Ron Paul MUST run for Speaker of the House
Submitted by Bob-45 on Fri, 10/29/2010 - 08:05Michelle Bachmann stated she would not vote for John Boehner if another acceptable candidate comes along. Tea Party candidates will comprise the vast majority of new GOP House members and Ron Paul has significant support in the Tea Party. Even those in the Tea Party who oppose Ron Paul would be loath to vote against him; as, Freshmen House members are the most vulnerable incumbents holding national office and the state of the US is likely to get considerably worse by 2012. Democrats livid at Pelosi may very well support Ron Paul for Speaker. After all, Ron Paul holds appeal across party and ideology lines; look at how he was treated on "The View" and "The Daily Show". Further, media hypocrites like Keith Olbermann and Rush Limbaugh could not continue to ignore Ron Paul if he were House Speaker. They and the Democrats would hope that worsening conditions could then be blamed on Dr. Paul, ending our movement. Perhaps more importantly, the GOP would be forced to embrace Dr. Paul or face third party status to a surging third party, such as the Libertarians. The LP has fielded MUCH better
Senate candidates this year than the GOP in many states.
Finally, Dr. Paul would prove, once and for all, he is serious about this movement succeeding, and would be in an even better position to run for president in 2012.
What's it going to be, Dr. Paul? Who are you, Thomas Jefferson, who bravely defied John Adams and the US Supreme Court, or Ronald Reagan, who talked a good story
but did not leave a single domestic accomplishment that promoted liberty.
- Login to post comments
My opion of what Ron Paul my become is..
to head The United States House Committee on Financial Services once Barney Frank is bounced. This is where he needs to be, again in my opinion.
Nah
I don't think Ron would make a great head of the house, AS OF NOW. If we get more constitutionalists in the House, then maybe but until then it doesn't make sense to have such a small minority lead the GOP. You guys have to understand, Ron Paul votes against almost everything. There's still virtually no politician like him. There's no way he could lead the House, nor would he want to.
Buy and Sell Homes For Bitcoins! (Domain For Sale)
http://homesforbitcoins.com/
disregarding how,
giving him more political power is always a more positive thing.
Yes
Ron Paul should be Speaker of the House.
Boehner is a tired Bush Admin retread. That is NOT what this country needs now or ever.
_________________________________
Freedom - Peace - Prosperity
I don't think so
If Dr. Paul was put in that position, my feeling is both the Reps and Dems wouldn't get anything done...blatently on purpose!
Ron Paul would not let them have their candy, cake, ice cream, and free rides so I could see both chambers walking out in a childish crybaby protest. Somehow I can't even see the president kicking the chambers in the rear to get them back to work.
Right now, all I am thinking of is Ron Paul running for President of the United States in 2012!
Real eyes realize real lies
2012, we want our country back
2012 is the year for Ron Paul!
Speaker holds too much power.
The question is, is he willing to wield it to fix everything and then return that power to the chamber at large where it belongs so the fixes will be difficult if not impossible to undo?
Precisely because he may NOT want the power or position is why he should have it.
And if he is willing to use the power of the office correctly, not only will he set a precedent for future Speakers to follow, but those who wish to sabotage him will have a hard time doing so.
Plus he needs us, he can't do it alone.
HR-1207 was a huge success from the standpoint of the people having their wishes heard.
How many cosigners hoped they could earn points on election day, even if they didn't support a full audit in the final bill. How many Congressmen will be replaced next Tuesday?
Is it that easy to fool the people? Perhaps if we keep silent.
Instead Congress simply borrowed more money from an organization of questionable resources. Are we trying to build a sound economy on a faulty and failing Central Bank? Congress doesn't know and many seemed afraid to find out if the Federal Reserve is financially sound. The toxic assets are just the tip of a mountain of shenanigans.
I suppose if we held gold and silver as individuals or saw that there was gold or silver or equivalent backing of the Federal Reserve Notes we use there could be cause for hope.
Instead every dollar in the money supply is borrowed and it costs almost a nickel a year a piece in interest to use them. Plus inflation of the money supply is causing the value of each dollar to shrink.
The Incredible shrinking American Dollar brought to you by the Federal Reserve. In the year before the creation of the Federal Reserve, Twenty Dollars bought one ounce of gold and a Silver Dollar bought:
-dozen eggs
-gallon of milk
-1 pound of steak,
-6 pounds of flour
-10 pounds of potatoes
-10 gallons of kerosene
100 years earlier a silver Dollar bought half that much. This kind of deflation in prices is healthy as was the first 100 years of the American economy.
Today the Silver in that Silver Dollar will buy $18 in Federal Reserve notes [FRN]. A one dollar FRN won't even buy a dozen eggs.
Even more inflation is on the way. What has Congress done to our money?
Ron Paul as Speaker would help us sort they difficulties out.
Free includes debt-free!
But Dr. Ron Paul is successful.
Few others are on a winning team with their voters.
One of the things they have to get done is the budget.
There is not really much else that is Constitutional. So let them pout. Two years where Congress did nothing would be the exact opposite of the unconstitutional Horrors produced starting with the 107th Congress in 2001.
June 7, 2001: Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, Pub.L. 107-16, 115 Stat. 38
October 26, 2001: Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism ("USA PATRIOT") Act, Pub.L. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272
January 8, 2002: No Child Left Behind Act, Pub.L. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425
January 11, 2002: Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, Pub.L. 107-118, 115 Stat. 2356
March 9, 2002: Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act, Pub.L. 107-147, 116 Stat. 21
March 27, 2002: Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (McCain-Feingold), Pub.L. 107-155, 116 Stat. 81
May 13, 2002: Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, Pub.L. 107-171, 116 Stat. 134
July 30, 2002: Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Pub.L. 107-204, 116 Stat. 745
August 6, 2002: Trade Act of 2002, Pub.L. 107-210, 116 Stat. 933
October 16, 2002: Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq, Pub.L. 107-243, 116 Stat. 1497
October 21, 2002: Sudan Peace Act, Pub.L. 107-245, 116 Stat. 1504
October 29, 2002: Help America Vote Act, Pub.L. 107-252, 116 Stat. 1666
November 25, 2002: Homeland Security Act, Pub.L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135
December 17, 2002: E-Government Act of 2002, Pub.L. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/107th_United_States_Congress
Free includes debt-free!
Republicans in the Tea Party
Republicans in the Tea Party who oppose Ron Paul? What would make a Tea Party Republican oppose Ron Paul? The Tea Party Movement originated from the Ron Paul 2008 Campaign.
Anyone who opposes Ron Paul is NO Tea Partier!
Let's see how many elected Tea Party candidates...
endorse Ron Paul in 2012. Hint: How many Tea Party candidates have MENTIONED Ron Paul when given an opportunity to talk about party leaders?
Absolutely not.
No way it will happen. And I hope it doesn't.
Columbus, Ohio
That's it? No Explanations?
I offered reasons, Wirebaugh. You offered sound bites.
Hard to have a soundbite when I typed. Typebite? :)
As you know, we are no longer in a D or R world. We are in an Establishment vs. Common Man world. People are waking up to that.
Speaker is not chosen by the Common Man, it is chosen by the Establishment. Ron Paul is a leader of the Common Man. The Establishment hate Ron Paul. They will do whatever it takes to tear him and our Revolution down. Democrats and Republicans in the House are all Establishment. They will in no way select Dr. Paul. They would be unable to carryout the Establishment's agenda. They (Establishment) will select someone to perpetuate the false R/L paradigm.
Second, if by some miracle Dr. Paul was selected (not elected), he would be locked into an "establishment" position which would make it more difficult for him to run as President which is where he is desperately needed to fuel the Revolution. It would be detrimental.
Columbus, Ohio
Nope, if he did become Speaker he would hold more
power over events than the President or any other single individual, maybe even group of individuals.
The establishment could do nothing to stop him short of assassination, which I don't put past them if they think they need to in order to protect their plunder and pillage scheme they have going.
How would he be selected? The
How would he be selected? The Dems and Repubs are on the same team.
I disagree that he would hold more impacting power. Theoretically, the Speaker does hold more power but the role of the Pres has changed, and more importantly, him being Pres would be a lifetime of political impact for the better, knocking the office of the President to its Constitutional level. The Common Man would have won.
If Dr. Paul wins the Pres, over 50% of the electorate would believe in his message. Speaker is selected by 50% of the Establishment.
Columbus, Ohio
No
We need to restore it as THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE.
_________________________________
Freedom - Peace - Prosperity
The Executive Branch is buried under bureaucrats.
The Pendleton Civil Service Act of 1883 established a permanent government bureaucracy. It is effectively a another branch of government. But it is unelected and permanent and has grown with every President to date.
There is no way this is going to turn around on the shoulders of one man. Such an Atlas is a figment of our imagination inflamed by our zeal for laziness.
When it becomes the People's House in a meaningful way then the rest will follow. I can think of no better Speaker for the people and the Constitution than Ron Paul.
Free includes debt-free!
Well you have some work to
Well you have some work to do. You have to get 434 advocates of the "People." You keep working on that.
Columbus, Ohio
There's an easier way.
Get a corrected Article the First ratified and then we get over 6,000 house members and they'll be so close to their constituents, we won't need to get them advocating for the people. They'll already be doing that just by managing to get elected.
We'd be diluting the big wigs votes massively.
Yes Sam!
I think we've had this discussion before.
I personally think that this could solve almost all of the corruption in our government, and could be bigger than Dr. Paul as Prez.
6,300+ members of the House. And if we got the states to elect a Senator again, we would be much better off.
More info here:
http://www.thirty-thousand.org/
Columbus, Ohio
Well
Your "I give up before anyone even tries" attitude sure as heck ain't gonna get a darn thing done for anyone.
So keep up the naysaying.
_________________________________
Freedom - Peace - Prosperity
Good answer, Wirebaugh
However, is the presidency any less of an "establishment" position? Dr. Paul needs hard accomplishments to convince the American people he would be an effective president. Dr. Paul is in a unique position to forge bipartisan coalitions from the "left" and the "right" to accomplish some real good. Imagine cutting the defense budget by 50%, closing overseas bases, selling government assets, ending the Fed and the IRS, prosecuting Bush and Cheney for war crimes, prosecuting Goldman-Sachs and Fed officers for debasing the currency.
After the 2010 elections, Barack Obama will be a "lame duck" president. Certainly, Obama and the Senate will still be in a good position to frustrate Dr. Paul's efforts. However, if they do so, they risk subjecting themselves to the wrath of the American voter. This also applies, to a lesser extent to the MSM and special interest groups. If a "Ron Paul" House still fails to achieve even one piece of Dr. Paul's agenda, that agenda will be debated and discussed by the American people, and the voters will beg for a Ron Paul presidency.
I understand your intentions, but....
You are wanting to put an impeccable, juicy, tasty Red Delicious into a bushel of Rotten Apples, and expect good results. Practicality says that this is impossible.
Dr. Paul's presidency will not reek of Establishment but of the Common Man. He can do that solely on his own. Even if no changes come when he holds the office, it will be a template for all future politics.
Is Champion of the Constitution not a hard enough accomplishment? 30 years of impeccable voting? Leader of a Revolution? 2012 will be the year of the Common Man, not the year of hard, rotten accomplishments in a Rotten Bushel.
Columbus, Ohio
Nope, it's not.
Not for a man like Ron Paul. Such men are born only once every few generations. Few would attempt to accomplish more than one profession. Dr. Paul has been blessed by G*d to accomplish many. Such great blessings incur great obligations.
I respectfully disagree.
There are thousands of these men all throughout our country. Probably many of them on the DP. He has been blessed. I will give you that.
You originally stated that Dr. Paul needs more "hard accomplishments" to hope to be elected president, and I disagreed. If that were the case, John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi could be fit for Presidential runs.
I don't think he needs 6 months of Speaker before running for President. Let us not forget, Dr. Paul is a very fit but elderly man. I could physically see the toll that the last run for president took on him. A run for Speaker would be another load that I don't think he would want, especially prior to running for Pres. I think, and I of course am speculating, but I think Dr. Paul wants one last huge hoorah in a 2012 run for Pres.
I think you and I are arguing two separate arguments, I could be wrong. You are saying, Dr. Paul as Speaker would be great for our country. And I agree.
I am arguing that there are practicalities that will not allow that to happen, as well as, it being a hindrance on his pres run. What do you think?
Columbus, Ohio
The timing is right
the mood of the country is right. The main issue, the economy, is right. This is the right time for RP to show he is serious about leading.
_________________
Romney is a detour on the way to liberty, anyone else is a shorter path, win or lose.
All in favor,
Say AYE.
agreed!
agreed!
" Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of they day; but a series of oppresssions...pursued unalterably, through every change of ministers, too plainly proove delibrate, systematical plan of reducing us to slavery..."
Tho