Ron Paul Thread. "Farewell Address" Pt.1 Vid and text.

[essential1]

rashi wrote:

---

Essential1 wrote:

---

Ron Paul

4. Mason Capital Management (Hedge Fund)
5. Microsoft
6. Boeing
7. Google
8. Lockheed Martin
15. Northrop Grumman


Corporations, Banks, Hedge Funds, etc.. BUY ALL POLITICIANS.. Ron Paul is not immune.. And IF he becomes a legitimate candidate to win the presidency... Then Goldman will pour the money into his coffers as well

Dude, these ranking ARE NOT CORPORATE DONATIONS. When you make a donation to a political candidate you have you put your employment AND who you work for. I'm sure Goldman Sachs loves to hear Ron Paul wanting to abolish their Piggy Bank.



Then Obama's donations, Romney's donations, Cain's and Perry's really don't make a difference either... If there small or large donations from individuals make a difference so does Paul's.. Who has received as much large contributions as he has small contributions 6,075,354 (48%) tp 6,114,372 (48%)....  But I guess to you that doesn't make a difference
 
And you're naive to think that no matter how Goldman feels about Ron Paul if he was even REMOTELY a LEGITIMATE candidate for the Presidency they would play their bets on him as well..

But because he is not a legitimate candidate there is no point for a donation to him. Let him win the Republican Nomination you will see how many corporations will play their bets on every number on the Roulette table including his..

To be intellectually honest which you refuse to be... Goldman and other corporations donate based on the relative chances that person has in winning the election.. So Obama, Romney, Cain, Perry have far larger donations than  Huntsman  or Paul...

Just be honest with yourself... The more legitimate the candidate the more funds he can raise in total from people... The more chance he has in winning, the more likely he is to get significant donations from corporations who put their hands in everyone's pocket...

Ron Paul's only immunity from this is NO ONE TAKES HIM AS A SERIOUS CANDIDATE.

Also in terms of small contributions Obama (46%) and Paul (48%) ... Whereas Mitt has 10%

 

[tbone97]

damn

 

[tbone97]

damn

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by Essential1

rashi wrote:

---

Essential1 wrote:

---

Ron Paul

4. Mason Capital Management (Hedge Fund)
5. Microsoft
6. Boeing
7. Google
8. Lockheed Martin
15. Northrop Grumman


Corporations, Banks, Hedge Funds, etc.. BUY ALL POLITICIANS.. Ron Paul is not immune.. And IF he becomes a legitimate candidate to win the presidency... Then Goldman will pour the money into his coffers as well

Dude, these ranking ARE NOT CORPORATE DONATIONS. When you make a donation to a political candidate you have you put your employment AND who you work for. I'm sure Goldman Sachs loves to hear Ron Paul wanting to abolish their Piggy Bank.



Then Obama's donations, Romney's donations, Cain's and Perry's really don't make a difference either... If there small or large donations from individuals make a difference so does Paul's.. Who has received as much large contributions as he has small contributions 6,075,354 (48%) tp 6,114,372 (48%)....  But I guess to you that doesn't make a difference
 
And you're naive to think that no matter how Goldman feels about Ron Paul if he was even REMOTELY a LEGITIMATE candidate for the Presidency they would play their bets on him as well..

But because he is not a legitimate candidate there is no point for a donation to him. Let him win the Republican Nomination you will see how many corporations will play their bets on every number on the Roulette table including his..

To be intellectually honest which you refuse to be... Goldman and other corporations donate based on the relative chances that person has in winning the election.. So Obama, Romney, Cain, Perry have far larger donations than  Huntsman  or Paul...

Just be honest with yourself... The more legitimate the candidate the more funds he can raise in total from people... The more chance he has in winning, the more likely he is to get significant donations from corporations who put their hands in everyone's pocket...

Ron Paul's only immunity from this is NO ONE TAKES HIM AS A SERIOUS CANDIDATE.

Also in terms of small contributions Obama (46%) and Paul (48%) ... Whereas Mitt has 10%

Just because Corporate Media is telling you he isn't "legitimate" doesn't mean he isn't. I guess to be "legitimate" you have to want to bomb and murder people all over the world? You have to be in favor of wanting to construct legislation that will benefit the few? *shrugs*

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by Essential1

rashi wrote:

---

Essential1 wrote:

---

Ron Paul

4. Mason Capital Management (Hedge Fund)
5. Microsoft
6. Boeing
7. Google
8. Lockheed Martin
15. Northrop Grumman


Corporations, Banks, Hedge Funds, etc.. BUY ALL POLITICIANS.. Ron Paul is not immune.. And IF he becomes a legitimate candidate to win the presidency... Then Goldman will pour the money into his coffers as well

Dude, these ranking ARE NOT CORPORATE DONATIONS. When you make a donation to a political candidate you have you put your employment AND who you work for. I'm sure Goldman Sachs loves to hear Ron Paul wanting to abolish their Piggy Bank.



Then Obama's donations, Romney's donations, Cain's and Perry's really don't make a difference either... If there small or large donations from individuals make a difference so does Paul's.. Who has received as much large contributions as he has small contributions 6,075,354 (48%) tp 6,114,372 (48%)....  But I guess to you that doesn't make a difference
 
And you're naive to think that no matter how Goldman feels about Ron Paul if he was even REMOTELY a LEGITIMATE candidate for the Presidency they would play their bets on him as well..

But because he is not a legitimate candidate there is no point for a donation to him. Let him win the Republican Nomination you will see how many corporations will play their bets on every number on the Roulette table including his..

To be intellectually honest which you refuse to be... Goldman and other corporations donate based on the relative chances that person has in winning the election.. So Obama, Romney, Cain, Perry have far larger donations than  Huntsman  or Paul...

Just be honest with yourself... The more legitimate the candidate the more funds he can raise in total from people... The more chance he has in winning, the more likely he is to get significant donations from corporations who put their hands in everyone's pocket...

Ron Paul's only immunity from this is NO ONE TAKES HIM AS A SERIOUS CANDIDATE.

Also in terms of small contributions Obama (46%) and Paul (48%) ... Whereas Mitt has 10%

Just because Corporate Media is telling you he isn't "legitimate" doesn't mean he isn't. I guess to be "legitimate" you have to want to bomb and murder people all over the world? You have to be in favor of wanting to construct legislation that will benefit the few? *shrugs*

 

[rashi]

http://www.bluerepublican.org/

 

[rashi]

http://www.bluerepublican.org/

 

[essential1]

Originally Posted by rashi

Originally Posted by Essential1

rashi wrote:

---

Dude, these ranking ARE NOT CORPORATE DONATIONS. When you make a donation to a political candidate you have you put your employment AND who you work for. I'm sure Goldman Sachs loves to hear Ron Paul wanting to abolish their Piggy Bank.

Then Obama's donations, Romney's donations, Cain's and Perry's really don't make a difference either... If there small or large donations from individuals make a difference so does Paul's.. Who has received as much large contributions as he has small contributions 6,075,354 (48%) tp 6,114,372 (48%)....  But I guess to you that doesn't make a difference
 
And you're naive to think that no matter how Goldman feels about Ron Paul if he was even REMOTELY a LEGITIMATE candidate for the Presidency they would play their bets on him as well..

But because he is not a legitimate candidate there is no point for a donation to him. Let him win the Republican Nomination you will see how many corporations will play their bets on every number on the Roulette table including his..

To be intellectually honest which you refuse to be... Goldman and other corporations donate based on the relative chances that person has in winning the election.. So Obama, Romney, Cain, Perry have far larger donations than  Huntsman  or Paul...

Just be honest with yourself... The more legitimate the candidate the more funds he can raise in total from people... The more chance he has in winning, the more likely he is to get significant donations from corporations who put their hands in everyone's pocket...

Ron Paul's only immunity from this is NO ONE TAKES HIM AS A SERIOUS CANDIDATE.

Also in terms of small contributions Obama (46%) and Paul (48%) ... Whereas Mitt has 10%

Just because Corporate Media is telling you he isn't "legitimate" doesn't mean he isn't. I guess to be "legitimate" you have to want to bomb and murder people all over the world? You have to be in favor of wanting to construct legislation that will benefit the few? *shrugs*


You do know he isn't a legitimate candidate according to citizens and not just the "Corporate Media"...  *Shrugs*

But continue to think it is only the corporate media who thinks he is largely a joke

 

[essential1]

Originally Posted by rashi

Originally Posted by Essential1

rashi wrote:

---

Dude, these ranking ARE NOT CORPORATE DONATIONS. When you make a donation to a political candidate you have you put your employment AND who you work for. I'm sure Goldman Sachs loves to hear Ron Paul wanting to abolish their Piggy Bank.

Then Obama's donations, Romney's donations, Cain's and Perry's really don't make a difference either... If there small or large donations from individuals make a difference so does Paul's.. Who has received as much large contributions as he has small contributions 6,075,354 (48%) tp 6,114,372 (48%)....  But I guess to you that doesn't make a difference
 
And you're naive to think that no matter how Goldman feels about Ron Paul if he was even REMOTELY a LEGITIMATE candidate for the Presidency they would play their bets on him as well..

But because he is not a legitimate candidate there is no point for a donation to him. Let him win the Republican Nomination you will see how many corporations will play their bets on every number on the Roulette table including his..

To be intellectually honest which you refuse to be... Goldman and other corporations donate based on the relative chances that person has in winning the election.. So Obama, Romney, Cain, Perry have far larger donations than  Huntsman  or Paul...

Just be honest with yourself... The more legitimate the candidate the more funds he can raise in total from people... The more chance he has in winning, the more likely he is to get significant donations from corporations who put their hands in everyone's pocket...

Ron Paul's only immunity from this is NO ONE TAKES HIM AS A SERIOUS CANDIDATE.

Also in terms of small contributions Obama (46%) and Paul (48%) ... Whereas Mitt has 10%

Just because Corporate Media is telling you he isn't "legitimate" doesn't mean he isn't. I guess to be "legitimate" you have to want to bomb and murder people all over the world? You have to be in favor of wanting to construct legislation that will benefit the few? *shrugs*


You do know he isn't a legitimate candidate according to citizens and not just the "Corporate Media"...  *Shrugs*

But continue to think it is only the corporate media who thinks he is largely a joke

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by Essential1

Originally Posted by rashi

Originally Posted by Essential1

Then Obama's donations, Romney's donations, Cain's and Perry's really don't make a difference either... If there small or large donations from individuals make a difference so does Paul's.. Who has received as much large contributions as he has small contributions 6,075,354 (48%) tp 6,114,372 (48%)....  But I guess to you that doesn't make a difference
 
And you're naive to think that no matter how Goldman feels about Ron Paul if he was even REMOTELY a LEGITIMATE candidate for the Presidency they would play their bets on him as well..

But because he is not a legitimate candidate there is no point for a donation to him. Let him win the Republican Nomination you will see how many corporations will play their bets on every number on the Roulette table including his..

To be intellectually honest which you refuse to be... Goldman and other corporations donate based on the relative chances that person has in winning the election.. So Obama, Romney, Cain, Perry have far larger donations than  Huntsman  or Paul...

Just be honest with yourself... The more legitimate the candidate the more funds he can raise in total from people... The more chance he has in winning, the more likely he is to get significant donations from corporations who put their hands in everyone's pocket...

Ron Paul's only immunity from this is NO ONE TAKES HIM AS A SERIOUS CANDIDATE.

Also in terms of small contributions Obama (46%) and Paul (48%) ... Whereas Mitt has 10%

Just because Corporate Media is telling you he isn't "legitimate" doesn't mean he isn't. I guess to be "legitimate" you have to want to bomb and murder people all over the world? You have to be in favor of wanting to construct legislation that will benefit the few? *shrugs*

You do know he isn't a legitimate candidate according to citizens and not just the "Corporate Media"...  *Shrugs*

But continue to think it is only the corporate media who thinks he is largely a joke

Still didn't answer the question.

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by Essential1

Originally Posted by rashi

Originally Posted by Essential1

Then Obama's donations, Romney's donations, Cain's and Perry's really don't make a difference either... If there small or large donations from individuals make a difference so does Paul's.. Who has received as much large contributions as he has small contributions 6,075,354 (48%) tp 6,114,372 (48%)....  But I guess to you that doesn't make a difference
 
And you're naive to think that no matter how Goldman feels about Ron Paul if he was even REMOTELY a LEGITIMATE candidate for the Presidency they would play their bets on him as well..

But because he is not a legitimate candidate there is no point for a donation to him. Let him win the Republican Nomination you will see how many corporations will play their bets on every number on the Roulette table including his..

To be intellectually honest which you refuse to be... Goldman and other corporations donate based on the relative chances that person has in winning the election.. So Obama, Romney, Cain, Perry have far larger donations than  Huntsman  or Paul...

Just be honest with yourself... The more legitimate the candidate the more funds he can raise in total from people... The more chance he has in winning, the more likely he is to get significant donations from corporations who put their hands in everyone's pocket...

Ron Paul's only immunity from this is NO ONE TAKES HIM AS A SERIOUS CANDIDATE.

Also in terms of small contributions Obama (46%) and Paul (48%) ... Whereas Mitt has 10%

Just because Corporate Media is telling you he isn't "legitimate" doesn't mean he isn't. I guess to be "legitimate" you have to want to bomb and murder people all over the world? You have to be in favor of wanting to construct legislation that will benefit the few? *shrugs*

You do know he isn't a legitimate candidate according to citizens and not just the "Corporate Media"...  *Shrugs*

But continue to think it is only the corporate media who thinks he is largely a joke

Still didn't answer the question.

 

[rashi]

Peyton Hillis supports Ron Paul.







All this talk between Fascist Romney v. Muslim killing Newt. Romney is done, and Pelosi for sure is going to drop a dime on this satanic demon Newt.

 

[rashi]

Peyton Hillis supports Ron Paul.







All this talk between Fascist Romney v. Muslim killing Newt. Romney is done, and Pelosi for sure is going to drop a dime on this satanic demon Newt.

 

[jking0821]

Peyton Hillis

 

[jking0821]

Peyton Hillis

 

[sonoftony]

Originally Posted by AceMaster193

End the Fed Reserve. This is the only man looking to attack important issues. However, all changes when the MAN reaches the White House. Let's hope he's not like the rest.

thats what always happens. i hope not if Ron Paul gets elected
  

 

[sonoftony]

Originally Posted by AceMaster193

End the Fed Reserve. This is the only man looking to attack important issues. However, all changes when the MAN reaches the White House. Let's hope he's not like the rest.

thats what always happens. i hope not if Ron Paul gets elected
  

 

[00david00]

Just registered as a republican so i can vote for this man come june 5th

 

[00david00]

Just registered as a republican so i can vote for this man come june 5th

 

[jtplatnum]

got my vote...even if he runs as an independent.

 

[jtplatnum]

got my vote...even if he runs as an independent.

 

[rashi]

I'm in FEMA region IV, who wants to share a bunk with me?

 

[rashi]

I'm in FEMA region IV, who wants to share a bunk with me?

 

[RustyShackleford]

Originally Posted by rashi






I'm in FEMA region IV, who wants to share a bunk with me?

This bish Maddow's rating must be low because she straight OD'ed with this crap. She straight up took some parts out of context, especially the end.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Originally Posted by rashi






I'm in FEMA region IV, who wants to share a bunk with me?

This bish Maddow's rating must be low because she straight OD'ed with this crap. She straight up took some parts out of context, especially the end.