Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Who really controls America? George Carlin. Ron Paul on dissent in the time of war.



March 10, 2008 – Comments (14) | RELATED TICKERS: SKF , SRS

Who Really Controls America? (PG-13 Language, Adult Content)

Ron Paul on dissent in a time of war. Sit down and watch the whole video.

Ron Paul's speech in the House of Representatives on 5/22/07.

14 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On March 10, 2008 at 4:48 PM, zygnoda (< 20) wrote:

Wow..  Have you managed to get a national "I love Ron Paul" day yet?  haha

Report this comment
#2) On March 10, 2008 at 5:00 PM, abitare (30.03) wrote:


After the next President is elected and goes down like Herbert Hoover or Jimmy Carter or worse, there will be nationial day of mourning for the opportunity missed to get such a statesmen elected to office, who has been proven right on all the major issues.

T o be honest, Ron Paul does not need or deserve the pain and suffering the next president is going to inherit. Better one of the Pro war CFR stooges inherit the mess and be remembered in history the way Hoover and Carter are.


Report this comment
#3) On March 10, 2008 at 5:04 PM, klaracat (28.50) wrote:

Watch ZEITGEIST part 3 of 3

Banks,The Federal Reserve,and central banks in Europe.

History repeat again. 

Report this comment
#4) On March 10, 2008 at 9:23 PM, misterpickles (< 20) wrote:

That Ron paul speech should be played in every history 101 class to show the younger generations how far we have strayed from the founding fathers vision of America. As long as special interest money rule politics guys like Ron Paul,Kuchinch,Nader will never have a shot. In my opinion something as important as presidential races should be ran on public finance only. 

Report this comment
#5) On March 10, 2008 at 9:58 PM, abitare (30.03) wrote:


I am new to the zeitgeist theory, but it is interesting. Dr Paul wants to end  the FED or atleast have oversite. I can agree on that.





I thru the internet. Dr Paul's message is catching on.  

Report this comment
#6) On March 10, 2008 at 10:22 PM, lepersinmyhead (28.78) wrote:

Ron Paul is to Libertarianism as William Buckley/Barry Goldwater is to conservatism?


I truly hope and believe that the ideas will take hold.  I loved his careful elucidation of the "Patriot Act".  Most folks are numb to what is going on.  Keep 'em coming. 

Report this comment
#7) On March 11, 2008 at 12:31 AM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

HEY aba is all of this tracked by google? I wonder why Bushieandcrew  wants  leagle access to e mail and then the benadict Arnold that he is avertized it on public air waves for all the terriostto use. He just gave them a  game plan for the next  a tack. Then he can take more of our rights away.I say it again it is 2 bankers fighting over who will run the world, with a few other cast of caricatures thrown in. Still following the money with your help. Thank you. prepare of more outings because the bankers now know about each other. Depression here we come and more actual bad weather on the way as well as figiturally speaking.Take Care.LQ

Report this comment
#8) On March 11, 2008 at 7:01 AM, abitare (30.03) wrote:


Everything that is on the internet is on there permenantly, although  finding and recovering information maybe difficult. That is the way I understand it.  

Hopefully we can avoid a depression, but it is not off the table.

Take care, abit 

Report this comment
#9) On March 11, 2008 at 9:14 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Yes I know what you mean. You take care also. LQ

Report this comment
#10) On March 13, 2008 at 3:18 PM, CollinsKeith (73.71) wrote:

Hmmmm... have any of you heard Ron Paul give a press conference? Floor speeches are one thing... prepared, written, praticed rhetoric. That's why he has staffers.

Ron Paul is, to use a word from my 11 year old niece, such a poser. His ideas are so politically unpalatable and his naivety is almost unbelieveable. Kuchinich... same idea, but from the left...

If Ron Paul had all the money in the word, he still wouldn't be "electable." Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Bush fan either. He is obviously too concerned with his legacy and it's backfired on him. He'll go down as one of the worst presidents of our time. But, Ron Paul, Dennis Kuchinich? Come on! They're not presidential! Neither would be able to handle, nor surround themselves with competent advisors, to combat the problems we face today. Now, FDR (GD) and Lincoln (Civil War), they were presidential and made great change without seeming unpresidential. You know to be president and have a chance at change you do have to get elected first...

Report this comment
#11) On March 13, 2008 at 10:14 PM, abitare (30.03) wrote:


Thanks for the reply. Let me help you.

Your knowledge of history is about as good as your knowledge of Dr. Paul. Your knowledge of history is so poor it is a case to re instate Jim Crow laws to prevent the poorly educated from voting.  

"Now FDR and Lincoln, they were presidential" 

You would have to be a complete moron to think leading a nation INTO a Civil War is "presidential". 620k Americans died and much of the South was burned to the ground by Grant, no other Western nation had a civil war over to end slavery. Most nations just paid to free the slaves.

Of course the Civil War was over states rights vs Federal, but would not likely know that. Also your "President" Lincoln almost lost the War, DC should have been taken by the South. How many Generals did Lincoln go thru, before the alcholic Gen Grant burned much of the AMERICAN south to the ground?

Lincoln was one of the worst presidents in history. Lincoln did not inherit the Civil War, he helped to create it. Great leaders AVOID wars.  

FDR? Since you are so off base on Lincoln, discussion of the damage of Roosevelt's New Deal, leading us to war with Germany and Japan. Confiscation of citizens gold and silver is way beyond anything you are likely to know or understand.

FYI- In 1933, Roosevelt ordered the partial confiscation of citizens' gold and silver bullion. The legal authority Roosevelt used to confiscate your parents' or grandparents' gold and silver—the "Trading with the Enemy Act"—remains on the books.

"You know to be president and have a chance at change you do have to get elected first..."

We agree on this, but the best cannidate does not always win.  

Report this comment
#12) On March 13, 2008 at 11:20 PM, abitare (30.03) wrote:

There were 13 GOP cannidates. Now there are two, so I guess Dr Paul did okay.

I will let Dr Paul answer your on electability Ron Paul - Electability - Censored by Fox 1-10-08:


Report this comment
#13) On March 14, 2008 at 9:22 AM, CollinsKeith (73.71) wrote:

My response... being president means making tough decisions during tough times. Our understanding of historical events differ drastically. You're telling me Hoover and Buchanan could have done better jobs? Lincoln tried to avoid war and FDR gave our country hope and help in a time of desperate desperate need. Our view points differ in perspective... Desperate times call for desperate measures.

Good book recommendation: A People's History of the United States, by Howard Zinn

Also, Lies My History Teacher Told Me, forget the author...

Report this comment
#14) On March 14, 2008 at 1:15 PM, abitare (30.03) wrote:

"Lincoln tried to avoid war"

He failed, the war should have been avoided at all costs and the consequence was severe. So how in the world is he more "presidential"? Lincoln is a totally ridicoulous choice. FDR is marginial. 

FDR was nearly caused a revolt and dictatorship and he confiscated the personnel wealth of the citizens.

Hoover was a victim of the FED's credit expansion and subsequent collapse. Just like the next president will inherit the credit collapse and housing implosion. 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners