing of one of her breasts. Wouldn't you say that she should go ahead and do it? Well, Jesus means that if you have a sin that you like, you should remove it because it's not worth it to go to hell. Oh, so I can't say that you took that verse out of context. That's like me asking you "What's 2 plus 2 and you can't say 4!"
Calvinist4Christ 3 years ago
So how do you know its not literal? Is the creation story not literal? How about the Garden of Eden or Noah and the flood? This means anyone can interpret the bible however they wish and its just as valid as anyone else. I think that the verse would be literal because it WOULD be better to pluck out you're eyes in this life in order to make it to heaven, no?
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago
But it's a living document!!
takadi 3 years ago
.....and that means what? How can a document be living?
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago
How do we know its literal or not literal? COMMON SENSE!!!
Calvinist4Christ 3 years ago
Ooooh So its up to the individual to decide? OK, so what of the flood, jonah and the whale, talking snakes, resurrection? Because common sense would tell me that there was no flood and jonah would be dead and that there are no talking snakes and nobody gets up after they are dead. So tell me what you think is literal and how you KNOW that it is.
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago
Actually Jonah and the flood would be true because sometime in the 1800s a man (sorry I forgot his name) got swallowed by a whale and survived for three days in it until some fishermen caught the whale and found him alive. We also use evidence. Now to your question....
"So tell me what you think is literal and how you KNOW that it is."
Well I don't know where to start. There are many things that I take literally so I'd advise you to read a Bible to look at the context.
Calvinist4Christ 3 years ago
LMAO! It was Noah and the flood and Jonah and the whale...2 different stories....have you read the bible AT ALL??? I don't believe it...you know, stomach acids or lack of air the esophagus closes unless you are eating LOL You should have googled a little deeper. Context has nothing to do with whether or not it literally happened, context is about what the words MEAN. You crack me up! You are alright with me. :)
UcanbeGOD 3 years ago
Okay, yes I did made a mistake but hey, I had only gotten 3 hours of sleep last night! Yes it did happen, I found out his name was James Bartley. I do know that his face and hands were bleached to a deadly whiteness, and the skin was wrinkled giving the man the appearance of having been parboiled.... That might have something to do with stomach acids but I'm no expert on whales. Yes context is about what words MEAN, so therefore you can tell what someone MEANS and whether he MEANS it literally.
Calvinist4Christ 3 years ago
calvin we dont know if that story is true
sandroeleven 3 years ago
Less Pat Robertson and More Ron Paul!
Vote for Ron Paul 2008!
slometal64 4 years ago 12
This has been flagged as spam show
@slometal64 Ron Paul is a Christian and has defended the rights of the gay community because a person's lifestyle is nobody's business and God doesn't want us to pass judgment on each other.
proselegalassociates 9 months ago
"Who's he going to take votes from in New Hampshire?" I'm more worried about who's going to take votes from Dr Ron!
gunloc26 4 years ago
Where are Pat Robertson's predictions? Huge hurricane dislocating Florida, Huge desasters around the world and so on?
These christian liers are aq disaster!
48acar19 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul is America!
murphyms 4 years ago
this guy sound like an hones person who actually feels like people and cares
FireOFK 4 years ago
Here is the NH GOP info in case you wanna contact them
Telephone: (603)225-9341
Fax: (603) 225-7498
jwka2001 4 years ago
May I order a porno-movie with Ted Haggard, Pat Robertson and Marc Foley????
48acar19 4 years ago 2
He must have read my email complaint.. lol.
Pat originally endorsed Guiliani! Nice to see him come to his senses.
VanHalenRulz 4 years ago
My congratulations to CBN for a well done story.
jimmyjoe1975 4 years ago
Bring Back Freedom. Bring Ron Paul.
Rendition the NeoCons to Afghanistan.
fourcell911 4 years ago 2
I think Ron Paul is interesting. I have differing views and solutions then Paul. My problem is with the supporters. He seems to appeal to a segment of the population. To me that is the sadness here; That people feel his message is the answer. That's just sad to me.
j0hnnyV3gas 4 years ago
If you mean the Constitution, I fail to see how that isn't the answer. He isn't perfect, but considering the track record of the last 100 years of our government, it's not too bad
takadi 4 years ago 3
How about: return to the gold standard, abolition of the federal reserve banking system, destruction of the federal government and federal protection of civil rights, attack of women's right to control their reproductive system...
He's a fringe candidate looking to turn America back to the 1870s, the era of robber-baron capitalism. Your utopia, not mine.
carrite 4 years ago
No, he's a timeless humanitarian and statesman that recognizes there are truths in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence that would serve us now as well as ever.
Are you seriously against a currency backed by something? Or the idea that private bankers shouldn't run the money supply? Or that people that own property, be it a bar or their own bodies, should be the only one's to decide what happens to it, as long as that action doesn't hurt anyone else?
thinkchip 4 years ago 3
Respect for _every_ _individuals_ right to their own life (present), liberty (future) and property (past) does sound great to me!
thinkchip 4 years ago 2
Paul is against corpratism, which is what robber baron style economics was based on
krist300 4 years ago 6
In point of fact the Robber Barons you hate so much became the Federal Reserve and all their names are right at the top of the pyramid that you see on your dollar bill: Rothschild, Morgan, Rockefeller, Warburg, Roosevelt, Kennedy, Bush, Goldman Sachs to name but a few. The Fed is controlled by all the investment banks who print the money they lend to your government and make gargantuan profits from the interest that YOU pay in YOUR income taxes.
Jeremiah188 4 years ago
CBN trying to be cunning. A slam piece designed as a seemingly even-handed.
The polling is hilariously innacurate. All CBN is trying to do is frame Paul as a quixotic candidate with no chance, just as many other old media outlets have been doing.
The shock will continue when Paul starts racking up primary wins.
All I say is doubt more, because it will be fun to watch your faces in the next couple months.
DanMcCall 4 years ago 2
Pat Robertson is bad news.
He is why Christians shouldn't be allowed to talk.
halo2994 4 years ago
Pat is no Christian. How could he call himself a man of God and support the kind of man that Rudy Ghouliani is? Most(not all) of these God TV people are total cons.
savageUSA 4 years ago 2
Do the other candidates blow him off? "Less so every day"!
RP08)
Lakshmana4 4 years ago
Yeah! Go RON PAUL! You have my vote and the votes of my family members. We are conservative republicans and we love you.
eminnj 4 years ago
Pat Robertson is bad news. We don't want him in the Ron Paul Revolution. He wants to make America a theocracy.
Pat Robertson is for the New World Order. Ron Paul is against the New World Order.
ireallyxoxoyou 4 years ago
Pat Robertson's head looks like a taxi cab with its doors open.
39rc6cf 4 years ago
This guy (RP) has a chance to make a 'big boom' on voting day. I can't stand Pat Robertson and am not religious anyhow. Please view searchword wilburjr-thanks.
wilburjr 4 years ago
Pat Robertson is not allowed to be part of the revolution. He endorsed Rudy Giuliani, Neo-Con and pro-abortion. However, I am happy that Ron Paul got exposure on his network. The info in this video was incorrect... says 37,000 donors... actual is 60,000+. $6 million in 1 week? No, it was $6 million in ONE DAY!!! go to -> r o n p a u l 2 0 0 8 do t c o m
April4th1984 4 years ago 2
Mr Robertson claims that Ron Paul will be the spoiler then questions from whom Ron will be taking votes. Hmmm, think about this one---isn't that democracy in action? Who OWNS the votes that Ron will be taking? Isn't the idea that the candidate that RECEIVES the votes wins? It just shows how corrupt our system is today---that a true, honest candidate can be accused of "taking" votes from the other candidates. Don't we all know by now that only the vote-machine programers can do that?
V1rotatev2 4 years ago
Pat endorsed Rudy...what`s that tell you?
jcalex 4 years ago
"Nothing to make front-runners nervous!"
LOL
I guess sh|tting your pants is a little more than being "nervous."
bigken61 4 years ago