Wednesday, 21 March 2012

New Ron Paul ad-DESTROYS Obama and Romney

This is not really an Ad but it is a great promo. It shows it's the people versus the establishment. Ron Paul is the only one of the people on offer not beholden to the corrupt military industrial complex.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, March 21st, 2012.]


steven andresen said...


Not only has the Paul campaign failed to address issues that have kept him from gaining a larger percentage of the vote in Republican primaries...i.e., on the social security issue, discussed by Paul C. Roberts, and the issue of what to do with unemployed soldiers and other government workers in a downsized Paul administration, but, he has not , as far as I can see, defended himself from the arguments made by people like Webster Tarpley who is arguing that Paul is soft punching Romney so that at the convention Rand Paul could be nominated as the V.P. candidate to run with Romney.

Tarpley is pointing out that Paul is not attacking Romney, but is going after other conservatives...and that this means Paul is working in cahoots with Romney.

Tarpley is also claiming that since super tuesday the Paul campaign can't be considered a serious campaign any longer.

Paul has to take some position on these issues, even if he sees that he cannot win enough order to assure his supporters that he will not pull a Kucinich on them...where he supports the eventual Republican candidate... gruesome as that candidate might order to have party unity.

Yes, it's a rousing video and it points out differences between Paul and Obama/Romney, but it doesn't tell anyone why they should at this time vote for Paul instead of the others. At this time people know all the problems there are with Obama/Romney, and they are still voting for them, despite what Paul has been saying. Paul needs to address the other issues that divide him from voters....


steven andresen said...


Freedom is a great issue. It's like Peace. Peace is a great issue. But nobody voted for the "peace" candidates. They voted for the war candidates. They voted for candidates who told the voters that once in office they were going to fuck them over from start to finish in pursuit of corporate profits. People still voted for them. ....

Just having a Freedom candidate is not enough.

SpookyOne said...


While it is true that Paul has not properly addressed the concerns of Roberts I find it highly unlikely that Rand Paul would become Romney's V.P. or that the Paul campaign is in cahoots with them.

I think that there is still a clear distinction between Paul and the other candidates (plus Obama) that sees him drawing support in any vote.

You can see by the GOP skullduggery that, with the media censorship, they are struggling to keep a lid on things. Don't believe the mainstream polling. Lots of people ARE fed up with the obvious pro-establishment candidates.

And we know heaps of votes are being flipped, that we don't really know what the real delagate count is - beyond the TV sources.

I seriously doubt, with Paul's record, that he will flip on his supporters and go for any of the other candidates.

I agree with Tarpley that the RP campaign has been damaged, and somewhat demoralised - but via Vote Fraud, media censorship and the propganda effects of these actions. There is still a lot of grass roots support out there. I think the mantra "Ron Paul or no one" should be seriously considered as part of what is going on out there.

Plus, I don't think people really vote for the pro-War, pro corporate candidates....

When the election was "close" in 2000 people were voting for a non-interventionist, small government G.W. Bush campaign.

In 2004 the voters, even under the threat of "Al Qaeda" and still full of WMD propaganda- but realising occupation in Iraq was going to be ugly, rejected Bush and Voted for John Kerry (another stooge) who was campaigning with a more diplomatic message. He only lost thanks to massive electronic vote fraud - exit polling had him ahead 52 to 48%. Plus logic shows that all those extra pro Democrat people MUST have turned the results around when Gore only just lost and the numbers for Bush from 2000 did not increase.

In 2008 people voted for Hope and Change - a rapid ending of the Wars, a transparent government and a better life not controlled by special interests.

This message is the same torch being carried by Paul, albeit with his radically smaller, and non interventionist Federal Government ideals.

I am still of the opinion that this message does carry weight and that Paul's referral to "following the Constitution" stands in contrast to the other puppet Candidates. I think many rank and file Republicans -not beholden to the GOP machinery- and lots of other voters, get what is being "hinted" at here.

The choice, as I see it is, is pretty stark- vote for some stooge, or take a chance and vote for Paul. And for those on principle- if Paul is not nominated- vote for none of the above (or else "write in" your preferred choice).