medicineman
New Member
From your posts, I'd be inclined to surmise you were a Rudy sort of guy, am I wrong,~LOL~?
Ron Paul Revolution
- Thread starter 7xstall
- Start date
silk
Well-Known Member
Yup. I know who he is that's about it.
medicineman
New Member
Well, in my humble opinion, he is the worst possible candidate. Even the firefighters from NY hate his guts. If you like pot, he would be the absolute worst candidate as minor pot arrests went up 900% when he took over as Mayor of NYC. He pranced around at the WTC site spewing forth anti-terror rhetoric, just as he is doing now, while denying Firefighters the right to look for bodies of the fallen heroes. The guy is a complete asshole. If He gets "elected" (my opinion on that is, rigged voting machines), this will be ever more a police state, ruled by the elites and the corporations, a genuine Fascist state.
ViRedd
New Member
If you truely like Ron Paul's platform and all that he stands for, how can Obama possibly be your second choice? Man, that's like saying if sugar doesn't win, then give me an ice pick in the ear. ~lol~But who R your guys second choices if Paul does not get the nod. The only other remotely viable candidate i see is obama. But would america elect a black president? If it comes down in the end to Hillary vs. any other republican except Paul I'll. I won't even vote if that were to happen.
Vi
silk
Well-Known Member
I don't feel good about any of the candidates. I lived in NYC during 2001. Nobody I knew there ever had anything positive to say about Giuliani. That's about as much as I still know about him. His platform is dubious at best; looks like a slimy New York hustle.
7xstall
Well-Known Member
lol, look at these mindless Clinton servants trying to keep the herd of vote casting robots from finding out about Ron Paul!! another great example of "free speech for me" but not for you.
YouTube - Hillary Clinton Censorship of Ron Paul
<object width="425" height="366"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Oa30AgNzkM0&rel=1&border=0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Oa30AgNzkM0&rel=1&border=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="366"></embed></object>
.
YouTube - Hillary Clinton Censorship of Ron Paul
<object width="425" height="366"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Oa30AgNzkM0&rel=1&border=0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Oa30AgNzkM0&rel=1&border=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="366"></embed></object>
.
so i'll shamelessly shill for Ron Paul, seeing as it's allowed here...
To say Ron Paul doesn't have a chance is ridiculous: the only evidence that doesn't overturn this argument completely are the scientific polls done on land-lines by people who don't like Ron Paul, and often leave him out of the poll itself. The MSM reports that Ron Paul has no chance in spite of his fundraising being equal to McCain's. How does it work that Paul gets the same money from working people that McCain gets from businesses, (meaning Paul's $/donation ratio is much lower: $40) and he still has less supporters? Short answer: it doesn't. Which means that the reported polling is meant to make people interested in his campaign talk hopelessly about how it isn't possible for him to win; then they go out and choose some tool.
The other degrading thing to say is that he's merely an internet sensation (as it's always phrased in the MSM) Who isn't on the fucking internet? If someone's hot on the internet, they're hot period. It's the most honest indicator as it's pretty much anonymous. Doesn't anyone remember the problem of 2000, when they did the exit polling and got it wrong? When the votes were counted (and that is the determining factor of who can win an election) it turned out differently. Paul even received 38% at the last debate from people who texted in: Hannity encourages everyone to vote (hoping that Ron Paul would not win) and then whines (for like the fourth time in a row) that there's a problem with the process. That is Hannity's Problem. The fact that their machine counts votes is his problem. He can't believe it, and he doesn't want you to, either.
Mandatory Go Ron Paul! (just to give it some spam-like quality)
Basically, he would be good for you as President, personally. The other republican candidates are trying to make you vote on their language and their imagination of some epic struggle in Iraq: it is much more mundane and indefensible than that. You would pay less taxes. You would have the right to habeas corpus. You would be free to do whatever the fuck you wanted to as long as no one else was hurt. I'll blaze to that!
To say Ron Paul doesn't have a chance is ridiculous: the only evidence that doesn't overturn this argument completely are the scientific polls done on land-lines by people who don't like Ron Paul, and often leave him out of the poll itself. The MSM reports that Ron Paul has no chance in spite of his fundraising being equal to McCain's. How does it work that Paul gets the same money from working people that McCain gets from businesses, (meaning Paul's $/donation ratio is much lower: $40) and he still has less supporters? Short answer: it doesn't. Which means that the reported polling is meant to make people interested in his campaign talk hopelessly about how it isn't possible for him to win; then they go out and choose some tool.
The other degrading thing to say is that he's merely an internet sensation (as it's always phrased in the MSM) Who isn't on the fucking internet? If someone's hot on the internet, they're hot period. It's the most honest indicator as it's pretty much anonymous. Doesn't anyone remember the problem of 2000, when they did the exit polling and got it wrong? When the votes were counted (and that is the determining factor of who can win an election) it turned out differently. Paul even received 38% at the last debate from people who texted in: Hannity encourages everyone to vote (hoping that Ron Paul would not win) and then whines (for like the fourth time in a row) that there's a problem with the process. That is Hannity's Problem. The fact that their machine counts votes is his problem. He can't believe it, and he doesn't want you to, either.
Mandatory Go Ron Paul! (just to give it some spam-like quality)
Basically, he would be good for you as President, personally. The other republican candidates are trying to make you vote on their language and their imagination of some epic struggle in Iraq: it is much more mundane and indefensible than that. You would pay less taxes. You would have the right to habeas corpus. You would be free to do whatever the fuck you wanted to as long as no one else was hurt. I'll blaze to that!
medicineman
New Member
I'll take the opposing view for a moment, although I've said I like some things about Paul. He would privatize everything, even my SS, BAH Humbug. The power he would turn over to the private sector would leave millions without a means of support or health care. Corporations are not known for their charitable ways, only using Charity for tax purposes, and since he would abolish Income tax, there would be no need for charitable contributions. The Coporations would rule this country even more than they do now. Wages would plumet as he would make unions illegal, leaving the price of labor to the employers, and we all know how they like to pay fair and equitable wages. By trying to stop wars (Which are a major part of the elites income), he would undoubtably be assasinated, Law enforcement would also want him removed, (How many jobs depend on Drug laws), cops, lawers, judges, Bail bondsmen, prison guards, etc. By privatizing the schools, only the wealthy would afford an education for their children. You see, there is a place for government, a smart government, not the corrupt piece of shit we have now. Paul has some wonderful attributes, I'll agree, Honesty is high on my list, but his plans are flawed. By privatizing everything, he will give all power to the private sector. Do you know that conditions in the private prisons system are much worse than in the governmental ones, PROFIT is the only operating procedure followed to the letter. Would you want to be "protected" by Blackwater? They will most assuredly be used against US citizens in the near future, and Oh yeah, If you want to be afraid, start worrying about the dissapearance of the Bees, The main source of propagation for 1/3 of our food. "There will be great Famine upon the land".
7xstall
Well-Known Member
by Ron Paul, Dr. July 3, 2006
On the fourth day of July, in 1776, a small group of men, representing 13 colonies in the far-off Americas, boldly told the most powerful nation on earth that they were free.
They declared, in terms that still are radical today, that all men are created equal, and endowed with certain inalienable rights that government neither grants nor can take away.
In the Declaration of Independence, the founding fathers sought to demonstrate to the world that they were rejecting a tyrannical king. They listed the “injuries and usurpations” that contain the philosophical basis for our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
One point of consternation to our founding fathers was that the king had been “imposing Taxes on us without our Consent.” But 230 years later, taxation with representation has not worked out much better.
Indeed, one has to wonder how Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin would react to the current state of affairs. After all, they were outraged by mere import tariffs of a few pennies on the dollar. Today, the average American pays roughly 50 percent of their income in direct and indirect taxes.
In fact, most Texans will not start working for themselves for another week. Texans, like most Americans, work from January until early July just to pay their federal income taxes, state and local taxes, and the enormous costs of regulation. Only about half the year is spent working to pay for food, clothing, shelter, or education.
It is easy to simply blame faceless bureaucrats and politicians for our current state of affairs, and they do bear much of the blame. But blame also rests with those who expect Washington DC to solve every problem under the sun. If the public demanded that Congress abide by the Constitution and pass only constitutional spending bills, politicians would have no choice but to respond.
Everybody seems to agree that government waste is rampant and spending should but cut—but not when it comes to their communities or pet projects. So members of Congress have every incentive to support spending bills and adopt a go-along, get-along attitude. This leads to the famous compromises, but the bill eventually comes due on April 15th.
Our basic problem is that we have lost sight of the simple premise that guided the actions of our founding fathers. That premise? The government that governs least is the government that governs best.
When we cut the size of government, our taxes will fall. When we reduce the power of the federal bureaucracy, the cost of government will plummet. And when we firmly fix our eyes, undistracted, on the principles of liberty, Americans truly will be free. That should be our new declaration.
.
On the fourth day of July, in 1776, a small group of men, representing 13 colonies in the far-off Americas, boldly told the most powerful nation on earth that they were free.
They declared, in terms that still are radical today, that all men are created equal, and endowed with certain inalienable rights that government neither grants nor can take away.
In the Declaration of Independence, the founding fathers sought to demonstrate to the world that they were rejecting a tyrannical king. They listed the “injuries and usurpations” that contain the philosophical basis for our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
One point of consternation to our founding fathers was that the king had been “imposing Taxes on us without our Consent.” But 230 years later, taxation with representation has not worked out much better.
Indeed, one has to wonder how Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin would react to the current state of affairs. After all, they were outraged by mere import tariffs of a few pennies on the dollar. Today, the average American pays roughly 50 percent of their income in direct and indirect taxes.
In fact, most Texans will not start working for themselves for another week. Texans, like most Americans, work from January until early July just to pay their federal income taxes, state and local taxes, and the enormous costs of regulation. Only about half the year is spent working to pay for food, clothing, shelter, or education.
It is easy to simply blame faceless bureaucrats and politicians for our current state of affairs, and they do bear much of the blame. But blame also rests with those who expect Washington DC to solve every problem under the sun. If the public demanded that Congress abide by the Constitution and pass only constitutional spending bills, politicians would have no choice but to respond.
Everybody seems to agree that government waste is rampant and spending should but cut—but not when it comes to their communities or pet projects. So members of Congress have every incentive to support spending bills and adopt a go-along, get-along attitude. This leads to the famous compromises, but the bill eventually comes due on April 15th.
Our basic problem is that we have lost sight of the simple premise that guided the actions of our founding fathers. That premise? The government that governs least is the government that governs best.
When we cut the size of government, our taxes will fall. When we reduce the power of the federal bureaucracy, the cost of government will plummet. And when we firmly fix our eyes, undistracted, on the principles of liberty, Americans truly will be free. That should be our new declaration.
.
medicineman
New Member
Fat chance............
7xstall
Well-Known Member
the poster boy of the MEMEME generation has spoken.
for those of us willing to roll up our sleeves, Ron Paul 2008!
.
medicineman
New Member
I wonder when you are going to wake up? This la-la land you live in has you extremely confused. I may have a negative view of the possibilities of change, but maybe that is because I've been watching politics a lot longer than you. The entrenched mindset of the political elites is not about to change because a few million internet yahoos decide that their candidate is the right one. Even if by some extreme chance he would win the presidency, the powers that really run this country would exterminate him like stepping on a cockroach. Keep the positive attitude as I find it encouraging in this day and age, just be prepared for failure as it is inevitable. Remember, I was alive and cognizant when JFK was assasinated, watched them Kill Bobby, kill Martin Luther. Leaders that want to effect change are eliminated. I was so positive and energetic when Bobby Kennedy was running, the great savior, and they killed him so they could continue the war.
7xstall
Well-Known Member
i greatly prefer to embrace a naive optimism than to expect the worst that may come. even when life has nearly dashed me to pieces i suffered no more than when i gave up hope for just a moment.
we deserve better than what our corrupt servants want to dole out to us from our very own provision! WE are the hand that feeds them - yet they want to sell our own property and earnings back to us in such a battered and inferior state that it is no longer recognizable as what we originally produced.
i also reject the idea that after years of disappointment you have license to lose hope; your years demand that you have excessive hope. you should be an inspiration because if you have seen so much failure and lost resolve it's time to change now more than ever! you shouldn't be cowering under the threat of another lost dream, you should be fighting harder than ever!
you curl around the legs of the politicians promising free health care, free retirement, free this and free that, what about FREEDOM?
we must not lose hope.
.
we deserve better than what our corrupt servants want to dole out to us from our very own provision! WE are the hand that feeds them - yet they want to sell our own property and earnings back to us in such a battered and inferior state that it is no longer recognizable as what we originally produced.
i also reject the idea that after years of disappointment you have license to lose hope; your years demand that you have excessive hope. you should be an inspiration because if you have seen so much failure and lost resolve it's time to change now more than ever! you shouldn't be cowering under the threat of another lost dream, you should be fighting harder than ever!
you curl around the legs of the politicians promising free health care, free retirement, free this and free that, what about FREEDOM?
we must not lose hope.
.
medicineman
New Member
All I ask Is leave my SS and VA alone, then bring on the freedom. Yeah it would be nice if everyone had medical and didn't have to mortgauge
Their homes to pay medical bills. It would be nice if we could eliminate poverty and hunger in America, stop the insanity of the drug laws, stop the insane Bush war, Make corporations accountable to their employees and the environment they are destroying, yes that would be nice, but don't peg me with all the other crap you assume about me, I am no fucking commie. I worked in excess of 50 fucking years to accumulate what I have, Don't try and take it away with your insane privitization plans, turning SS over to the volatile stock market and privatizing Va health care, Fuck that. You want to see some Irate citizens, fuck with their SS checks. I paid into that for 50+ years.
ViRedd
New Member
Med ...
The ONLY reason you have VA benefits is because of citizens like me who voted for them as a way of showing our appreciation of your service. You have no fucking "right" to those benefits at all. They are there because of the kindness of citizens like me. And yes, also like me, you paid into SS all of your life. So what? You and I were forced to pay into a system that returns around 1% on our "investment" dollar. Had your SS "investments" been placed into mutual funds over all those years you'd be a millionaire today ... and wouldn't be suffering from that class envy you're so full of. You socialists revere a SS system that is nothing but a house of cards. The funds have been used for other government projects and there is nothing but IOUs in the trust fund account. You paid into it all of your life and yet, if you die, no part of it can be willed to your spouse or offsprings. It was designed for a population that started recieving SS benefits at age 65 ... and then died at 67. That's your kind, compassionate, benevolent federal government for ya: Forced extraction of SS taxes for our entire working life. When we die, the federal government gets the benefits. Are you trying to tell us there isn't a better way? When will folks like you wake up and realize that every government "benefit" has a hook in it?
Vi
The ONLY reason you have VA benefits is because of citizens like me who voted for them as a way of showing our appreciation of your service. You have no fucking "right" to those benefits at all. They are there because of the kindness of citizens like me. And yes, also like me, you paid into SS all of your life. So what? You and I were forced to pay into a system that returns around 1% on our "investment" dollar. Had your SS "investments" been placed into mutual funds over all those years you'd be a millionaire today ... and wouldn't be suffering from that class envy you're so full of. You socialists revere a SS system that is nothing but a house of cards. The funds have been used for other government projects and there is nothing but IOUs in the trust fund account. You paid into it all of your life and yet, if you die, no part of it can be willed to your spouse or offsprings. It was designed for a population that started recieving SS benefits at age 65 ... and then died at 67. That's your kind, compassionate, benevolent federal government for ya: Forced extraction of SS taxes for our entire working life. When we die, the federal government gets the benefits. Are you trying to tell us there isn't a better way? When will folks like you wake up and realize that every government "benefit" has a hook in it?
Vi
silk
Well-Known Member
If you completely ignore the statistical relationship between primary polls and 3rd party polls ( such as Gallop) to whom gets nominated for their party and wins the presidency I would agree with you. You see typically one of the front runners in a party wins the nomination and the losers are expected to stand in support of the party. I Ron Paul doesn't win the nominations he can still get on the presidential ballot as a 3rd party candidate. A 3rd party candidate hasn't won a presidency since Millard Filmore did in 1850 (Whig Party).
If you bothered to look you would have seen Ron Paul is included in the polls;you need to look for the actual results by who has taken the polls. However you will clearly find that people reporting on the polls may have left his name off the list because of either political bias or because 0% or even 1-2% isn't statistically noteworthy. Think about it; there are only 9 candidates for the Republican nomination...
I'm not going to write a paper on this so lets say you are right and let me add one last thing: lets make a wager, if you think Ron Paul can beat the odds, put your money where your mouth is.
7xstall
Well-Known Member
we don't know what will happen.
the mass media is waging a very effective campaign against Ron Paul but that doesn't mean it can't be overcome. in 1776 a "provincial fog" descended on what was left of Washington's rag-tag and depleted army to provide for their safe escape and allow them to regroup. they DID come back and defeat the vastly superior royal army.
unprecedented things set precedents, so let's just spread the word and do everything we can.
.
the mass media is waging a very effective campaign against Ron Paul but that doesn't mean it can't be overcome. in 1776 a "provincial fog" descended on what was left of Washington's rag-tag and depleted army to provide for their safe escape and allow them to regroup. they DID come back and defeat the vastly superior royal army.
unprecedented things set precedents, so let's just spread the word and do everything we can.
.
Wavels
Well-Known Member
Wow, it took me awhile to catch up with this thread....the major problems I have with Dr Paul are his(to me) deficient leadership skills. I wish he were a more forceful and dynamic public speaker. His personality does not exude natural charisma.
Unfortunately too many voters focus on a candidates style over their substance.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who is even remotely worthy of a single vote....IMHO!
</IMG>
Unfortunately too many voters focus on a candidates style over their substance.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who is even remotely worthy of a single vote....IMHO!
</IMG>
7xstall
Well-Known Member
long time no see, Wavels! glad to see you posting again.Wow, it took me awhile to catch up with this thread....the major problems I have with Dr Paul are his(to me) deficient leadership skills. I wish he were a more forceful and dynamic public speaker. His personality does not exude natural charisma.
Unfortunately too many voters focus on a candidates style over their substance.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who is even remotely worthy of a single vote....IMHO!
</IMG>
it's funny you point that out, every time i watch him in a debate i'm thinking, "straighten your shoulders!", "stand up straight", "elbow off the podium, now!" lol, glad i'm not the only one.
but i also agree that we shouldn't want to be "sold" by our politicians. this is a public office, it's not hollywood.... i guess we've (society) become so accustomed to the glamour of professional deception that we expect it. lot's of people think that a witty one liner and a charming smile is backed up with deep wisdom - often not the case.
.