EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Price-Fixing Scandal Ever
- Study: Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide Linked to Cancer, Autism, Parkinson's
- Picture of the Week
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Study: Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide Linked to Cancer, Autism, Parkinson's
- Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Price-Fixing Scandal Ever
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- The Life and Death of Words, People, and Even Nature
- You and Your Family Are Guinea Pigs for the Chemical Corporations
Popular content
Today's Top News
Ron Paul, Tea Party Godfather, Says ‘Occupy’ All About ‘Handouts'
CARROLL, Iowa -- Ron Paul outlined what he believed was the difference between “Occupy Wall Street” and the “Tea Party.”
Rightwinger Ron Paul on the Occupy Wall Street protesters: "They’re scared to death they won’t get their handouts." “Some are demonstrating, because they’re scared to death they won’t get their handouts,” Paul said yesterday. “And the other half are demonstrating, because they’re sick and tired of paying for it. I’m on the side of sick and tired of paying for it.”
Paul's popularity has risen since 2008 largely because of the Tea Party. He doesn't lead in polling in any state, but he is routinely in the top three in states like Iowa and New Hampshire.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
277 Comments so far
Show AllUh, does anybody else see anything odd about this story? When and where did Ron Paul make these comments? Was he speaking only to these two reporters? In private or something? Is there a video of it? I can't find any other source for these statements, which don't jibe with previous statements he's made about Occupy Wall Street.
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/152425/ron-paul-defends-occupy-wall-street-and-middle-class-at-republican-debate/
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/234033/20111019/mitt-romney-herman-cain.htm
JUAN WILLIAMS, THEHILL.COM: Congressman Paul, I wrote earlier this year this is the age of Ron Paul because, ya know, you look back at the '08 campaign and a lot of the things that you stood for, the debt you are talking about, smaller government, that became the heart and soul of the Tea Party and the Tea Party movement. Now as you watch the Occupy Wall Street movement, do you see them as reflecting some of your anger and frustration with the Fed and with the federal government, Wall Street?
PAUL: I do. I don't think that -- you know, I could say, well, everything that's happening on Occupy Wall Street is something, ya know, I fully endorse, but I think it's this frustration. I think it's the frustration with the American people not just tired with Obama but tired of the Republicans. They are looking for something else.
So this is why the election occurred last year with the Tea Party movement, but that hasn't satisfied everybody. This is why I didn't like the idea when I think Cain said that these people ought to just go out and get a job. Why blame the victims?
But there are some there that would advocate positions that I bet we might agree we shouldn't be advocating. I advocate the market. But I complain that this one percent are very wealthy because they get benefits through the inflationary system, through the contract system, through the military expenditure system, through the bailout system. So I identify with them. And a lot of them are anti-Federal Reserve people that are there.
But some of them just say the solution is just raise taxes on the rich. And they put everybody in the same category that everyone who's made money is a bad person. And I don't believe that.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/special-report/2011/10/27/age-ron-paul#ixzz1cHz1wIJH
Sorry. The system refused to accept paragraphs from me.
It's just as well. You and your Fox propaganda and turning things into hatred of the rich is so typical of the right-wing assholes. There are a huge number of wonderful rich people. What's wrong is the endless cutting of taxes on the rich for decades and forcing the middle class and poor to pay the price. Having 1% own 40% of the wealth is a recipe for disaster. Take off the fucking blinders, Emma.
I feel bad for you,pinchy. Is it a hatred (?) of the rich or of humanity in general?
There are not "huge numbers" of "rich people"of any kind, Greg. ;)
I guess that depends on how we define huge and rich and whether we speak of the US or the entire world.
"But in typical Yankee fashion, it's all about their pockets, so fuck the rest of the world. Not a good basis for a morally sound protest, is it, OWS"
Your comment is false. Most OWS particiapants are against the wars, but OWS hasn't yet chosen to emphasize this issue. I think that may change as time goes on.
OWS is attemting to gain mass popular support. The issues that you discuss are potentailly divisive and have not been fully addressed. To "demand reparations to each and every nation for all the bloodshed America was responsible for since the end of the "good war" some 65 years ago" would immediately get OWS labelled as "anti-American"; so such emphasis would be counter-productive at this point.
Also, it's counter productive to slam OWS! If you want to make suggestions why don't you go to an occupy camp. your keyboard critique shows a real lack of solidarity and accomplishes nothing. Bit then your use of the term "yankee" would indicate that you are "not from around here," and are simply throwing rhetorical bombs from outside the OWS movement.
You excel in making fallacious arguments. Pathetic.
Phantom_
Your user name choice isn't all that clever, given how easy it is to see through your obfuscation, and spin. I don't believe for one second, that your stated concerns are sincere, especially given the content of your contortionist reasoning, relative to your assertion that OWS movements worldwide are bereft of concern for human rights and morals.
You work for the dark side.
HUE: He's hardly alone. There's a virtual orchestra that waits to ambush any and every significant personality who dares to voice a compelling Progressive argument. I think some of these fake purists feign an interest in Marxism just to venture their attacks from a would-be Leftist angle. It's NOT a coincidence that following just about every thread, one or two emerge with posts aimed at ruining the credibility of the speaker. They may try to pull up the individual's financial history, or they'll otherwise suggest said individual is not being hard enough on the Democrats (even when many, in fact, are!); or they'll take the single flaw in the person's argument and make THAT the crux of their discussion. It's done to destroy the entirety of the argument (or points) being raised. -------------------------------------------------------------I've watched them spin these tactics for over two years, and now the patterns used are quite clear to me. These are NOT honest posters, and their opinions are not posted in accord with Free Speech. Campaigns of character assassination are a covert form of Hate Speech, and these imposters should be called to the mat on their twisted allegiance to, as you put it, the Dark Side.
Some people look at life through a holistic prism, and others are stuck on one thing and one thing alone, like one trick ponies.
So to the few on CD who want Israel to take the blame for all martial (and otherwise horrific) decisions taken on the part of US elites, I suppose my call to understanding the diverse factors that play into the calculus of foreign policy may appear as an apologia to Israel. Just as to those who defend militarism find my comments along the lines of "Mars rules" cause to castigate me for stating as much. Then there are those who react equally aggressively when I speak about gender equality. The favored reflex is to to call me a man hater, as more enlightened views are anathema to those raised to view authoritarian/patriarchal standards as THE norm. Basically, you're a creep, and I could care less what you think. Obvious detractors (even enemies) in this forum do not post on these threads for honest reasons. And I DO have my sources, and it's being documented... as evidence for saner times. One day The Watchers will have to account for what they've done, or attempted to do in the way of seeking to harm the reputations of those who spent a lifetime building their good names. You hide behind a cover like a Klansmen... even your screen name suggests the need for a shroud, and aversion to The Light.
First, RP has stated his domestic and foreign policies will be guided by the Golden Rule, which makes your assertion he lacks morals false. Second, where at http://occupywallst.org/ did you find any list of demands? The 99% Declaration is no more than a working draft not yet approved by OWS, which means NO list of demands exists. If you want any credibility, you'll need to post a link.
Your comments on Scott Olsen, along with this disparaging remark about the OWS movement shows you for the right wing SICKO & shill that you are. Unless "Left" to you = the policies of Ron Paul.
What do you mean by "official".
Nobody controls the movement and as soon as it is controlled, it will probably lose all interest.
Nothing like a mystery to keep public interest and If you did not believe that why call yourself "Phantom"?
Also the statement of demands you site is by one person and they are all good. Nobody I see out there is more against the war in general than OWS.
The Tea Party never has a held any sign against the war that I have seen... yet.
When that happens, we will be on to somethin much bigger.
Okay, okay, for all you Ron Paul acolytes, let us for the sake of discussion, say Ron Paul was elected President in 2012 and he kept his word and began withdrawing our troops from around the world; shutting down the 1000 miltary, and who knows how many other clandestine CIA bases around the world.
How long before the 1% that this program would cost trillions of $ to, would use the JFK option. In other words, even if Ron Paul wanted to do it, the Empire would never allow it....and you can take that to the bank!
Exactly. Ron Paul, for all you can say of him, could never implement his anti-MIC, anti-Fed intentions. All those incensed by his presence in the political sphere should realize that we are deep in the heart of a corporatist Empire, and at this point, worrying about who is going to be our next president is folly. It's not going to be Ron Paul, that's for sure, so don't get all upset. It's going to be one toady for the MIC and the Fed or another.
This whole dog and pony show of who is going to be our next President is nothing but a Wall Street, fascist, facade for the American sheeple! He has already been handpicked; like Elizabeth H says: " worrying about who is going to be our next President is folly " . It is nothing but a fixed horse race where the 1% never,never, ever lose because they own all the horses, in the Presidential race, just like they own 99% of Congress! And a long shot like Ron Paul or anyone else that wants to enter the race, that the 1% do not own, will always be disqualified.
Bye Ron
Its apparent that voting for the Lesser of Evils equates to some sorta political sadomasochism psychology. It should really be examined.
The creation of the one-party system was a masterful thing. A work of art. Brilliantly done.
Ron Paul's economic policies are entirely misguided and unworkable in a modern complex society. Once they are spelt out in any detail, the constituency for them will be extremely small. There is no way that Paul's economic concepts can or will be enacted. However, Paul has been a consistent and principled voice speaking against wars on foreign soil, against the drug war, against the TSA and the Patriot Act, and against an arrogant Empire. Those are issues by which a limited common cause and dialogue can be struck between progressives and Paul's libertarian supporters. It would be foolhardy to turn away from this opportunity, as the way forward requires this dialogue.
OK,
If he agrees with us on those things, If we held up Ron Paul for prez signs everywhere, would he still say we just want handouts?
Too bad he can't turn away from his arrogance toward women, national parks, "handouts" that we have paid for with our wages, agencies to keep our food safe, public schools, yadda, yadda, yadda.
There is no way his anti-empire policies will be enacted, especially, since his libertarian philosophy, if carried out in policy, would only embolden and enrich the very corporatist power brokers that drive empire in the first place.
Whether he or his supporters acknowledge it, or believe it, he and they are surrogates for, and supporters of, the 1%. They need to be persuaded, not joined with.
How do you persuade people if you are not talking with them?
Do you talk to Ron Paul yourself?
It would be great if more in the Tea Party and the Occupy movement could talk to each other.
Most of them are in the same boat as us.
But since the Tea Party has come under the control of the Americans for Prosperity and Koch Gang, tell me how?
I talk a lot with a good friend who is a Ron Paul Fan and is just as much against the Status Quo with the Rich gettin richer and the Poor poorer as anyone here.
It would be great if we could convert the Tea Party, than we might go on to covert the War Machine too.
For me so much of this depends not so much of what we can occupy but more on how we can persuade each other and those we meet and talk to that we are all in the same boat and have much more in common than not.
....another lost soul!!
I used to think this guy had at least a modicum of common sense, but his total off-target "take" on the "Occupy" movement has irrevocably convinced me otherwise.
Too bad! When he talks of auditing the Fed, he makes sense, but it is apparently a lucid moment in an otherwise deluded mind.
Enough cause for this palefaced WWII veteran to bid, "So Long.....M...F'er"!!
Weird, for all the 'nonviolence' preached here, there is one helluvah lot of belief in it. Vote democratic, you get the most violent and destructive cabal ever to grace the planets surface. Dittos for voting republicans next time around – with exception of Paul.
Which is it? Are these folks really nonviolent, or just in denial or just liars? Or perhaps all the killing is fine if you get something in exchange for your complicity? Could that be the answer?
Really, which is it? Its truly the litmus test of the age. Either you are or aren't. :)
Hilarious.
Paul is against violence when it comes to foreign imperial adventures, but he yearns for the day that corporations can commit economic violence against the public without interference from the government.
Ron Paul has consistently been anti-war for over 30 years, and has voted that way every time. Also, he has never voted to fund a war. Paul is one of only a handful of members of Congress of either political party who voted against the Patriot Act.
If you want perpetual war, then vote for Obama or one of the leading Republicans. If you are really anti-war, then get behind Ron Paul.
Denruter, Very well stated.Thomas Gilbert-
So, murdering people and destroying their land & culture is fine with you as long as you get your little slice of the pie at home, eh Denruter?
If nothing else, through Paul's candidacy, democrats continue to be exposed for the warmongering, murdering, materialistic hypocrites they really are. Money – not life – is the moral baseline for (all) members of the one-party system.
"..its a nation of noses pressed up against the glass, they've seen it on the TV and they want it pretty fast" –D. Henley/Gimmie What You've Got
Its true.
Jimmy
What about everything else? Do you care about anything about compassionate social policy?Thomas Gilbert-
"What about everything else?"
Ron Paul is running for the Red Party's nomination.
Where are the other Red Party candidates on "compassionate social policy"?
(Where is Obama, for that matter?)
If my State was going to have a Red Party "Primary" next year, I would vote for Paul in it. But one doesn't have to register as Red to vote in their "Primary" here. Even so, I might do it and then just re-register as Green (again) if I lived in a State that did that.
It would be about attempting to influence the Red Party's nomination process -and that is all.
I would never ever vote for the man to hold an actual Office!
I would just rather have him on TV "debating" Obama than his fellow Reds. ;)
My question had to do with Dr. Paul.. I know what the guy stands for....Questions about others are for another discussion.
My central question was: Why do people who, one the one hand. claim to believe in creating a system of social equality and on the other promote an individual such as Dr. Paul who would stand in direct opposition to such a system.
Where the others (Obama etc.) stand is irrelevant.
Great hearing from you again Matti
Thomas Gilbert-
Matti,
"would never ever vote for the man to hold an actual Office!"
"I would just rather have him on TV "debating" Obama than his fellow Reds."
Matti,
I got that from the context of your first post. I understood your motivations.
Take Care
Thomas Gilbert-...
Well, it might be a different question than you are wanting to focus on, but it is not irrelevant.
NONE of the Reds are better than Paul on social policy.
He is running against them and they against he.
Where he stands on social policy -full stop- is a question for the actual Election.
Where he stands relative to the other Reds is a better question for now, IMHO.
But nobody ever wants to talk about that kind of thing here, do they?
Only the important philosophical questions matter here. ;)
matti
I am sorry I should employed another word. Irrelevant was meant to convey the focus of my question regarding Dr.Paul. I certainly did not mean to appear dismissive of the valid point you were making in your comment. I have a lot of respect for your opinion on this forum."Where he stands relative to the other Reds is a better question for now, IMHO." I think it would be the only question at this time.You got me curious Matti and when I find time I will be on Dr. Paul's case. I am now interested in Dr. Paul's relative position on the social issues Hope to see you around tomorrow...Take Care MattiThomas Gilbert-
Where he stands relative to the other Reds...
Reds? So Ron Paul is a socialist or communist?
Will the USA please join the world? Everywhere else in the whole world, red is the color of the left and blue is the color of the right.
If you are not a registered Republican, How do you get behind him, besides giving him a handout?
Politicians depend on them and their financial worth has gone up 25 percent the last two years.
If anybody is for handouts, they invented it.
"""“Some are demonstrating, because they’re scared to death they won’t get their handouts,” Paul said yesterday. “And the other half are demonstrating, because they’re sick and tired of paying for it. I’m on the side of sick and tired of paying for it.”""
**************************************************
So ronnie has it figured with that quote being spot on, in his own mind. Only problem I see is where the thieving comes into play. What the free corporate welfare comes into the picture. Surely old paul is aware of those activities. But instead of hammering people who want what should be theirs instead of a bunch of hedge fund managers and corporations whom just so happen to be the cause of this faux money crisis, I suggest paul get off his stick and get on to what he was elected to do which should be to end this faux(stealing the people's money under dubious reasons) financial terrorist attack on this country and undo slick willie's atrocious acts of gutting glass-steagal, allowing banks and financial brokers to become one and the best one yet, signing into law a bill that gives immunity to these goddamn rats.
So paul, stop your belly aching and do something constructive for this country instead of 'politely' blaming the 99%ers for your and your congressional colleague's ineptness and lack of action to prevent and stop the grand larceny.
Is Texas the insane assylum for the United States? It sure seems like it. Let's give it back to Mexico.
Man... You know what's really funny? At the last OWS protest I went to there were a good half-dozen Ron Paul supporters there protesting along with us. In fact, they seemed to be among the most vocal.
They must be feeling pretty betrayed right now by this creepy, sociopathic ideologue. And here's a clue you old codger: OWS is not about handouts. It's about taking back our democracy from a runaway corporate state in order to restore respect for the rule of law, social justice and human rights.
Yes, there's a lot of fundamental Libertarian thought existing within OWS as expressed in discussions reported at its websites, and many noted this basic link from OWS's beginning. IMO, RP made a strategic error while displaying a high degree of ignorance. However, I think his comment will have a positive impact on OWS as it indicates their need to become more artculate.
what a childish nincompoop.
Scratch the surface of a Libertarian and you will find a sociopath. What is missing in our country right now is a balance between the responsibility of individual freedom and the compassion of caring for others.
And yet more stereotyping of the useless/mindless variety.
NWcitizen: In a few words you crafted a portrait of the delicate balance EVERY nation (or similar entity) must grapple with. I see these drives through the prisms of Mars (self-interest, aggression, competition, me-first) and Venus (community interest, peace-making, and respect for law). Our society, as seen through the ridiculous money spent on war and weapons designs, veers way off kilter towards Mars. Its martial inclination colors all other areas of engagement, and leads to an emphasis on might makes right in place of law. Balance has been forgotten; and that's another reason why the Great Mother (nature) is everywhere trashed just to draw in quarterly profits... as if Life itself (urging towards perpetuity) didn't rely upon that delicate balance.
Ron Paul is against the wars of empire, he is against the Federal Reserves conquest for all the world money and us as debt slaves, and he is firmly against the Patriot Acts.
If we dont fix those things first in America, we will have no America.
And yes , I am one of those gun toten left wing constitutional loving leftists.
I voted for Obama, and had a huge sign support in my car window for a year prior to his election. I paid a heavy price down here in right wing CONTROLLED WAR MONGERING TAMPA FOR THAT, I SUPPORT RON PAUL FOR BETTER OR WORSE, BECAUSE THE OTHER CANDIDATES ARE ALL SMOKE AND MIRRORS.
Your miscalculation in voting for Obama (a crime I'm not guilty of) has taught you nothing. Democrats and Republicans are the same criminal.
Paul is clueless. Wants to abolish student loans, presumably because they are not in debt enough, I guess. Wants to abolish the department of education. Supports biz privilege over human rights. The list of moronic stupidity he supports goes on and on.
Please learn your facts and remember: They fool you once, shame on them; fool you twice, shame on YOU.
Get off this stupid repub/democrat thing please!
Yes Tony,
You're exactly right. But Ron Paul's vilification of "handouts" to those who need help, is analogous to an insurance company who suddenly denies all claims. Social Security is a solvent program: insurance that we all payed into, and now he want's to court the Tea Party nuts and cut off all social welfare, when what he should be stressing is cutting off Corporate and Military Welfare.
It's a distressing development for me, a Left-Libertarian or Socialist Libertarian. Many of us were worried this might happen once too many Republicans defected into the Right-Libertarian side of the house.
Consumer and Social Safety Nets are two of the only legitimate reasons for government to exist at all, imho. Can we trust Ron Paul to end all foreign wars and close the Central Bank as the Libertarian main planks require him too?
Or, if elected, will he turn out to be another hope & change Oilbomber? His state's economy is based largely in part on oil sold to the MIC and secured by the MIC. It seems to me like a huge conflict of interest that Ron Paul would face if elected.
I don't know Tony, I've been burned so many times, I'm starting to get paranoid. I'm not sure real change can ever happen within this crooked fake democracy.
Maybe, you cannot ever put your trust in a single man. Maybe you can never trust any Political Party ever because they will just get bought out by the elite. Maybe we should just put our trust in the 99 percent and the Anarchy they have unleashed in the OWS movement a la 1776.
This Ron Paul position puts a whole different complexion on the matter. I am considering not admitting I'm a Socialist Libertarian anymore, because people always confuse that with extreme Right Libertarians like Ann Rand and Tea Party people like, appartently now, Ron Paul.
Maybe I'll just consider myself a pure Anarchist. Go OWS! Let's just close the Federal Government down and close down wall street and move all business and government to the local level. Those two hydras have brought us nothing but misery.
I just don't know anymore. What do you guys think?
TJ
National Boycott!
National Strike!
Ron Paul is Libertarian, is that a krischin religion? No actually like Thom Hartmann says he's a ReThugliCon that just wants to smoke dope and get laid, although he may be too old for the getting laid part....And I am sure he would LIKE to be another 'wankin' banker! Make more money by not producing a damn thing except grief. I guess the folks that support him don't like their police and fire departments, because honey, with him you would be all on your own. He doesn't believe in public service, that's beyond his reach, that's his minds reach. I think he needs to smoke a lot more.