Ron Paul: GOP 2010 Victory Would Bring No Change

Many people are disappointed by Obama’s “change”, but the GOP has not changed its opinions on Keynesian economics, wasteful foreign aid and aggressive warfare either. That’s why a Republican victory in the 2010 midterm elections would not automatically change the direction of the country, warned Ron Paul in today’s appearance on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. The best hope for real change is an ideological grassroots revolution that will transform public opinion and eventually influence Congress and the President to follow the Constitution, stop the wars, end the Fed, cut spending, and allow the free market to regulate the economy.

Show: Morning Joe
Channel: MSNBC
Date: 02/23/2010


  • longshotlouie

    yepper, that ‘crazy’ Ron Paul saying those ‘wacky’ things to The Benankster

    Follow The Money
    Jan 14, 2004

    • Forest

      Ahhh yes, that ‘wacky’ Ron Paul saying ‘crazy’ things again…

      “One newsletter, right after the 1992 LA riots, just to give you a taste, says “order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.””

      How silly is that?!?!?! What an adorable old man… But hey, don’t stop sending him money! He always needs new sources!

      “Cato Institute President Ed Crane told reason he recalls a conversation from some time in the late 1980s in which Paul claimed that his best source of congressional campaign donations was the mailing list for The Spotlight, the conspiracy-mongering, anti-Semitic tabloid run by the Holocaust denier Willis Carto until it folded in 2001.”

  • The truth of the matter is that the government shouldn’t have never interviene by bailing out the banksters! They should’ve let the free market just make them collaps and since the fall of 2008 the big banks are still getting our hard earned money! This is one example why the free market actually works!

    • Forest

      The vast majority of ‘banksters’ were not bailed out and DID NOT receive our hard earned money! Only a few did!

      Regarding free markets and failure, have you NOT seen the lists of FAILED for 2009 and 2010!??! 140 in 2009 alone!


      • You are correct, the government did not bail out all the banks. The government CHOSE which banks to let fail, which ones to bail out, and which ones to FORCE to take TARP – and to you that is a FREE economy?


        • Forest

          “The government CHOSE which banks to let fail”

          Umm, what banks, exactly, are you referring to? Do you mean the INSOLVENT banks that went INSOLVENT because of decisions they made in the FREE MARKETS? What banks, exactly are you referring to? of the list of failed banks i provided above – they all FAILED AT BEING A BANK? How can I make this more clear? The government declares them insolvent because they are! Do you hear any complaints from the failed banks that state they were actually in great health ‘BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DECIDED WE WOULD FAIL’? No! They failed on their own.

          “which ones to bail out”
          Actually, all of the 8,500 banks in the United States were eligible to APPLY for TARP if they wanted to – those that were healthy were approved. How is it a bailout if you are financially healthy and make the conscious decision you would LIKE to apply?

          “which ones to FORCE to take TARP”
          9 were ‘FORCED’ to take TARP – of which all have repaid it which would imply they didn’t need it in the first place. What about the other eight thousand five hundred banks? Did they just STOP BANKING when that happened? Or did the other EIGHT THOUSAND BANKS apply for TARP? Sounds a lot to me like the other EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED BANKS were MAKING THEIR OWN BUSINESS DECISIONS IN A FREE MARKET.

          No free markets there at all? None?!?! Not even a little bit?!?!? Really?

          • Sure the banks that were forced paid it back – with interest! So, what you are saying is it is ok for the government to FORCE a bank to borrow money and pay it back at high interest?! Does that seem reasonable? If I were to go to my neighbor, force him to borrow $1,000 from me, and then tell him he has to pay back $1,100 they would put me in jail!

      • globalism sucks

        What constitutes a few banks Forest?

        Check out this website

        I see a number of banks on the list of recipients; I am curious as to what your source is for claiming only a few banks received our hard earned money.

        • Forest

          @ Globalism sucks

          Thanks for admitting you ignorance up front, apparently longshotlouie taught you well 🙂 you copy and paste url’s, without knowing what they mean, like a champ! You will do ronbots well!

          Let me educate you, the issue was more whether there is a free market at all that allows failure (self-flagellation memo last week) and whether or not the GOVERNMENT screws EVERYTHING up by simply BAILING OUT ZOMBIE BANKS (all phrases yall like, and yeah I’m from the south, but omg maybe the latest memo says I should say that? Boo!) All the time.

          You have a list, douchebag, but you don’t know what it is.

          Kinda reminds me when louie was talking about TARP and I gave him the .PDF and he couldn’t even do simple addition.

          Ill give you a second chance though 🙂 don’t let our country down, you are smarter than that.

          Ohhh maybe I’m pro-intellectual now and actually a democrat? Boo! 😉

          • longshotlouie

            You’re trying too hard, and your memory is shot.

            Thanks for the mention.

    • Forest

      By the way… Regarding TARP and the Banksters – looks like our ‘hard earned money’ is making a profit?

      As Banks Repay Bailout Money, U.S. Sees a Profit

      This is not the same for AIG/FNM/FRE/Chrysler, but hey you said ‘banksters’…

      • longshotlouie

        I’m in the sharing mood:

        “Police who searched the room the Watergate burglars used found $4,200 in $100 dollar bills, all numbered in sequence. Proxmire asked the Federal Reserve Board where the money came from. As he explained in a letter to the late Rep. Wright Patman (D-Tex.), chairman of the House Banking Committee: “I got the biggest run-around in years. They ducked, misled, lied, and gave me the idiot treatment.”

        – 1982 story from the Milwaukee Sentinel by Richard Bradee

  • So… Forest, what would your answer be? Let the government determine every action that is safe and every business venture that is deemed acceptable. That is not only laughable, but blasphemy against the constitution and the principles upon which it was based. My point was that businesses are not in the business of failing; their aim is to succeed. If their business practices cause them to fail, then they will change those practices in order to succeed in the future and other companies will adjust their practices based on the track record of others. THIS IS HOW MARKETS WILL REGULATE THEMSELVES.

    If the government bails out the very companies that participated in the practices which caused them to fail, where is the incentive to change or adjust said practices?

    It is not the government’s job to make sure no one loses money or no business fails. It is the government’s job to provide an environment for free markets to exist and to thrive. With this established, government should step out of the way. What we have now is a system of privatized gains and socialized losses. In that system, everyone loses.

    • Forest


      Stop frothing before you spin yourself into the ground…

      To address:
      “Forest, what would your answer be? Let the government determine every action that is safe and every business venture that is deemed acceptable.”

      NO. HOWEVER, are you really saying that is what is happening right now? Are you really? The government is PROPPING UP EVERYTHING? No it is not, I fear your paranoia is limiting your vision.

      Jeezus man. If you haven’t your head stuck up your behind you would see that there is PLENTY of failure occurring right now. For starters, look at the unemployment rate. Businesses are closing and markets are shutting their doors. Companies are still failing.

      Self-flagellation is the way to prosperity!

      • Self-flagellation – did you just look up that word? Is this why you are so eager to use it in every response you have?

        • Forest

          If the word fits, you must use it! Much in the same manner someone being whipped enjoys it, your yearning to see increasingly more and more businesses and people endure failure is equal.

          What is your obsession with this lack of failure that, in your opinion, NEEDS to happen?

          Did you not notice all of the businesses that have imploded in the past couple of years? Businesses that, when they imploded, provided the market-regulating forces you are so yearning for and blind to see?

          What do you want? 25% unemployment? 20% MORE businesses to go bankrupt? You don’t know, because you can’t know. So you continue to bemoan from your pulpit.

        • longshotlouie

          It’s called ‘talking points’.

          He got the memo.

    • SomebodyElse

      Very respectively this conversation is not about the Federal Government bailing out the banks… ??? Why you keep bringing this is humerous. I would like to finish this debate, first. hahaha

      I did NOT say that I am for OVER REGULATION, EITHER… hahaha… No I do not want the Fed Gov to be place on the board of directors or own any of them. If you read my complaints about credit cards, not being able to withdraw your own cash, raising interest rates on credit cards w/o notice, calling your 30 year mortgage note, etc. These are basic protections….! Get out of here .. I am not an extremist… hahaha

    • Somebody Else

      Wow I am trying to understand your concept of thinking…. If you are for regulation, you are automatically tagged as being for exteme regulation…. I beleive you have very poor judgement and you refuse to answer that fact that you do not care what bank charges for ATM fees, I do not care if I try to pull my money out of my bank and the bank tells you to come back in 6 months because we just made some huge commercial loans, I do not care if the bank calls my note now on my 30 year mortgage, I do not care about getting screwed on credit card interest and not being notified, I do not care if the bank increases my fixed rate 30 year mortgage, etc.

      You are the little that like getting screwed?? I have asked you to answer this 4 times w/o any response….. Do us all a favor and just quit… Thank you.

      • If you are in favor of the government regulating how much banks can charge for ATM withdraws, then yes, you are for EXTREME regulation! Does it really seem in the spirit of our constitution to allow the government to determine what is an acceptable price for one business to charge for its services?! If an ATM charges too much, I GOT TO A DIFFERENT ATM. That is called competition, and it is what are economy is supposed to be based on. If all banks decide to hike the rates of the ATMs, then people will start to go inside to the teller to make their withdraws. Banks will then realize they are losing money on their ATMs and the labor it takes to process all of the teller withdraws, and they will lower the prices at the ATMs. THAT IS THE MARKET REGULATING ITSELF!!!

  • What I find so baffling in these kinds of conversations is the notion that allowing the market to regulate itself is some sort of evil concept. People assume the end goal of all business is to screw everyone and pillage the earth, while reaping the rewards of its own destruction; however, if that were true, it would require an assumption that all accomplishment is futile and the goal of every CEO is to personally gain while driving his company to ruin. This is simply not the case. What I mean to say is if businesses and markets are ALLOWED to fail, they will regulate themselves. It is government interference which allows businesses to take undue risks. Quit the bailouts and the instinct of self preservation will bring the banks and businesses back in line.

    @somebody else – how can you favor Ron Paul’s platform and NOT be in favor of self regulating markets – THAT IS RON PAUL’S PLATFORM??!!! Perhaps you would do better to shut down your computer and read a copy of the constitution before you put your ill informed opinions on such public display.

    • Forest

      “What I mean to say is if businesses and markets are ALLOWED to fail, they will regulate themselves.”

      What an idiotic statement. Have you not seen failure in the past two years? Have you not seen the bank failures that occurred where even the largest thrift in the world went belly up? And the bank failures that CONTINUE to happen every week? Have you not seen the shops around you closing up? The grovery stores that are barely scraping by? Did you not see the forced consolidation that occurred in nearly every sector?

      Did you not see markets worldwide halve in value within a matter of months? Have you not seen unemployment rise in both the private and public sectors?

      What more do you want to see before you cease putting forth this absurd notion that ‘noone is allowed to fail in the American society’? Heads on pikes in your front yard?

      Don’t use a handful of companies to justify your terribly skewed and self-flagellating view of the world.

    • Somebody Else

      Follow up….. You completely fail to describe how financial instituations will regulate themselves and provide consumer/stock holder protections. _________________________, please answer again….

      I assume that you are a consumer that does not care about his/her own consumer protections. I am the little guy but I do not cared if I get screwed by my financial institution… You are just like the little guy commercial.. hahaha… Seriously you people are strange. Why don’t we deregulate all businesses then, since you are so competent that the old buddy system works in todays society! Wow Let’s deregulate Lawyers, Real Estate Brokers, Doctors, Achitects, Energy, etc. Let become one lawless society to do business. This does NOT CREATE A SOUND AND SECURE ENVIRONMENT TO DO BUSINESS IN THE USA. I WANT TO SAY WE COULD DO BUSINESS LIKE CHINA AND RUSSIA BUT THEY TOO HAVE FINANCIAL REGULATIONS. What this means is that the USA would be virtually the worst place to do business on the globe and even though all paper work was signed for a loan, the paperwork that it is written on is worthless! This is not the middle east and this is why people are skeptical to business in 2nd and 3rd world countries, not to mention if the politics change. This lawless recklessness will surely NOT allow USA financial institutions to compete a head of global financial markets.

      So in your world the banks are not regulated. This means you abosultely do not care, what banks charge for ATM fees, I do not care if I try to pull my money out of my bank and there is no money, I do not care if the bank calls my note now on my 30 year mortgage, I do not care about getting screwed on credit card interest and not being notified, I do not want FDIC deposit protection, reporting to it share holders is nothing more lies, etc. and I basically I do not hold my bank responsible or accountable for anything and their no is legal recourse and I do not care.

      Amazing! Wow….

      Also you are telling everyone that you are now going to read and you want 200 million USA citizens and all global financial prospects to read and review every banks 300 plus pages of its fine print to understand each and every rule and regulation of that bank. So before WE ALL figure out what bank has the best services, protections, lower fees, best disclaimer language, what they are liable for and now WE all have to hire an attorney to figure out what bank is best!! Great Plan….

      Madoff, Ken Lay, Schilling, Sir Allen Stanford, etc. would all be in business, if you were in charge….

      This is really outragous… hahahaha

      Oh and Forrest****** This debate is not about the Fed bailing out the banks… That is not a regulation.. thanks.

      • Forest

        “This debate is not about the Fed bailing out the banks…”

        I assumed the bemoaning was a catch-all for ‘Failure isn’t occurring because markets are not free’ because the government supports everything financially and the ‘regulation’ was the fact that now, nothing fails – without realizing the market still does regulate itself.

        I see what you could be saying though. Either way a worthless rant.

    • Somebody Else

      hahaha…. John Gault, if you read Ron Paul’s platform on his website self regulating markets is not his entire platform… CAN YOU REALLY READ…

      It is funny how you think that Ron Paul has only one issue out of 2,000…. that this country faces…

      Look we can disagree about self market regulation and agree on the 1999….

      • What you are too dim to recognize is the notion of free markets and small government is the principle upon which his stance on ALL the issues is derived. I think all of that high toxic boat cleaner you use has finally gone to your head!

  • Somebody Else

    I TOTALLY agree with “Somebody” as shown above. I agree with Ron Paul on so many issues, but allowing the free market economy to regulate itself is like trying to get a Bear to use the restroom in a private/public bathroom facility. Financial institutions have proven that they will not regulate themselves and that they will not perform to any kind of high level ethical or moral standard on their own good judgement. In my opinion Bank closings and failures would become a daily consistent practice and consumer protections would be non-existent.

    The real truth in many instances is that the number 1 priority of Directors of Banks and Large Corporations is their monthly income, bonuses, etc. their number 2 priority is the financial strength and security of the company by which they direct, and their number 3 priority are the stock holders/bank customers/deposits, etc.

    I want you to run for President and I want to provide you with my full support and vote. This seems to be the only real issue I have with your platform.

    Please explain in detail how financial instutions will regulate themselves, while also providing consumer/stock holder protections.

    Kindest Regards,

  • somebody

    To Dr Paul or any of his campaign group:

    I think you would do people a big service by explaining in more details the subject of free market regulating the market. Both, in theory and practice, ideally with concrete examples of the past and the present.

    Because every time you mention free market there are confusing ideas that thieve through so much we are receiving from everywhere. So one does not know with clarity which direction to take in terms of supporting or oppossing policies, does not matter what political custom the presenter uses.

    But most important would be a way to then hold the policy makers accountable, not attacking them, but rather bringing them to what it should be; service to the people.

    When free market is mentioned one envisions a complete derregulated situation: no accountability, anything goes, a lawless situation, a plantation type of industry and market. So that USA could not fairly compete with slaves in third world countries or massive countries where slavery is the work force that manofactures items and sets the prices in market.

    Would you please clarify. I’m not a journalist, just part of the people. Please make a slide show and let us see that in people’s language, but with uptodate data. Thanks.