Added: 9 months ago
From: defnug66
Views: 5,954
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (57)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Everyone at Fox must have came in drunk that day.

  • MR RON PAUL IF I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET YOU I WOULD TELL YOU THAT I ADMIRE YOU SO MUCH...

  • @joyce4christ i think you're misunderstood about his intentions. SS needs a revamp and he can do it. his age i understand is a concern for a lot of ppl but i dont think it matters, looks like hes still alive and kickin pretty good to me and until hes not, i got his back. he doesnt want us to murder our parents lady you are crazy, romney along with everyone else besides ron paul wants to send us and our kids and grandkids to a war for their benefit. we the people DO NOT want war. blog that kids.

  • This sounds great in theory only, the consequences will be awful! He is too old too, so he should be the president with no pay, same as if senior citizens no longer receive their pay, they paid for all these years. They built the buildings, they paved the roads, they gave their hard earn money for the tax and the SS.

  • @Joyce4Christ okay i'm going to clear something up for you there is no more money for SS we borrowed against it i am sure people will be compensated eventually but either way SS no longer exist so gtfo

  • What an itiot, so he is saying, he will no longer give SS checks to the people who have paid into it all these years! That is all he is saying folks! Wake up/ Every retired person will not get their SS they payed for! Their children will responsible for caring for them, Then they will want us to murder our parents too! He is a sick man!

  • Ron Paul is not a Liberal, he's a Libertarian.

  • britt is such a terd.....i love to ask that steaming nugget of play-doh,,what do you think about credibility?? do you have any sir?

  • crap, doesn't anybody know what happened in 1937 to the court? maybe chris needs to dust off a history book and talk about that, it would be a great education for many people

  • 0:14

    Ron Paul's commentary on slavery and how it relates to the constiutution's power over us, yet at the same time our limited power over the constitution, is so priceless. This is for everyone who says that Ron Paul is pro-slavery / racist, because commentary like that is obviously in abhorrence of the subject. Ron Paul stands by the constitution but he isn't afraid to say when it might have some flexibility.

  • Must say I admire Ron Paul, even as a Liberal myself.

  • Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist and does NOT want to end all government assistance programs. The U.S. has moved so far to the left and corporate corrupt that any sensible conservatism is seen as "extreme". So sad.

  • @tubeviewerX20

    Exactly! The lines have been blurred so badly that people can't see where they're standing.

  • man this guy is good...

  • Is the poster suggesting it is liberal to defend the Constitution, defend State rights, call for smaller federal government and be pro life? Maybe I'm missing some tongue in cheek meaning.

  • Ron Paul is the only "choice" the country has. I you dont support Dr. Paul then you are simply uninformed, seriously be you liberal, marxist, or conservative if your not supporting Ron Paul then you are doing your self ant the world a disservice.

  • Laugh Rupert Murdoch is a big government shill, he is a phony libertarian, the CATO institute and all of it is full of phony libertarians, so when a real libertarian like Ron Paul comes on the scene they panick.

  • Does that mean that Huffington Post and Digg.com need a new media outlet to bitch about now?

  • socialist security is a mandate. all mandates are unconstitutional. it's NOT government role to tell us what to do.

  • whats with the eyebrow

  • @starscreamdkmo its a battle scar from fighting for our freedom

  • They're not-- I don't know why, but they don't like Ron Paul, I guess.

  • "... the supreme court in 1937--"

    "LMAO!"

  • Uh... Paul screwed up with that example. Slavery WAS constitutional until the constitution was amended to make it illegal. The social security scam was never constitutional and the fact that we have has such a long history now of congressmen and presidents unwilling to impeach judges who violate their oaths is deplorable.

  • @wrjamescom Thats what he said..."The constitution and the courts said slavery was legal too, and we had to reverse that"

  • @jeremygiaco He didn't mention that, but he should have. As morally wrong and repugnant as slavery was, it was entirely legal and constitutional. It required a constitutional amendment to have a federal ban on it. Social Security was never constitutional and still isn't. Amendments 9 and 10 are clear on that.

  • Fox News is really pissing me off lately. Their continual ignorance of Ron Paul, or put downs of him if they actually mention him, proves that they are NOT conservatives. They're a bunch of neo-conservative Republicans.

    Some of the only good people they have are relegated to Fox Business channel like John Stossel and Judge Andrew Napolitano

  • TerrorWarrior5000 obviously supports fiscal socialists.

  • RON PAUL 2012

    AMERICA'S LAST HOPE

  • Ron Paul is a Marxist.

  • @echarvalkeem

    I completely disagree with you.

    I doubt Ron Paul, who has been preaching the same things since the 1980s will all of a sudden change his views if he became President. If he was going to change his views, he would have done it already to gain more support. Back in 2008 the media tried to make him look crazy and often tried to make him look like a fool, but he's coming back with the EXACT same views.

    Ron Paul is the next JFK, let's hope it doesn't end the same way.

  • @TheMattswish

    Also, Ron Paul doesn't participate in the Congress Pension plan, has consistently voted against pay raises for congressmen, AND even returns unused money to the Treasury.

    This should prove that he is not in it for the money, but rather for the people of America.

  • @TheMattswish I will vote for Ron Paul but he may be assassinated if he gets into office. Why? Because the four presidents that were assassinated while in office, Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield, William McKinley, and John F. Kennedy were the four and the only four who have attempted to free America from the private banks (aka federal reserve). And the private banks will slaughter 150 million people in this country to keep their control if they must.

  • @orbitar88

    Yes, I have read about those Presidents.

    Unfortunately, I am Canadian and unable to vote for Ron Paul, BUT I will continue to show my support and try to get his name out there.

  • @echarvalkeem you may be right, but Ron Pauls voting record clearly shows that he sticks to his believes at all times. I don't believe he would change that after 30 years of faithfully serving the tax payers interest. Not the banks, or corporations, or unions, or the military industrial complex.He only serves the tax payer. No other politicians have a voting record that is consistent.Its hard to believe he would just up and change everything if he was elected.He is the best chance for America

  • Ron Paul has views all over the political spectrum. But only because that is the perception the media gives to people. Ending the American empire overseas is seen as liberal, but it is what is demanded by the constitution and is what is fiscally responsible. Legalizing drugs is seen as liberal, but it removes government from one area of your life. His motivations for his views are hardly liberal, if you really think about it, but I know that is too hard for some of you to do.

  • Fox news is quite liberal

  • Ron's reaction to the year 1937 is great.

  • @defnug66 It's so true to what he is, genuine!!!

  • @defnug66 Caption should have been Ron saying: "OMG, you so stupid"

  • @defnug66

    He is so precious! Awww!

  • Ron Paul is the only choice to save the country!

  • look Ron Paul is Winning !

  • When did Fox News start defending liberals?

  • @defnug66 Since forever. Although Obama is a mess, Bush spent more than his father, Bill Clinton, and Ronald Reagan COMBINED. Sounds like liberalism to me, and we know how vigorously they defended Bush.

  • @snhtown9 i just dont get how people like you can get away with making stats up. i knew what you said was wrong, but just to check i added up the numbers from usgovernmentspending and reagan+BushI+clinton is about 24 trillion, bush II is 19 trillion. that's not even adjusted for inflation. believe it or not, clinton averaged 19.53% of gdp in federal spending, bush averaged 19.41% of gdp. obama is averaging 24.6% of gdp through 2011. you really need to get your facts straight

  • @Welsh77 My apologies. I stand corrected. HOWEVER, your stats do show that W came within 5 trillion of those 3 administrations combined. That is STILL staggering for anyone to look at. In Clinton's first term, federal expenditures rose 4.7 percent. In his second term, they rose 3.7 percent. In the first term of the Bush administration, however, spending rose 19.2 percent. Big difference. And these stats are according to Richard Viguerie, one of the architects of the Reagan Revolution.

  • @Welsh77 And now we have Obama's spending on top of that to add to the mess. Again, I'm sorry if I put incorrect info up here.

  • @defnug66 Anything to take shots at RP

  • @defnug66 When Ron Paul threatened to take away their money by limiting government power and threatening to bring down the military-industrial complex is what I think. And I'm sure there is more that he says that threatens their money supply.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more