img519.imageshack.us — It's oft said that to figure out what is really going on you simply follow the money. Who wants to bail out failing banks with your money? The answer is simple, who was given millions of dollars by failing banks? Thanks to www.opensecrets.org you may quickly see who has contributed to your representatives. The figures for Paul are for one year.
Oct 1, 2008 View in Crawl 4
playaz33Oct 1, 2008
That was insightful.
aftern9neOct 2, 2008
The disputable facts:1) Both Obama and McCain support the financial bailout because they were given thousands of dollars by individuals employed by the financial sector.
Closed AccountOct 2, 2008
Looks like the Senate has learned nothing from the Great Depression. During WW1 the Federal Reserve engaged in massive inflation to fund the war. This caused all kinds of malinvestment and misallocation of resources. After the war was over these malinvestments needed to be liquidated to have a recovery. Warren Harding did just that, he cut government spending and taxes, let prices fall and halted inflation and the recession was over in less than a year.In the late 1920's the Federal Reserve (see a pattern here) in a misguided attempt to stop gold from draining out of the reserves in the Bank of England, pumped inflationary credit into the markets. This once again caused another credit bubble. When the bubble burst in 1929, Hoover and Roosevelt did the exact opposite as Harding, they raised taxes, increased government spending and tried to hold up wages in prices with price controls. The result of course was the worst economic disaster in this country's history.I advocate following the policies of Harding though I would go farther than he did and abolish the Federal Reserve and fraudulent fractional reserve banking so these crises don't reoccur.
s1n0nOct 2, 2008
Read the Banker's Manifesto of 1892, and its obvious how long these banksters have infiltrated and shaped our political system.
libertygal76Oct 2, 2008
McCain's no spring chicken!
evenstar75Oct 3, 2008
I personally plan to write Ron Paul's name in. If you don't vote, you're assumed to be apathetic. If you do vote, but vote for the lesser of two evils, you're assumed to support them (as opposed to hating the other more). If you vote for whom you want, there's no chance in hell you'll win, but at least your opinion will be harder to misinterpret.
boulder555Oct 24, 2008
Paul too old?What difference does one year make.One is 72, the other is 73.