John Stossel tells Hannity "Ron Paul will catch on starting next week". Does he know something?
Submitted by gizzy on Tue, 05/01/2012 - 09:03in
I was listening to Hannity's interview with John Stossel yesterday & found it very interesting when Stossel hinted at the idea that Ron's campaign would gain traction this upcoming week. He sounded pretty sure of his statement...to which of course douchebag Hannity yelled "Ron Paul isn't going to catch on!".
So, does Stossel know of some big announcement or event that is going to boost the Paul campaign? Any ideas???
Rubio? No way
Anyone who supports the NDAA is NOT a good choice.
Sorry - this post was in response to the Rubio suggestion below.
Think everyone..Just a few weeks ago
Dr Paul was summoned to a private meeting with the evangelical leaders, wasn't he?
Maybe some prominent religious leaders will stand with Dr Paul and Rand and give their endorsement.
Yea I remember now
Back on april 4th there was a blog on DP . "Dr Paul meets quietly with evangelical leaders"
VP announcement
I was told that the candidates cannot, by law, endorse a VP until they have clenched the nomination. Is there any truth to this?
trading endorsements / political favors for support
It's illegal to trade favors, including promising money or appointments or whatever in exchange for support. Gingrich was really blatant about breaking the law, including his fake hint of picking Palin (and others) for the VP slot. BTW: Very quickly thereafter, Tod Palin came out in support of Gingrich. There have also been Romney rumors re: VP. Paul responded at least once to pressure for a VP choice, that it was clear that many of his supporters wanted Andrew Napolitano, but didn't say whether he'd do that. Seemed like such an obvious fact at that point, it didn't look to me as though he was on the edge of violating the law. And of course, Andrew Napolitano was already giving his full support ... no cause and effect.
Correlation does not prove causality!
No such law
Its the Convention that official picks the VP nominee but they usually pick whoever the candidate wants. The candidate can make his selection anytime he wants. They usually wait until the convention to try to get a lot of mileage out of the selection process. In '76 Reagan picked Sen Sweicker (sp?) from Pa. in an attempt to get moderate delegates to vote for him. The effort back fired, not only didn't he pick up any moderate delegates he lost some conservative delegates that didn't want Sweicker that close to the Presidency.
yup and in fact,
No candidate can really pick his VP. The establishment forces the pick.
ie. JFK didn't want LBJ
Reagan didn't want CIA Director Bush
Kerry didn't want Edwards
McCain didn't want Palin
These four examples expose that there was dissension. All other nominees were very complacent and showed no dissension. Guaranteed Romney will show no dissension as he's a spineless yes-man to the powers that be.
I wonder if they will try to strong arm Ron Paul
into choosing Romney as his VP?
If any neocon ends up being his VP,
they will off him as early as possible. I hate to be negative, but it's reality.
"He did not come into the world to condemn it, but to save it." - John 3:17
"Well, you know it's like I always say 'it ain't government work if you don't have to do it twice.'" - Jerry Gergich
That sounds like a repeat of
That sounds like a repeat of the Hinckley-Bush connection.
They'll probably
try to saddle him with Rubio or *shudder* Jeb Bush.
Disregard government. Acquire liberty.
Both of MR's parents were born in Cuba...
...And after OhBummer's birth certificate problems, I doubt he'd get very far.
Sorry: MR=Marco Rubio, not Mitt Romney!
"The liberty of the individual is no gift of civilization. It was greatest before there was any civilization." Sigmund Freud
Rubio might actually be a good choice.
He's a young politician on the rise, and he's relatively popular. He could learn true conservatism (as opposed to neocon spin) from Paul.
I don't play, I commission the league.
Why consider Rubio a candidate for VP?
I would only vouch for someone as VP if they were eligible to be president. Rubio isn't the offspring of American citizens. He's born to immigrants, therefore Rubio's children may be eligible to be president (assuming his wife is an American citizen).
But Rubio is not eligible to be president, therefore why even consider him for VP?
Uh NO!
Wait until I post the Rubio Files on the NHTPC website... waiting to see if he's a player at Bilderberg next week.
Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers
Yeah, he's a loonie...
He says that whatever is happening anywhere in the world is 'our' business. The exact opposite of what the movement believes. If he shows at the Bilderberg meeting, I'm sure the Occupiers will call him out.
"The liberty of the individual is no gift of civilization. It was greatest before there was any civilization." Sigmund Freud
OK,LET ME SEE
If i have this straight.Read this thread,and checked some links posted here.Now let me see:Stossel says that the Paul Campaign will gain traction next week.Big rally in Auston Texas with Ron and Rand on Sunday.THE JUDGE as possible VP.All i Can say is anybody who can get to Auston with a computer stream hook up needs to get there.i Gotta see this.Alex,they may need a bull horn cause this could be huge!!!!!
Some see things as they are and say why,but i dream things that never were and say why not. Robert F. Kennedy
Obama is getting ready to fight the last war against Romney
Little does he know that the "rules" have changed!!!
=======
RON PAUL 2012
How Long O Lord?
can these clowns like Hannity and BO Reilly evade reality? Frankly, the 'catching on' has already started - they just missed the memo.
We will enjoy it, when they are forced to eat their words...
Um
It is hard to "catch on" when the entire purpose of your position is to keep the masses from actually catching on.
_________________________________
Freedom - Peace - Prosperity
And to that end Shamitty has
And to that end Shamitty has played into the hand of the RP campaign. The term "useful idiot" comes to mind.
"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." Benjamin Franklin
Will likely announce his VP preference,
which he's already stated as The Judge! (He said this in an interview following one of the rallies.)
No The Judge Wants A Supreme Court Position
To my knowledge, Ron Paul did not make any statements before regarding The Judge being a VP pick. The campaign certainly has not mentioned anything. And to my knowledge, The Judge was asked about this and he said he would not want a VP position, but would be willing to serve the country in one of the other branches of government....Sorry if this is incorrect, just passing along what I've heard.
Ron Paul is my president. I am a Ron Paul Republican.
When RP was asked about VP...
...he merely said, "The name Andrew Napolitano comes to mind..". he did not say it was definite. You are right, the best job for Judge Nap is 'obviously' the Supreme Court. What Judge is more 'Constitutionally Minded' than he? If no openings in the SC come about, then I say Attorney General would be second best.
"The liberty of the individual is no gift of civilization. It was greatest before there was any civilization." Sigmund Freud
did he?
did he?
Not really.
Ronpaul1fan is just going from this comment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_qaMPSz8yk
Saw Stossel on Bill O'reilly
Stossel was talking about individual liberties granted by the bill of rights and the constitution and Bill sounded like a Marxist as usual, pretty funny. In the end Bill O'reilly said something like,'You're all libertarians now like Ron Paul', lol sounded pissed.
Liberties and rights aren't
Liberties and rights aren't granted by the Bill of Rights. Men are sovereign, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.
The constitution gives certain limited, clearly defined powers to the federal government that can be taken back by the people at anytime. The bill of rights simply further expressly limits the government, but government was already limited even if not spelled out. There are far more limitless rights that people have that aren't spelled out.
See 9th and 10th amendment.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
Excellent point and thank you
Excellent point and thank you for the reminder. It has been quite the education following this election cycle. Just started "Constitution 101" on line program @ Hillsdale College. Even from your brief statements I get the sense you are well studied. Any resources you might suggest for a burgeoning constitutionalist? I know the founding documents are of course the primary source but it is helpful to have aids in the learning process.
"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." Benjamin Franklin
Michael Badnarik's constitution course
Here is the link to part 1 of 7 of Michael Badnarik's course, taped in 2004 I believe.
Its an amazing enlightening course, and I am a Canadian! I kept the link
so I can go back and watch it again.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5085838350268647159#
cw