Cnbc "Ron-Paul-a-Holics"

[deprave]

I ignore your post because they are childish but when you post something really really stupid I make a comment on it, I will not have a childish argument with you. so shooo

 

[Dan Kone]

I noticed you argue with people on purpose and its very annoying? What are you even talking about?

I was talking about how Ron Paul supporters refuse to listen to any criticism about him and instead become extremely defensive and start spouting off nonsense like "open your eyes!", "wake up!", or my favorite "that's just what the media wants you to think" as if no one could possibly disagree with any of Ron Paul's policies unless they were being brainwashed.

I just Ignore your post Dan so I dont know refresh my memory

Isn't that convenient. That's for proving my point as usual. I know, it's much easier to ignore me that open yourself up to the possibility that Ron Paul isn't perfect. Keep sippin that koolaide.

 

[deprave]

Thats just not true dan, its a sterotype for one thing.

 

[Dan Kone]

Thats just not true dan, its a sterotype for one thing.

Then how come when I do forum searches for the phrases "wake up" or "open your eyes" every single Ron Paul thread pops up?

 

[UncleBuck]

Ron Paul is infallible! open your eyes!

oh, shit. no wonder i was walking into so many retaining walls and curbs. thanks man.

 

[beardo]

Then how come when I do forum searches for the phrases "wake up" every single Ron Paul thread pops up?

Daniel Carver should pop up on that search...
Ron Paul is great and even if you don't agree 100% you should vote for him because he is an American and I don't think he is Evil or has bad intentions.

 

[UncleBuck]

Daniel Carver should pop up on that search...
Ron Paul is great and even if you don't agree 100% you should vote for him because he is an American and I don't think he is Evil or has bad intentions.

in that case, we should all vote for richard simmons for the exact same reasons.

 

[sync0s]

I don't know why people intend on generalizing groups so much. This is what propels racism and other bigotry so much. I'm a big supporter of Ron Paul. First thing I did when I saw that post was began searching it. You can't take the words of one and plaster it as the words of many, that's just ignorance and it's exactly what your preaching against. Thus making you both hypocrites.

Anyways, links on the statement please, I can't find. What I did find was a news article blaming Ron Paul for hijacking an airline and claimed his real name was D.B. Cooper... weird.

Also, how can you be infallible, when just about every one of your colleagues considers you a joke?

 

[budlover13]

always personally attacking someone it gets annoying btw, I hope your entertained.

That's what scared animals and people do when they realize they are cornered in the wild or an argument. It is called Ad Hominem and is a tactic of the weak minded and unintelligent most often. Not always, since political sellouts use it too.

 

[UncleBuck]

That's what scared animals and people do when they realize they are cornered in the wild or an argument. It is called Ad Hominem and is a tactic of the weak minded and unintelligent most often. Not always, since political sellouts use it too.

trolls, too!

 

[Dan Kone]

That's what scared animals and people do when they realize they are cornered in the wild or an argument. It is called Ad Hominem and is a tactic of the weak minded and unintelligent most often. Not always, since political sellouts use it too.

I've tried to respond to the content of his posts, his most substantive response was "no, you're wrong". He then proclaimed me unworthy of knowing why I was wrong and declared I was trolling.

Hey, if you want to get into policy reasons for why Ron Paul is a two bit hack, bring it on. I'm happy to have that conversation. I'm not posting like this because I have nothing to back up what I'm saying about Ron Paul, I'm doing it because most Ron Paul supporters here don't respond to reason.

 

[Dan Kone]

trolls, too!

have some koolaide! Then you can stop worshiping the mainstream media and join the church of ron paul!

 

[Dan Kone]

That's what scared animals and people do when they realize they are cornered in the wild or an argument. It is called Ad Hominem and is a tactic of the weak minded and unintelligent most often. Not always, since political sellouts use it too.

If you want to talk Ron Paul, lets do it.

Explain to me how we'd be better off with the corporate monopolies Ron Paul's policies would allow. Tell how we'd be better off with the 50% unemployment that would have come along with letting all the banks fail. Tell me why we are better off not regulating the economy. Is the "free market" a sentient being that will look out for our best interests if we stop regulating it or are we better off setting up rules to insure the market works for us rather than all of us becoming slaves to the robber barons.

hint = "that's just mainstream media propaganda" is not the correct answer to those questions.

 

[deprave]

I've tried to respond to the content of his posts, his most substantive response was "no, you're wrong". He then proclaimed me unworthy of knowing why I was wrong and declared I was trolling.

Hey, if you want to get into policy reasons for why Ron Paul is a two bit hack, bring it on. I'm happy to have that conversation. I'm not posting like this because I have nothing to back up what I'm saying about Ron Paul, I'm doing it because most Ron Paul supporters here don't respond to reason.

your so full of shit lol you think Ron Paul is some kind of conspiracy theory that he will destroy america and let the corporations takeover, your just as bad as the imaginary persona you have so much hatred for. I have answered to your bullshit countless times.

 

[deprave]

Explain to me how we'd be better off with the corporate monopolies Ron Paul's policies would allow.

Tell how we'd be better off with the 50% unemployment that would have come along with letting all the banks fail.

Tell me why we are better off not regulating the economy. Is the "free market" a sentient being that will look out for our best interests if we stop regulating it or are we better off setting up rules to insure the market works for us rather than all of us becoming slaves to the robber barons.

hint = "that's just mainstream media propaganda" is not the correct answer to those questions.

no its not "mainstream media propaganda", its some sort of conspiracy theory you have made up in your head, You just break out your crystal ball for this one also?

Explain to me how Ron Paul will cause 50% unemployment? where do you get this #? Is this gunna happen all at once my 40% of people are just gonna get laid off, hows that going to go down? Ron Pauls free market philosophy means we prosper, it means more jobs, less bills.

How will the Banks fail, o wise seer? Because they wont be able to rip people off and get away with it? and that's a failure in your mind how?

Better off NOT regulating? You mean giving money to the government? How will we be better off with more money? Is that what your asking?

People don't debate you about Ron Paul, because what your saying is absolutely ridiculous conspiracy theorist bullshit ever think about that? Honestly I am suprised you havent called him something like a 'Zionist Pig" yet or claimed that hes part of the Illuminati.

 

[UncleBuck]

your so full of shit lol you think Ron Paul is some kind of conspiracy theory that he will destroy america and let the corporations takeover, your just as bad as the imaginary persona you have so much hatred for. I have answered to your bullshit countless times.

i don't think it is a conspiracy theory, i think it is an argument to which you can present counterpoints.

i'll play devil's advocate for you.

but dan, if we let the free market work, taxpayers will not have to foot the bill for these 'too big to fail' companies. if we let them fail, they will try harder to succeed as they will no longer have incentive to fail.

if we let the free market work, no monopolies will exist because americans don't like monopolies and will avoid those companies which try to monopolize markets.

besides, who do you want looking out for you? let's take health care for example. if we let private, for profit companies run the show, they will naturally compete with each other and lower prices so we can all get affordable health care. whereas is we let government do it, they will just take your taxes, skim money off the top and thus make it more expensive.

what sayeth you?

 

[budlover13]

I've tried to respond to the content of his posts, his most substantive response was "no, you're wrong". He then proclaimed me unworthy of knowing why I was wrong and declared I was trolling.

Hey, if you want to get into policy reasons for why Ron Paul is a two bit hack, bring it on. I'm happy to have that conversation. I'm not posting like this because I have nothing to back up what I'm saying about Ron Paul, I'm doing it because most Ron Paul supporters here don't respond to reason.

Ok. i will openly admit here that i am probably not as informed/educated/blinded(depending on who's responses i've read).

And i still have LOTS of time to decide who to back. SO far, what i've seen of Ron Paul i like. A LOT.

i tend to be a seperatist, almost hermit(would be but for my wife and son), raised Christian Conservative, not HIGHLY educated b/c of some poor choices but intelligent nonetheless(if you want my 2x tested iq #'s when i applied to LEO, pm me, both tests came in 2 points apart).

So, i guess one could say i've jumped off already, but now your challenge is to convert me back to the two-party system or what you are throwing your weight behind. I may not debate much but will read(that's what one who is learning does imho) and ask questions. The pro-Paul group can respond and let ME decide who's in the right camp.

So right now i guess i'm a politically active citizen that wants to see everything i can in order to make an intelligent, informed decision.

Both sides, fire away please. No attacking, no violating rules of debate. i guess in a way i will become not only the audience but the moderator of this thread if OP doesn't mind. If rules of debate are followed i will listen, question, ponder, and decide. If persnal attacks(Ad Hominem) or the other rules are not follwed i will call out the person violating them. Either side. If i don't catch it feel free to point it out. i'm not perfect or the smartest, but i want justice and freedom and at this point RP seems to be the man for me.

So, let the games begin and be aware that if personal attacks are posted i WILL report straight up and attack you violently within forum rules as best i can. Not just you Dan, but ANYONE that does it. Like i said earlier, when i see personal attacks or the ignorance of the rules of debate the offender is a dunce imho.

Convince me please.

 

[UncleBuck]

no its not, its some sort of conspiracy theory you have made up in your head, You just break out your crystal bar for this one also?

Explain to me how Ron Paul will cause 50% unemployment? where do you get this #? Ron Pauls free market philosphy means we prosper, it means more jobs, less bills.

now let me switch modes again, and play devil's advocate to you.

suppose we did not bail out any of those companies in 2008 that were going to fail. who do you think provides capital for small businesses, loans for citizens, etc? why, that would be the companies we did not allow to fail. now, had they failed, imagine the problems small companies would have had in obtaining credit to make payroll. imagine the even greater plummet in the housing market that would have followed. perhaps 50% is stretching it, but unemployment would have been markedly worse had we followed the ron paul philosophy of letting them fail.

How the Banks will fail? Because they wont be able to rip people off?

regulating these unethical assholes of banks is what makes them less able to rip people off (i say less able because they find other ways to rip you no matter what). for example, the financial reform bill that was passed mandated that my credit card company put my billing date on the same day each month, making it less likely that i would miss a payment by a day, thus incurring not only a late fee but also a markedly increased interest rate.

not only that, but that same bill prohibits credit card companies from raising your interest rate if you are only a day or two late. you have to be 30 - 60 days late for them to raise the interest rate nowadays, thanks to obama and the democrats. however, they are making this money up by now adding an annual fee across the board (fucking assholes!).

i discussed this here: https://www.rollitup.org/politics/428446-bank-america-start-charging-annual.html

Better off NOT regulating? You mean giving money to the government? How will we be better off with more money? Is that what your asking?

i really don't get what you are trying to say here, which makes it tough to play devil's advocate.

 

[UncleBuck]

(if you want my 2x tested iq #'s when i applied to LEO, pm me, both tests came in 2 points apart)

can you give us a rough range? i will go first.

i was a guinea pig for my wife, who is becoming a psychologist, when she started administering WAIS-IV tests (ie, IQ tests).

my score came back around 140, which is mensa smart. i told her she biased the test since she is my wife, so i would put it at closer to 125 (still damn good).

i showed mine, you show yours now.

 

[Dan Kone]

Explain to me how Ron Paul will cause 50% unemployment?

By letting the banks and major industries fail. It would likely be an event similar to the great depression, but much worse because now we are more dependent on banking and financial services than we were in the 30's.

where do you get this #?

That number comes directly from the Department of Making Shit Up.

Is this gunna happen all at once my 40% of people are just gonna get laid off, hows that going to go down?

No, that is what would have happened if people followed Ron Paul's advice to just let the banks fail in 2007-now.

Ron Pauls free market philosophy means we prosper, it means more jobs, less bills.

lol. Does it now? And what are you basing that off of? Sure, we'll all have a job.... in a sweatshop for $1 per day. Let's go back to the 1880's when we had what was close to a free market. How'd that work out? Prosperity all around? No. It was a few families getting extremely wealthy while everyone else was dirt poor. Businesses would buy up all their competition and when the people had no choice but to buy their products, they jacked up the prices on everything which funneled away all the middle class wealth transferring it to the ultra-wealthy.

How will the Banks fail, o wise seer?

I'm not talking about seeing the future, I'm talking about what has happened and what would have happened if Ron Paul had his way.

Because they wont be able to rip people off and get away with it?

You think that if we got rid of all the rules preventing banks from ripping us off, they'd just decide to stop doing it out of respect for the free market? GTFO.

What do you think regulations are? Apparently you think regulations are there to stop people from having freedom. But what they are really there for is to stop large corporations and financial institutions from ripping us off. And Ron Paul wants those eliminated.

Better off NOT regulating? You mean giving money to the government?

Yeah, now I'm positive you don't understand what financial regulations are, do, what their purpose is, or what effects they have.

How will we be better off with more money? Is that what your asking?

I see.

step 1 - deregulate everything!
step 2 - free market!
step 3 - ????
step 4 - profit!

Can you please fill us in on what step 3 is or is that a sekret?