*promote scary music.

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Sunday, July 17th, 2011 11:04am PDT - promote requested by original submitter blankfist.

*controversy

Adding video to channels (Controversy) - requested by MrFisk.

As much as I respect Ron Paul, I doubt Congress would allow him to accomplish as much he claims he could if he were elected president.

Never gonna happen.

So.. Whats the difference then ? Every politician lies, "we" all thought barrack was gonna kick ass, and he is just another tool. Doesnt matter what name gets elected, they wont do what they say, they never do.

Politicians are salesmen for themselves, and you can not trust a salesman. I am in the stands on voting, people are stupid and there are a lot of them out there buying this shit.

PHOOEY

I want that sound track, anybody know who wrote the music?

>> ^BoneRemake:
So.. Whats the difference then ? Every politician lies, "we" all thought barrack was gonna kick ass, and he is just another tool. Doesnt matter what name gets elected, they wont do what they say, they never do.
Politicians are salesmen for themselves, and you can not trust a salesman. I am in the stands on voting, people are stupid and there are a lot of them out there buying this shit.
PHOOEY


Sigh... no. The fact that politicians lie is the outcome--but the reason is FAR more important than the outcome.

Every politician lies. WHY? Because they wouldn't be elected if they didn't. We would punish them, shit on them, and ruin their lives if they told half of what they believed. We do this every election cycle!

We the people make the salesmen.

Why are there so few nice guys left? Because the world eats them up and spits their fucking carcasses out. I hate myself sometimes because I used to be a very nice guy and was sharted on every day from everywhere. Now that I have become wiser, harsher and less likable? I am more liked. I cannot fathom that in any manner.

You’re not stupid for voting for someone you believe is telling you the truth, you’re stupid for going into an election bar, being smooth-talked by some slick fuck in a nice suit, and going home with him to his ballot. Then, when you're crying to your friend about the disease you caught, the same friend that is the honest guy you left at the bar all alone, you wonder why he hangs up the phone on you… You wonder why he doesn't try or care. Because he did try and care--and you didn't.

Sorry for the long tirade. But the excuse is shallow on me. How to stop the lies is far more valuable than to note that they do... Here is a comment I wrote in another video, "On the right, on the left, why can't all politicians be as decent as Paul? Forget what you believe in and vote for the candidate that is most decent as a human being. Because, if you vote for a liar who "believes" as you do, you won't get anything but dick."

I would vote for Dennis John Kucinich too, for the same reason of truthiness. And I am far from liberal... And I am sure Blankfist would too, because, if not, then he would be a very shitty voter. Just like--all the other shitty voters who are damning us all.

Obama and Paul are both good guys. I give them both the benefit of the doubt that they'd like to kick some ass in Washington, but it's not possible with the way our elections are structured. In order to get elected, you not only need big business bucks, but you also need to reassure big business that their power will not be challenged, lest they tear you apart in the media. This creates an election to election cycle of dependency that nullifies not only the voice of the people, but also the vision of the politician.

For Ron Paul to get elected, he would need both the financial and moral support of multinational corporations, which leaves his supporters with 2 possible outcomes: a principled loser or a neutered winner.

Lessig talks about this cycle of dependency in the latter half of this video: http://videosift.com/video/Lawrence-Lessig-Your-Broadband-Milked-For-Profit-Not-Speed

Until we sort out our campaign finance system, we will always have subservient leaders.

Who can beat obama? Look for whomever the socialist vermin fear the most.

That was hilarious. And utterly irrelevant since Paul won't even get the republican nomination never mind win the election....

One thing or sure you always know where Ron Paul stands and that hew does not waiver,

*promote

Self promoting this video back to the front page; last published Sunday, July 17th, 2011 2:05pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter blankfist.

Terms like "subservient leaders" is where I doff my hat and move on.

And you would agree that we the people have created this lose-lose, toxic atmosphere?

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Obama and Paul are both good guys. I give them both the benefit of the doubt that they'd like to kick some ass in Washington, but it's not possible with the way our elections are structured. In order to get elected, you not only need big business bucks, but you also need to reassure big business that their power will not be challenged, lest they tear you apart in the media. This creates an election to election cycle of dependency that nullifies not only the voice of the people, but also the vision of the politician.
For Ron Paul to get elected, he would need both the financial and moral support of multinational corporations, which leaves his supporters with 2 possible outcomes: a principled loser or a neutered winner.
Lessig talks about this cycle of dependency in the latter half of this video: http://videosift.com/video/Lawrence-Lessig-Your-Broadband
-Milked-For-Profit-Not-Speed
Until we sort out our campaign finance system, we will always have subservient leaders.

If we switched to a Condorcet voting method, or any type of alternative voting method really, I would vote for Paul at the top. But since he doesn't have a chance in hell of winning, I'm not going to help split Obama's vote so that Bachman or some tool like her could become president. That's just insane.

Fortunately that won't be happening, because Paul won't make it to the general election.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

That was hilarious. And utterly irrelevant since Paul won't even get the republican nomination never mind win the election....


It is relevant because it shows us the way we vote. We being the average Joe Blow. It is relevant because the more we see of honest people the more shame we should throw on others who don't care for honesty.

@dystopianfuturetoday
Ron Paul has been elected to office without the corporations in Texas. I agree he stands little chance of winning--but even he says that's not the greatest service he can give. The greatest service is to start the movement. Sadly, the movement was hijacked (I.e., Tea Party fucktards.) And sadly, his son is a greater hack populist than he is.

I will donate my 50 bucks--it's all I can for the moment. Is it wasted? Meh--not if it opens one persons mind...

And let's apply this further, this, principled loser thing. It's also the reason why teachers are afraid to teach. After all, if you are a great, great teacher, some parents will moan and bitch about you all day long and perhaps get you fired. Just like a shitty teacher. It is better to be a unprincipled loser teacher than to find yourself under attack...

Whether your think Obama is responsible for any of the mess we're in or not, whoever the Republicans nominate has a very good chance of winning.

It's in everyone's best interests to make sure the GOP produces a quality candidate and, right now, the only two I know of are RP and Gary Johnson. Johnson has, unfortunately, been excluded from the debates so far.

@Lawdeedaw - Individual members of the legislative branch don't have anything approximating the power of a president. It is true that idealists such as Kucinich, Wellstone, Weiner, Paul and Obama have managed to find a place in the legislative branch, but never have these idealists held the numbers to ever be a credible threat against corporate domination. (What's even more disheartening is the current epidemic of moronic idealists like Santorum, Bachman and Palin, who have been empowered by a decade of Republican campaigning that targets the lowest common denominator.)

Once the idealists enter the Presidential ring, all bets are off. McCain is a great example of a highly principled republican who was basically forced to renounce everything he ever believed in (most prominently campaign finance reform) to get a shot at the golden ring. Obama also broke his promise to only except public funding because he realized it would put him at a severe disadvantage. As long as our current system is in place, no presidential candidate (not even Saint Paul) has a chance of subverting it. This is not an insult against this man, whom I respect despite the fact that he holds some extremely naive economic views. This is just a frank assessment of how fucked up our campaign finance system is.

If you don't think Ron Paul plays the game too, then ask him about Texas pork barrel spending. There is a video on the sift where he freely admits to playing the pork barrel game. I don't blame him for it - you do what you have to do in a fucked up system.

I'm not here to bash Paul. My point is that our current system will not allow him to be what you want him to be, just as the system won't allow Obama to be the President I want him to be.

Speaking as someone who has already suffered through hopey-changey delusions, I'm just trying to save you some grief. Been there. Done that. I guess maybe you have to experience it first hand before you can truly accept this cruel reality on your own terms.

Until this system works for the voters rather than the funders, we are all destined for disappointment. I'd love to see a conservative-liberal truce until we can throw these money changers out of the temple.

@dystopianfuturetoday

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgTqSu-ZVFM

I'm guessing 5:35 is the Ron Paul bit you're thinking of. But yes I completely agree, campaign finance laws are the single biggest issue facing the US.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Who can beat obama? Look for whomever the socialist vermin fear the most.


Calling human beings "vermin"? I thought you were better than that.

Some qustions to the poster of this video and all of those who only find the lies on Obama.
Do you have videos of all the past presidents (G.W. Bush or maybe "no more taxes" daddy bush?) with all the broken campaingn promises?
Or you only find the "truth" when your beloved party is not in power?
Can you show me a video where all the campaign promises were made?
If you want to look for the truth why dont you post all the videos of the congress changing sides just because a pressident is not from his/her own party?

Yea right you have show me the "TRUTH"!

I"m just wondering as someone who's not that well informed about US politics, has Obama ever officially addressed that "bringing the troops home" promise? Some sort of attempt at an explanation of why he's been unable to do so? It seems to really stand out as something they were confident enough about being able to do that he felt comfortable giving such an assurance only to fail miserably at following it through.

On a side note, this piece of propaganda feels cheap. And the more I listen to Ron Paul the more I get the impression that as much as some of his views may be admirable he still symbolizes tradition. What is it with Americans and their constitution? Who gives a crap what your glorious founding fathers had in mind? Is it really relevant for present-day political decisions?

No disrespect intended but it seems like there's a tendency in American politics to refer to the constitution in matters of policy as Christians refer to the Bible in matters of civil rights.

*promote

Self promoting this video back to the front page; last published Sunday, July 17th, 2011 9:13pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter blankfist.

blah blah blah you get the leaders you deserve blah blah blah.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

@Lawdeedaw - Individual members of the legislative branch don't have anything approximating the power of a president. It is true that idealists such as Kucinich, Wellstone, Weiner, Paul and Obama have managed to find a place in the legislative branch, but never have these idealists held the numbers to ever be a credible threat against corporate domination. (What's even more disheartening is the current epidemic of moronic idealists like Santorum, Bachman and Palin, who have been empowered by a decade of Republican campaigning that targets the lowest common denominator.)
Once the idealists enter the Presidential ring, all bets are off. McCain is a great example of a highly principled republican who was basically forced to renounce everything he ever believed in (most prominently campaign finance reform) to get a shot at the golden ring. Obama also broke his promise to only except public funding because he realized it would put him at a severe disadvantage. As long as our current system is in place, no presidential candidate (not even Saint Paul) has a chance of subverting it. This is not an insult against this man, whom I respect despite the fact that he holds some extremely naive economic views. This is just a frank assessment of how fucked up our campaign finance system is.
If you don't think Ron Paul plays the game too, then ask him about Texas pork barrel spending. There is a video on the sift where he freely admits to playing the pork barrel game. I don't blame him for it - you do what you have to do in a fucked up system.
I'm not here to bash Paul. My point is that our current system will not allow him to be what you want him to be, just as the system won't allow Obama to be the President I want him to be.
Speaking as someone who has already suffered through hopey-changey delusions, I'm just trying to save you some grief. Been there. Done that. I guess maybe you have to experience it first hand before you can truly accept this cruel reality on your own terms.
Until this system works for the voters rather than the funders, we are all destined for disappointment. I'd love to see a conservative-liberal truce until we can throw these money changers out of the temple.


You think Keynesian economics got us out of the Great Depression yet Paul's the naive one? Paul's been saying to get rid of the money changers his whole political career. If we had actually been following the Austrian school of economics, none of this would've happen. You can't give a select group of people total control of your economy and then not expect them to take advantage of it.

And Paul always voted against pork spending. That's hardly playing the game.

Obama hasn't been neutered, he was a fraud from the beginning. He's not bombing civilians and waging wars to secure campaign donations. He's been a puppet and PR salesman for Wall Street and their war machine from day one. He's not prosecuting white-collar fraud, he's prosecuting government whistleblowers. He's arming drug cartels in Mexico. He's using flying robots to rain down hellfire missiles in sovereign countries on the other side of the world. He's a neocolonialist. Not because someone is twisting his arm, but because that's what he signed up to be.
Obama can't be the President you want him to be because he's not that guy and never was.

>> ^NinjaInHeat:

I"m just wondering as someone who's not that well informed about US politics, has Obama ever officially addressed that "bringing the troops home" promise? Some sort of attempt at an explanation of why he's been unable to do so? It seems to really stand out as something they were confident enough about being able to do that he felt comfortable giving such an assurance only to fail miserably at following it through.
On a side note, this piece of propaganda feels cheap. And the more I listen to Ron Paul the more I get the impression that as much as some of his views may be admirable he still symbolizes tradition. What is it with Americans and their constitution? Who gives a crap what your glorious founding fathers had in mind? Is it really relevant for present-day political decisions?
No disrespect intended but it seems like there's a tendency in American politics to refer to the constitution in matters of policy as Christians refer to the Bible in matters of civil rights.


You forgot to mark your sarcasm box.

@marbles

-Yes, Ron Paul is naive when it comes to economics, by putting his faith in neo-liberal doctrinal scripture that has no evidence to support it, nor any basis in the reality of a modern economy. The fact that he believes capitalism to be the embodiment of liberty is the root of this naivety.

Privatization, deregulation, international 'free' trade agreements and austerity -all principles of neo-liberal thought- have caused the lion share of our current economic woes: massive income disparity, high unemployment, wage slavery, inflation, labor abuse, war profiteering, eroding of civil rights, the death of many a small business, massive corruption, environmental harm, etc. Think of all the major economic scandals of the last few decades - The Saving and Loan Scandal, The Foreclosure scandal, Enron, the oil spills, Katrina (the aftermath, not the weather event), etc. All of them are the result of deregulation. I know that government interference is a big boogey man to the capitalist libertarian set, but every single one of these scandals could have been prevented with proper regulation and/or proper oversight.

-Yes, I'm sorry to say it, but Ron Paul does play the game, and he is a part of the two party system.
Check out the damage control here: http://videosift.com/search?q=ron+paul+earmarks

-If you remember 4 years ago, people were saying the same things about Obama that you are saying about Ron Paul today - that he is the answer to all our problems - but then he moved into the White House and was forced to abandon or compromise nearly all of his promises. I warn you against political hero worship. No matter how much you like the guy, no matter how much grandfatherly charm he exudes, he is still a politician who must play by the rules of the broken system.

I could be wrong, and these comments will be here next year to rub in my face in the off chance that America is transformed into Galt Island.

As Sammy Hagar once said in his infinite wisdom, "Only time will tell if we can stand the test of time."

I wouldn't say it's a broken system, but it does need some election reform tweaking.

Get the corporate interest out of our elections and I guarantee you that things will change for the better.