Like this article? Get DP delivered to your inbox daily. Subscribe here:
Isn't it possible that it is Dr. Paul's moral fiber that prevents him from verbally attacking other people, regardless of his true feelings about them. He could just be very uncomfortable saying bad things about other candidates, which could lead to his stammering.
Ron Paul is not good at going after one specific person, no matter what the issue. He didn't come off so well during the first debate with Perry, using that approach. He's best at sticking to his guns and the 'take it or leave it' approach. We could draft Tom Woods next time around. Tom Woods is also an easy to remember, two syllable name to scream in crowds.
It's hard to support Ron Paul when he just lurches and stammers his way through these debates. A certain amount of that may be endearing, but after 30 years with these subjects, he should have nailed Cain to the wall with a barrage of irrefutable indictments right off his fingertips. Instead he's tripping over his words, seems off-kilter, off guard, makes IMHO a feeble case. The missing 9 trillion? Not even mentioned. I know he's not a spring chicken anymore, how can you criticize the elderly. Bit if we're tying to influence unconvinced voters...how does this do it?
I will stand with Dr. Paul to the end, but watching the debates I am frustrated with Dr. Paul's rebuttals. I know Paul says he doesn't practice for debates, but as long as he has been doing this you would think these answers would roll off his tongue effortlessly. I guess age may play a role in it, I've watched a lot of his stuff from the 80s and he did answer much faster and more concise. His house floor speeches are very good though, I think in some cases maybe practice or a rehearsed answer would sound clearer and more factual. Win or lose Dr. Paul has started a revolution and we thank him for that. I'm definitely not counting the good Doc out but in the future other liberty minded leaders will pick-up the torch and some speak very well. Rand Paul...Judge Nap. and others.
The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government ... are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it-Andrew Jackson
but I remember reading an account by John Adams on how poor a speaker Thomas Jefferson was but he eventually got around to his point. His writing ability, however, was amazing.
Whether or not Dr. Paul becomes president (which I think he has a very good chance of doing), historians will not be able to claim that this liberty movement was driven by force of personality or charisma. History will show how a man inspired a generation by setting an example of moral excellance and principled persistence in a just cause. People will then see that through adopting these traits, they may also make a lasting impact on themselves and those around them, though their talents be meager.
I happen to believe that Dr. Paul's moral integrity is molded by his Christian beliefs and faith in God. Regardless, he has inspired Christians and nonchristians alike to positive action.
I hope you're right. That the importance of this campaign could fail purely on salesmanship is pretty terrifying.
I love and support Ron Paul to my core, but I am well-aware that he needs to win over more voters, for it is a race and competition. When he stammers and tries to keep a sentence together by saying "you know" too often, I worry that he is not coming across as "unconvincing" to the voters that he needs to secure. Doctor Paul needs to be more stable and efficient with his sentences, whenever possible. If he stammers and appears to lose ground while speaking, some of us tend to worry that he will fall short of making his case in point. My strong hope is that he has "speech coach" who can help him "smooth up" his speaking skills, while still remaining true, to who he is.
Cain: "Three words Mr. Woods: NINE NINE NINE!"
or he would say
Cain: "You did not understand the context in which I was speaking. You need to be careful where you hear things on the internet. Talking about the economy in the past is a distraction, because we know now that the policies of this administration are not working. And I am the only one with a plan; NINE-NINE-NINE!"
Woods: Do you really think the American people are stupid enough to not notice that you just completely avoided my question? Mr. Cain, should we continue to expect you to run away from taking responsibility for your statements, as you have already shown the propensity for doing in past debates? Perhaps it would assist you if I restated my question. Why should the American people trust any plans you have in regards to the economy when, unlike Paul who was able to call the situation 7 years in advance, you were unable to see it 7 days in advance? In fact, you were so off base that I have already implied that you should be embarrassed and indirectly suggested that you should save face and own up to the fact that you lack knowledge in matters related to the economy.
Your preface on the question was a bit lengthy which made the question lengthy. Ron Paul, in my opinion gets lengthy with his responses and his question last night. He needs to keep things more direct, more brief. You could hear the moderator, Charlie Rose, trying to expedite the question.
I'd keep the question as it is, but start where you started "On September 1st, 2008, you gave the economy a clean bill of health..." Perhaps he could preface it with his predictions of the Housing bust, etc. BRIEF snippets like: "In an address before Congress on X (date) I predicted the housing market bubble bursting. (and on with the question)"
I know that's not Dr. Paul's M.O. It sounds more self-aggrandizing, but he was right! Nothing wrong with taking a bow when you are right. Besides, it lends credence to his economic platform, the Austrian School (ie RP knew of the bubble because he understands Austrian Economics which help him see trouble before it begins).
I really like this question...intelligent !
I am afraid Herman Cain might respond, "you gotta be careful gettin' your info on the internet..'cause that is simply not somethin' I was involving in".
Let's hope, let's make intelligence win this campaign. I've decided, if Dr. Paul does make it to the White House, I'm gonna to have to find another country to call my home, before they build a wall to keep me in.
"This isn't what the govern meant"
"Win the crowd and you will win your freedom"
Paul should have an iphone on his desk ready to play back Cain's statements.
Time is short, Cain cooked himself and is running out of dough. Romney has plenty of money and Cain is just a distraction, a cover for Romney. Romney is the real threat because he is running unopposed and unchallenged.
The campaign has to hit Romney hard and heavy in the ads because the networks are not going to give Ron Paul much chance to ask Romney any questions.
They saw what happened to Cain last night and they will aim to protect Romney from being asked critical questions..
We need a big money bomb on October 19 to go on the attack. We need to hit Romney early and often with the same kind of truth that Cain witnessed first hand.
As I see it, by December 16th or so, the election cycle begins and whomever is in first place has a huge advantage.
We have to start the attacks very, very soon..
1) Romney I do not believe has the backing of the OWNERS, the real men behind the curtain. He does get the backing of lots of middle management people, who are so compartmentalized that they don't know they work for the devil.
2) Romney is not intrinsically evil and sold out, like Cain or Perry or Newt or Santorum. He is just deceived. And that's no excuse for a man as educated as Romney. He's still accountable to God for not having the moral and intellectual capacity to recognize the truth behind the deceptions.
Romney was torpedoed by the Insiders last time around, first by Huck in Iowa and then by McCain in N.H. Romney was completely ignored, Ron Paul sytle, I mean completely omitted from political discussion on the MSM outlets in late 2007, early 2008.
The Powers That Be have not invited Romney to the table. He's there on his own, an uninvited man to their party.
So Ron Paul rightly is going after Cain, the real threat, and Perry, who is plummeting as people see who he is.
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a rEVOLution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford
Paul took the shot at Santorium on Iran/Irag, took the shot at Perry on drug innocualtions and donations, then Cain on the Fed and lying. Now it's Romney's turn, and that team with the media support is preparing...
I do not claim to be a campaign wizard, but Romney is WEAK on Foreign Policy and has NOW selected the Bush Team of advisors, I think I would send a rocket launcher (not a shot) into this decision, I cannot believe the American public will go down that crooked path again.
Read this sad article on Romney...who could possibly vote for this walking fiasco
Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!
If Paul could just bring himself to do a little self-promotion, and flick the little pinky of his ginormous hand of credentials, it would be well enough to crush Cain, Romney, Perry, and other cockroaches of pretenders alike.
Cainunism [keyn - yuh - niz - uhm] – noun
1. A theory or system of economic organization based on a wildly optimistic regard for the fiscal discipline of Congress and the President. Adherence to this theory typically requires the suspension of disbelief concerning the ability of increasing the government’s power to tax, without substantive spending cuts, to actually reduce burdens on taxpayers and to produce economic recovery.
2. The intentional use by politicians of resonant slogans which obfuscate and distract some voters from the otherwise conspicuous absence of thoughtful, realistic or realizable fiscal or monetary plans and policies.
Cainunist [keyn - yuh - nist] - adjective
1. Of, characterized by, favoring or relating to Cainunism; Cainunistic
In a sentence: “Imagining that a ‘9 - 9 - 9’ percent tax ‘plan’ would not soon be 9.9 - 9.9 - 9.9, then 19 - 19 - 19, and so on, is just more magical Cainunist thinking.”
Origin of Cainunism: term used by informed voters to describe the economic-sounding slogans that originated from the 2012 vanity presidential campaign of former Federal Reserve banker Herman Cain (1945 – )
Synonyms for Cainunism: 1. Prevarication, 2. Deception, 2. Cozen, 3. Hucksterism, 4. Hoodwink, 5. Sales Pitch, 6. Razzle Dazzle
Antonyms for Cainunism: 1. Common Sense, 2. Objective Reality, 3. Free Market, 4. Tax Reduction, 5. Economic Liberty, 6. Less Government, 7. Constitutionalism, 8. Ron Paul
Paul ante portas.
This is the funniest thing I've ever seen about Cain. I plan on using this on the Cain FB page. Can't wait to see the responses I get!!! Thx!!!
I think the 999 plan is just a front -- a reference for the Fed insiders.
What Cain really means is that if he becomes the President and implements his plan, then the dollar will lose 99.9% of its purchasing power. That's where he got the number... 9-9-9.
See, just like what Ron Paul said, he speaks like a true insider.
27%. That is almost 1/3. Basically Cain wants to put a 1/3 Federal tax on everybody. Even the kings in the middle ages did not have the gall to tax that much! And this is just Federal taxes. With all the other taxes from state, county and local municipalities, the tax burden for each person would be over 50% and could easily go as high as 80%. Does this sound like the plans of a fiscal conservative?
...why can't Paul just point out to the American people that he is the only one on the stage not receiving corporate donations from Wall Street, to this fact alone, how can they trust any other candidate to fulfill their wishes and not Wall Street's?
"So for the record Mr. Romney you believe in Taxpayer Bailouts. In 2008 you supported Bush's TARP Bailout to the Bankers. And today in 2011, you are telling us that if another economic crises hits, yes you would do another Tax Payer Bailout to the Bankers, with better accountability this time. We got that.
"Ok, here is my question:
"If a future Congress refuses to pass yet another $800 billion Tax Payer Bailout for the Bankers, as President, what is your next move?"
** [The set up can be a few sentences, but the question should be short and punchy]
*** Did anyone notice a couple of things when Romney gave his softball question to Michelle Bachman? First, Romney asked Michelle Bachman how she'd get America back to work---isn't that Romney's big secret that he knows but never says. ( I doubt he knows a dam thing ). And second, by giving her a softball question, he may be signaling his VP pick. If Bachman was on Romney's ticket, Romney would shore up his Romney Care weakness with Mrs Anti-Obamacare on the ticket and he would gain "Tea Party" credentials... all weaknesses in Romney's game. Moreover, listening to Bachman's answer tells us, she doesn't have a clue either. Ironically, other than the good doctor, only Santorums idea of no Corp taxes was a good one. Of course Dr. Paul's plan of 0-0-0 is 1000 times better.
"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by George Smith --
BUY IT HERE: http://www.amazon.com/dp/0521182093/ref=tsm_1_fb_lk
Invest in Liberty, one Apartment deal at a time with me, just ask me how & get rich with me.
Even if Paul was to quote Cain's words verbatim, Cain would come back as saying that the point is being misconstrued or misinterpreted as something else. "What I really meant by that...blah blah blah..999...blah.."
But, it would definitely get a lot of people thinking, so the question should definitely be raised...it would also bolster Paul's prophet-like persona, it would also give a lot more credibility for the Austrian School..
Another question for Cain should go something like this:
Mr. Cain according to the Federal Trade Commission the average purchase price of a new car in America is $28,400.00
Your 9% sales tax would add another $2,500.00 to the price of that car. That's also an instant $2,500.00 devaluation of that car when it leaves the lot. In an economic downturn don't you think more Americans are going to choose to buy the slightly used car, say a demo car or previously leased car to avoid $2,500.00 tax? Isn't this rational going to extend to many high priced items housing etc...How is this not going to be the final nail in American manufacturing?
like always. Why is Tom not a head consultant/researcher for Dr. Paul right now?
and they (PAC members) can't work with the campaign.
Another question for Cain should sound something like this:
Mr. Cain, if your 999 plan isn't just a sales gimmick how do explain the end result when you consulted economists on these three areas of taxation 1. Corporate tax 2. Income tax and 3. Sales Tax. Do you expect the American people to believe that when these economists crunched the numbers that they all coincidentally end up with the number 9 in each taxation category? Or is it more likely that 999 is simply a sales gimmick and now you are looking for some economists to stake their reputation on it?
We need to destroy Cain on his 999 plan, that's all he has is gimmicks, take those away and all that's left is a corporate/fed shill.
A good short response would be that the 999 plan is just as gimmicky and arbitrary as our current tax system.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: