.

VIDEO: Ron Paul Defends Occupy Wall Street

Representative Ron Paul joined Patch for a Q&A session at The Draft in Concord today.

Ron Paul is one of the few Republicans who said he agrees with both the Tea Party and Occupy protesters.

The Republican candidate defended both movements at a Q&A session with Patch editors in Concord today.

When asked about Occupy Wall Street, he said it was unfair to dismiss the concerns that are being expressed by the protesters.

He added that, much like the Tea Party, there are always individuals who make the movement look bad.

While he supports public anger towards government and banks, Paul said that we should avoid blaming businessmen who have gained wealth honestly.

John St Croix November 23, 2011 at 07:14 PM
He wasn't defending them at all. He said he works for the "99%" meaning the working people which is a Congressman's job. He certainly doesn't defend the violence and filth and crime of OWS... and would have firehosed them. Ron Paul speaks softly but he carries a big stick.
John St Croix November 23, 2011 at 07:17 PM
LOL just keep blaming Bush. The rich got richer under Obama more than with any other president thanks to his cronyism. And the 'crash' happened because the bankers and George Soros wanted to crash the market in 2008 but were stopped by banks who prevented Soros from taking $350B from it as he tried to do in the UK.. (he's convicted you know?) He wanted to ensure that Obama won. Your progressive heroes are puppets of the bankers.. not the conservatives and certainly not RP supporters.
Leon Hadokun November 24, 2011 at 05:50 AM
He supports the movement, Ron Paul is no rich conservative snob who will ignore peoples complaints, because Ron Paul is right the unemployment is due to government policy.
LJoel Hackbart November 24, 2011 at 06:45 AM
The crash happened because of the elimination of Glass Steagall. So are you saying Phill Gramm was a progressive? No progressive is running around screaming "corporations are People"!!!!! That's a Mitt Romney and the conservative owned supreme court line of B.S. Saying progressives are puppets of the banks is so absurd no futher comment is needed. So is saying health care reform caused the crash. And the crash did happen under Bushes watch. .
cassidy December 05, 2011 at 03:04 AM
Please, let's not spin our wheels over the differences in progressive, libertarian, and conservative ideologies. We must unite in opposition to imperialism and crony capitalism. It's the authoritarian (neoconservative) ideology that's present in both parties that is the enemy of the people. The "original" (libertarian) tea party rose under a Republican administration; (progressive) OWS came about during the current Democrat admin - showing there's frustration everywhere that our own parties now sell us out to powerful special interests (military industrial complex, multi-national corporate insiders, Likudniks, etc). Both parties are now" two wings on the same bird of prey" (P. Buchanan). Big government Bush was not a true conservative. Big Defense spending Obama is not a true progressive. Our differences must be set aside so we can defeat the enemy and restore the republic - through purging the parties of the authoritarian (empire-builder) element. Use foreign policy as the litmus test. As Ron Paul says: you cannot separate economic policy from foreign pollicy. Support huge cuts to the military and end entangling alliances. Open trade with Cuba. End the saber-rattling with Iran.
John Galt December 11, 2011 at 10:00 PM
We may support or not support the Obama healthcare bill, but to blame the current economic mess on a bill that has largely not yet taken effect is pretty ridiculous.
Paul Mercury December 11, 2011 at 11:27 PM
@ Cassidy Good, thought provoking post. Thanks.
ForThePeople December 12, 2011 at 01:53 AM
A thought experiment about gaining wealth honestly: Hypothetically, let's say there is a businessperson who has found the cure to aging. In fact, nobody would ever die again if this magic pill were given. It only costs one dollar to manufacture. However, the businessperson uses patent laws to charge $4 billion dollars per pill (just to clean out the richest population first), and then gradually decreases the cost to finish off the rest. At the end of the day, this person controls most of the money. How do you feel about that?
Tony Schinella (Editor) December 12, 2011 at 02:11 AM
OK ForThePeople, I'll bite. If I invent whatever, it's mine. I can do what I want with it, the same way I can do anything with music I make, words I write, things I say, whatever. If I want to charge $4 or $4 billion, I can do what I want. Would I do what you describe? Probably not. I would sap enough money out of people to never have to work again - so I could invent many more cool things - and then, figure out what to do with the invention next. But, that's my right.
Tony Schinella (Editor) December 12, 2011 at 02:13 AM
Actually, rethinking what you've written again, I might not do anything. I might sit on the invention. Because if no one ever died again, the world would be consumed much faster than it ever will be now. In fact, now that I think about it, if I invented this, I probably wouldn't ever release it to anyone. What a horrible place the planet would be if seven billion people quickly become 100 billion people and they consumed everything in sight until there is nothing left. Or maybe I would be selfish, take the pill myself, and never share it with anyone else, and live forever. Who knows. Interesting comment though. Thanks for making me think about this a bit.
Paul Mercury December 12, 2011 at 03:17 AM
Fred, where did you get this "laugh sign" and "laugh track" stuff regarding Colbert? More imaginary information?
Paul Mercury December 12, 2011 at 03:27 AM
You mean you didn't stop reading after he wrote "A thought experiment", Regina? I'm impressed. Instead of being snarky and insulting, why not actually give his question a chance? He took the time to pose it.
Paul Mercury December 12, 2011 at 03:40 AM
You ain't kidding. Most high school kids would be embarrassed by most of the stuff on these boards lately. Still can't get past the "thought experiment", Regina?
LJoel Hackbart December 12, 2011 at 06:34 AM
And now Ron Paul and the libertarians[ Who wish to wipe out government and bring our country back to the Herbert Hoover- Robber Baran state that precluded the great depression] are to somehow be the moderate midiators between conservatives and progressives? How does that work?????????
ForThePeople December 12, 2011 at 03:34 PM
Your comment made me cough on my morning beverage, David. :-)
ForThePeople December 12, 2011 at 03:48 PM
Thanks for your reply Tony. I realize that the pill experiment has moral implications, but I wanted people to honestly think about what it means to generate wealth uninhibited, what it means to gather as much as you can in a laissez-faire system. In your conclusion, you mentioned that the consequence of uninhibited growth is the exhaustion of the planet, and that's actually not too far off from what I'm getting at! Uninhibited growth in an economy is no more possible than it is for a population on a planet; you have to have a symbiotic system. A complaint against a true free-market system is that it is extremely easy for someone who owns a resource (or a magic pill, as this thought experiment goes) to clean the pockets of everyone around them- to various extremes. Without some kind of regulation in place, I don't know how you would prevent that in a society that is extremely dependent on resources like energy, water, and food. We already see this kind of gouging taking place now. Imagine if Exxon owned your town water supply! Do you remember "The Sneetches" by Dr. Seuss? It's one of my favorite books. I remember reading this as a small child, and it has stuck with me to this very day. That's how I feel about a true free market. If you are not careful, the 'man' will distract you with your prejudices, give you a small souvenir (like legalizing pot), take all the money, and move on to the next village. And that is why you should be concerned about people like Ron Paul.
ForThePeople December 12, 2011 at 03:56 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMolzESn4oI A reading of "the sneetches" (by Dr. Seuss) on YouTube.
Tony December 24, 2011 at 03:19 PM
For the People, Your hypothetical question is certainly quite compelling, yet, your conclusion, I feel is flawed. What does your "thought experiment" have to do with Ron Paul? His premise is that the F E D is way too large and it infringes on individuals' and states' rights. He proposes to defer a lot of the powers to the states, as they were meant to be per the Constitution.
Tony December 24, 2011 at 03:29 PM
It has been suggested politicians should wear their sponsors' logos on them just like in Nascar, so who truly owns Washington by sponsoring these people into office or supporting them throughout their political careers for self gain? The raping and pillaging of the 99% must stop for a healthier society. I do not ever condone handouts or more gov't regulations, but I do condone fairness, ethics and goodwill. If the corporate greed blinds these powerful and global entities from acting justly, equitably, honorably and ethically, then there should most certainly be safeguards to prevent rampant abuses, would you not agree?
ForThePeople December 24, 2011 at 04:05 PM
Are talking about the original Constitution? The one that allowed slavery? The one that did not allow freedom of speech? If not, which year are you referring to that we should regress to? This is the problem with the people who are obsessed with the Constitution; it is a living document that reflects the life and times that it came from. As far as the states having "a lot of the powers" (you should specify this, as it is much too vague), the original Constitution was extremely explicit in asserting the federal government's rights. The war fought was for the United States of America, not for the enumeration of the colonies. Note that the document is what privileges the parties therein, not the other way around. I would be happy to engage in a constitution discussion, and if you want to cite the Constitution, please do so explicitly. There is far too much "well they really meant this!" going around every four years. As for the thought experiment, it discusses a hypothetical with the "true free market," advocated by Ron Paul. The economy becomes the dictator in that scenario, as people vote with their money. The problem is, we all know that some people have 99% more than others, so in a true free market economy, all voices are not equal. Finally, my thought experiment was to show you the limits of the economy. You cannot have infinite growth- of anything on this planet- another flaw of the free market.
Tony December 24, 2011 at 05:21 PM
The Constitution in itself is a great document and people should be more obsessed with it. What do you propose, the communist manifesto? Look up Thomas Jefferson's warnings. I am not here to write a book; however, I am merely posting a commenting and disagreeing with your assertions, so do not get so huffy and puffy with me, and conduct your own research. We were warned by many the day might come when a fed gov't grows so big that corruption will become rampant, trampling everyone as it plows right through Sir/Lady, that day is here now. Have you not read lately the Amish and small, local, organic and sustainable farmers are being raided, pillaged throughout the country, and are being both forced out of business and destroyed completely by the fed, so the big factory farms can continue feeding us substandard foods that create serious health risks? Have you not heard local sheriffs are now beginning to stand up to the states' constitutional rights and telling these same feds to stop illegal seizures and unnecessary abuse, or they will be arrested for trespassing onto these private properties without warrants? Look at the atrocities being committed daily, and guess what, against the very same Constitution you claim we should not take seriously. Ron Paul says that all this madness should stop!
Tony December 24, 2011 at 05:21 PM
Perhaps you should dedicate more time researching in what Ron Paul actually proposes, and not what the corporate owned media is portraying to create misinformation. The problem is that so much gov't interference sponsored by the corporations have eliminated most freedoms, have created State Monopoly Capitalism (Only Allows the huge corporations to have a free market capitalism, and the rest do not have a chance because of over-regulation). Ron Paul says, in a fair and open market, the consumers will regulate that market, provided everyone has an equal opportunity, not just these corrupt mega corporations. I wish I could write more, but I am in a hurry and cannot remain seated here all day debating you and providing you with endless examples. I wish you the best and Happy Holidays!
Tony December 24, 2011 at 05:24 PM
Here is an earlier post for your review. Perhaps we both agree on many things, but we are just misunderstanding each other: It has been suggested politicians should wear their sponsors' logos on them just like in Nascar, so who truly owns Washington by sponsoring these people into office or supporting them throughout their political careers for self gain? The raping and pillaging of the 99% must stop for a healthier society. I do not ever condone handouts or more gov't regulations, but I do condone fairness, ethics and goodwill. If the corporate greed blinds these powerful and global entities from acting justly, equitably, honorably and ethically, then there should most certainly be safeguards to prevent rampant abuses, would you not agree?
ForThePeople December 24, 2011 at 06:02 PM
But you didn't answer my questions. Like most Ron Paul followers, you just seem starstruck by the rhetoric and unable to actually dig into the meat of it. I asked you very specific questions about the Constitution, and you cannot reply. I'm not sure what is more to discuss, as the continued sidestepping by the right doesn't get us anywhere. I encourage you to actually do the research and struggle with the ideas instead of repeating some dire warnings from the Ron Paul newsletters past and present, which we all know have had very extremist- and sometimes bigoted- views.
ForThePeople December 24, 2011 at 06:03 PM
Giving free reign to corporations doesn't sound like preventing rampant abuse to me.
ForThePeople December 24, 2011 at 06:03 PM
I have no doubt that water seeks its own level. :-)
Paul Mercury December 25, 2011 at 08:10 AM
@ Tony I've heard the Nascar patch suggestion before, and I love it!
Paul Mercury December 25, 2011 at 08:11 AM
John, have you been reading off Glen Beck's chalkboard? Do you have any sources to support these claims?
Paul Mercury December 25, 2011 at 08:19 AM
@ LJoel Isn't it wild how people claim Obama screwed up our economy? They do! With a straight face! They'd have you believe GWB handed over an America to Obama that was humming along just fine. Actually, America was doing fine when Bill Clinton handed off to GWB. Remember those Clinton years? All that peace and prosperity? Bush was appointed by the SCOTUS, and in less than a year everything went to hell.
ggirl January 17, 2012 at 09:06 PM
Here Here!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something