Dr. Mercola July 15 2008 120,691 views
Well, l’ll let the cat out of the bag right here and tell you that I am not actually running for President.
This was a light-hearted parody; an idea spawned by the unlikely success of Ron Paul’s grass-roots’ campaign.
It’s disappointing that he didn’t make it all the way to become the Republican candidate for the U.S. Presidency, but despite being completely IGNORED by mainstream media, Ron Paul STILL made it to the final round!
He definitely had my vote and support because more so than any other presidential candidate, Ron Paul has continuously pushed to improve the fatally flawed health paradigm.
Aside from his dedication to principle, good old fashioned American freedom, and the American constitution – areas that have been trampled upon and abused more and more in the past several years – Congressman Ron Paul has always been devoted to your health freedom, championing issues such as:
These are issues that must be faced, with or without Ron Paul in office, and I will continue doing my part to educate and provide you with the vital information you need to optimize your health.
I won’t be doing it from the Oval Office, but my website, and this newsletter, is my way of helping incite the changes necessary. You too can help by sharing the information with your friends and loved ones.
Remember, it’s never too late to take control of your health and happiness!
You people make me laugh. You still think there are good politicians that want the presidency? LMAO The question isn't "which one will do more for us?", it's "which one will we get screwed less with?" People often ask why we never get anyone good in office. My answer to that is good people are not attracted to that kind of job. Good people, holy people, or REAL people are often humble, and not very prolific..seeking to stay out of the spotlight and help in a way that doesn't feed their ego or pocketbooks.
Amen!
Who can screw me the least.
We are heading into what our grandchildren will call the Real One.
This isn't a recession, it is a depression and NO politician can fix it. After all, they are the ones who assisted in getting us hear. Don't people realize that our jobs being sent to China was orchestrated (and paid for) by the Clintons?
I'd vote for him in a heartbeat.
TialsWorried, I don't understand your comment. You don't seem to approve of Clinton (I second that) in one breath and in the next say you would vote for him?
sparkleg, I believe TialsWorried was talking about voting for Mercola, not Clinton. Otherwise I'm with you, the comment didn't make much sense. ;-)
no ego. . .someone with no ego would be a perfect president. No personal agenda.
there have been people in history that have had this ability. . .and they still exist but are rare. ..tibet ring a bell? you are right. . .but there are people like that. One has just not popped up in North america yet:)
I think that good people can be attracted to the job, good leaders, with integrity and a sense of justice. But how long they can remain keeping their integrity intact is the question. Before too long when one favor is traded for another or having to vote the party line just to advance within the ranks, or being concerned about where the money is coming from for your support, etc before too long (even unknowingly) you could find yourself beholding to someone else......usually big pharma! PRAY for our leaders........
I agree Health Dragon.....cause we all know or should know by now that the president does not run the country. He's the ultimate frontman.
You know what we ought to do? We ought to find one of those good humble people and force him or her to be our president! A shame the Dalai Lama isn't a US citizen! But there are other people equally as good in the US and far less visible.
Alas, with no mechanism available to force these people to serve in such a brutally unforgiving position, we are stuck with rogues who fancy themselves winners. I still think we ought to rally behind the invisible candidates regardless of whether they win or lose and call them our "unofficial government." The only change we have a hope of making is a change in our perceptions. Perhaps we can simply declare one of the good humble folks our unofficial president.
Generally that is correct. The ones that do succeed are "made" men and women but I would disagree that good people aren't attracted to politics. They were just absent at the lodge meetings, etc., making them outsiders. Rev. Charles Finney knew the role of genuine people in political positions very well.
Health Dragon is right. There is a strong but silent movement sweeping the world based on the spiritual principles of Eckhart Tolle and others like him, teaching that the ego must be recognized and honored in such a way that Beingness overrides it and we return to our natural state. You will see the world an all our problems begin to heal once we reach that level of evolution. Unfortunately, at this particular moment in human consciousness, we have not reached the tipping point for the world to be changed by this new awareness but it's coming...as sure as the earth revolves around the sun. He is also correct that those who are most aware, enlightened and egoless are least likely to set foot into the political arena, but are most likely to lead by teaching and example. Stay open to the signs of such people...they are the ones who will lead us into a better world...not the ones for whom you pull the lever in November. But always remember to send blessing to those people running for office to keep them on the right path for the good of human evolution and a higher consciousness.
Now I know there are others who feel that way. There are probably a lot of capable, introverted, concerned citizens who love and care about other people, yet avoid public office because of the requirement to be a complete sell-out to ones' self and others in order to qualify. It is good for us all that the most money-grubbing ego-maniacs stay in the spotlight, so we can keep an eye on them. God help us all if they go underground.
MERCOLA FOR PRESIDENT!!! I would vote for you for sure.
I don't usually get into computer talks, but this is an answer to my prayers! I know you sell natural products, but your heart and beliefs are in every one of them. Who says it's wrong to make money because you promote a product? As long as you tell the truth and your products and beliefs have integrity, you can be proud of how you earn your living. I have learned and been validated many, many times, by the information on your website! So, I will continue to read and listen to your site and I will continue to SHARE THE INFO PROVIDED!! If you were President think of how many people would learn the truth about what they eat, drink and breathe and the effects it's having on all of us. Maybe, just maybe, this world would be a happier, healthier place to live and we wouldn't have to worry about whether our grandchildren and great grandchildren will be born with 2 heads or some other wonderful result of a toxic society! Rock on Dr. M.
Just an FYI, to "TiaIsWorried" who referred to NAFTA as being "orchestrated (and paid for) by the Clintons", did you know that Daddy Bush, in '92, was the one who was actually responsible for creating and signing the agreement with Mexico and Canada, not Clinton. More Republicans voted for the agreement, Clinton's own party, the evil Democrats, voted against it, see below. Better check your history before you pass judgements.
from en.wikipedia.org/.../NAFTA :
"NAFTA was initially pursued by politicians in the United States and Canada supportive of free trade, led by Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, U.S. President George H. W. Bush, and the Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari. The three countries signed NAFTA in December 1992, subject to ratification by the legislatures of the three countries. There was considerable opposition in all three countries. In the United States, NAFTA was able to secure passage after Bill Clinton made its passage a major legislative priority in 1993. Since the agreement had been signed by Bush under his fast-track prerogative, Clinton did not alter the original agreement, but complemented it with the aforementioned NAAEC and NAALC. After intense political debate and the negotiation of these side agreements, the U.S. House of Representatives passed NAFTA on November 17, 1993, by 234-200 vote (132 Republicans and 102 Democrats voting in favor; 43 Republicans, 156 Democrats, and 1 independent against), and the U.S. Senate passed it on the last day of its 1993 session, November 20, 1993, by 61-38 vote (34 Republicans and 27 Democrats voting in favor; 10 Republicans and 28 Democrats against, with 1 Democrat opponent not voting -- Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND), an ardent foe of NAFTA, missed the vote because of an illness in his family).[7]"
from en.wikipedia.org/.../NAFTA
Alternadeb: Better read it again regarding the Clintons voting against it. I didn't see that in the article.
Regarding NAFTA; I heard the Clintons take credit for it. In the Wikipedia, you will read this statement. "In the United States, NAFTA was able to secure passage after Bill Clinton made its passage a major legislative priority in 1993" (Wikipedia). The Clintons were indeed one of the 102 democrats voting in favor according to Hillary in a 2008 debate!
Hope, You might read my comment again. I didn't say Clinton voted against it. Bill nor Hilary Clinton would have had a vote on it as the president can veto a bill but not vote and Hilary was first lady at the time not a senator.
What I said was that the Democrats in congress voted against it in both the house and senate.
Thanks for trying though.