Forum Post: We Asked. You Answered. We Ask Again: “Why Doesn’t OWS Support Ron Lawl?"
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 23, 2011, 12:03 a.m. EST by thewallstreetprotest
(22)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
TheWallStreetProtest.com is not affiliated with any political party or candidate. We don’t support Ron Lawl at this point. Maybe down the road. However, out of all of the candidates who will be fighting for the upcoming presidency, only one candidate seems to represent anything even remotely close to what “Occupy” protesters stand for. Perhaps we are wrong. But no other candidate has received ANY support, compared to the support we have seen for Ron Lawl, at least from OWS supporters who have been in touch with our website.
Bear in mind, some people (most people) do not realize they are part of the OWS movement. Yet.
We’ve asked before, does OWS support Ron Lawl? You said no.
We want to ask this question again, but specifically, we want to know WHY OWS does NOT support Ron Lawl? Here is the poll question you voted on. If you disagree and have not voted yet, go ahead and voice your opinion.
Does OWS Support Ron Lawl?
* No (88%, 63 Votes)
* Yes (12%, 9 Votes)
Total Voters: 72
and the new follow-up question we are asking you to answer now, please:
If you consider yourself a supporter of OWS and you do not support Ron Lawl, why not?
Please vote at www.TheWallStreetProtest.com
Ron Lawl is one of those people who read a book early in his life, in this case "Atlas Shrugged," that had such an impact upon him that he spent the rest of his life trying to fit the world into the misguided ideals he had acquired.
It's like a confirmation bias gone wild.
Unfortunately, Mr. Paul is likely a very nice, sincere, man who is convincing in his promotion of this Ayn Rand Libertarian trash. He is so blinded by his theories that he is unable to see that effective leadership requires, at least, some contact with reality
[Removed]
Specifically speaking, what is it that you oppose (as opposed to what the other realistic presidential candidates are espousing)?
When I view a candidate's views, I look through the prism of history. What would have happened if Ron Lawl had been president during WWII? What would have happened if Ron Lawl were president during the civil rights era? You can phrase this a thousand ways and, in each one, Libertarianism would have been a failure. Libertarianism is, essentially, every man for himself in the name of freedom. But, freedom sometimes must be assessed from the gestalt. The summation of maximal individual freedom may produce a world where you have no freedom......because your city doesn't want to spring for cops and you're afraid to leave your house. It's a nice theory, but it reminds me of the misguided intellectuals who veered towards idealized communism during the 1930's only to find out that Uncle Joe was a mass murderer.
When something sounds too good to be true, it usually is. Dr. Paul's beliefs will gut social security, medicare, medicaid, education, environmental protections, workplace standards, and etc.
A more appropriate question might be, what....besides the freedom fairy tales of Libertarianism.....do you actually support.
[Removed]
Ron is a fucking Republican you fucking idiot.
Who cares...? That is such an ignorant response. Do you know what the word liberal even means? It has nothing to do with being a democrat.
[Removed]
RonPaul on the Issues:
Total free market capitalism.
Free market health care.
Repeal Roe v. Wade.
Eliminate capital gains and estate taxes.
Eliminate the EPA.
Repeal ban on assault weapons.
Undermine UN arms control efforts.
Go to his website and read it for yourself.
I listen to Ron speak. Screw his website.
Victim of ignorance.
He'll never get the nomination. He's too stupid to know that. He doesn't matter at all.
Judging a book by its' cover...It isn't wise. Not at all.
His cover?
He looks like a grandpa, with a core of dark republican.
He wants to end the federal reserve. @Schooz: give me another candidate who is willing to do that. Please, tell us....(sitting on edge of seat)
I'm not a one issue voter.
The man harbors some rather dangerous ideas.
So, you want to talk about the FED?
Ok. Just stop with the Paul crap.
I don't like him. I don't trust him, and I voted for him in '88'.
ROTFL!!! "Not a one issue voter" mhmmmhmhhhahahahahaha
XD somebody help me, my sides are hurting....
Sorry it didn't work out for you in '88. Reconsider. Who would you vote for, today? Give me a better candidate? (as long as this website doesn't censor it, ha).
It won't be a republican, of any shape, size, color or persuasion.
Ever again.
stevemiller: I live in a Republic.
"I pledge allegiance to The Republic for which it stands..."
Where do you live?
so the fuck what. do you think OWS is party-affiliated? HA.
I think it makes good sense for the OWS to neither support nor oppose any candidate as a matter of policy; a positive step toward accomplishing this would be to stop altering the display of "Ron Paul". But for individual people who admire the protesters' cause to argue the pluses and minuses of each candidate's position is very much a useful thing. When half the posts seem to come from trolls, the Ron Paul people don't sound so bad by comparison.
Agreed. For #ows to support any candidate or select a leader means to support a current political party system..the two that are not working for We The People. Also history shows all the way back to bibical times...when a movement selects a leader,the opposition seeks to behead him/her in order to KILL the movement. Hence the last century, Ghandi and Dr. King were wiped out to subdue their movements.
I certainly like the fact that Occuppy Denver elected a collie sheepdog to be their leader. What political assasin or politician is going jail or kill a dog unless they are just plain crazy to make a point.
You can't kill an idea.Long Live The #OWS Movement!
WHOSE RON LAWL?? I know a RonPaul.....he wants to close down the government & everyone is on their own. That's not us we help everyone. Right or wrong we have to help people all around the world.
Who is "we"? Are you including me in that statement? Are you saying that I must join you to help others "around the world"?
We have made the decision to allow OccupyWallSt.org time to fix this "error." Make no mistake, we will tell the world about this if it isn't fixed soon.
We will continue to make this thread relevant until you either ban us or acknowledge the bullshit in censoring anything (or provide a plausible explanation to TheWallStreetProtest@gmail.com)
Seriously, what is up with replacing "Paul" with "Lawl?" Please email us at TheWallStreetProtest@gmail.com and explain.
Why doesn't Occupy Wall Street support Ron Lawl? Why would they? They are not a bunch of pawns here to support some politician. They don't support any Democrats either. Well, they shouldn't. The people of OWS are merely folks gathering to voice their disgust with their existing government and with corporate America and start creating pressure for their politicians to get out of bed with Wall Street and start doing something about it. They don't need to support ANY candidate to do that. Naturally, there are candidates who'd love to co-opt the energy of the movement toward their own support.
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-now-unoccupied-but-stronger/
Has anyone heard of Buddy Roemer? His sole platform is to get the money out of politics, and he's running for the GOP presidential nomination. http://www.buddyroemer.com/ tells you more about this man whom I consider totally delightful. And I'm definitely not a republican.
ows is a leaderless movement that does not support any political candidate,including R.P. To support R.P. would be to support his idealogy. I am in total support of #ows and their 99% declaration. You need to read it,so you don't post anymore nonsence forums.
Happy Thanksgiving. watch this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiT8bQHxbq8
In a contest for the most stupid, the conservatives win by miles. Ron P doesn't matter.
OWS has no strategy that can possibly remedy the issues OWS raised.
Its so it doesnt show up in searches. Tea Party was taken over pretty early, it was Originally Ron Lawl supporters too. Sometimes bad people with lots of money on a power trip are controlling what is being sold to you. Dont expect voting to help either, Ron Lawl has got like 400 other people against him in office and the ones behind the curtain would probably deal with him the way they have other end the banking regime presidents. Better hope they dont censor or shut the internet down soon or everything will be back to big brother censorship levels.
Just because Ron Lawl has 400 people against him in office is a bullshit reason to tuck your tail between your legs and not support him. He is the closest thing we have to a leader.
LOL @ tuck my tail. I seem to support him and I fear for his life. I know how criminal organizations act tho, they dont let you vote to take control from them.
No disrespect intended. RP has a real chance if OWS supports him. He needs a viable vice president though. We'll figure it out.
We will investigate this and if it is the truth so be it. If not, we will expose bullshit. Thanks for the explanation though, we have refrained from posting a seriously damaging article for the time being. We thought free speech was being hampered.
Well I think it is, Im just guessing but I assume this site has been taken over by whomever is controlling all we hear and see, and it seems rather stupid and childish to do this name change. What damaging article do you have?
Nothing but the truth. The fact that OccupyWallSt.org (the #1 Occupy site) is censoring or remixing anything is absolute horse shit. Let it be known loud and clear, that at 1:30 am EST the website, www.TheWallStreetProtest.com, will post proof that this site is twisting Ron Lawl to Ron Lawl.
The bullshit stops now.
We will post an article with the words "Ron Lawl" to the forum at 1:30 am. If it is changed to "Ron Lawl," expect a ravishing article from www.TheWallStreetProtest.com exposing the truth.
Fix it. Free speech or you become irrelevant.
A friend slaps another friend across the face. An enemy stabs another in the back. We are your friend. We are slapping you.
They have disabled access to post for an hour. We will test it as soon as we can. = TheWallStreetProtest.com
Ron Lawl is a career politician who has carved a nifty little cave for himself in the repug party. he doesnt stand for us despite some of his words. when will we all realize that the candidates can SAY ANYTHING and DO NOTHING? its the system we need to change, not the candidates.
old game. old gamester. hes simply dead wrong about too many things.
but you know, i do want to be fair to him, and you all, so i am going to go long and deep on the wiki.
this is the new game, with new rules. it means new players, who come out of the movement and who represent it, not a dude who is patently an enemy of the people via the OTHER platform positions he has which ronpuallians conveniently ignore.
i'm not going to your site, the issue does not warrant me chasing it around.
Why don't you watch the Mic Checks on YouTube then. Search "Mic Check Ron Lawl." Then search "Mic Check Walker."
Note the Difference.
just because ron handles it better does not mean any real difference when rons IDEAS are half of them stupid, evil, insane, oligarchic fascism.
http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Category:Positions_of_Ron_Paul
I'm going to go over each of his platform positions, and explain it to you all i guess, one at a time, point by point, because you are all too thick headed and fucking double thinked into a paper box to get your heads out of your asses.
Seriously. I shouldn't have to spend the next 48 hours on this. But i will. Thanks ron fucking lawl supporters for sucking up two days of my time.
P A U L
Fuck censorship
Career politician.
Ok, has he ever had a chance though? It seems as if he is willing to listen. That is rare. He has done well in Texas. Maybe you are right, but who knows for sure.
He sure do like his earmarks, while bitching about everybody else's.
Career politician. Republican in fact.
Yes, the person who is censoring Paul's name should be ashamed of themselves for such an infringement on Freedom of Speech. Although, I'm not overly concerned about it. The more one tries to hide truth, the more it wants to get out. Therefore, it is a losing battle. And who would want to battle against truth in the first place?
[Removed]
I support BOTH! I support the sentiment of OWS and I support RP