Page 41 of 51 FirstFirst ... 27282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051 LastLast
Results 1,601 to 1,640 of 2034

Thread: ron paul=awesome/kickass?

  1. #1601
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    I am glad to Ron Paul for one thing ... previous to this cycle I've always sat on the side and been snarky, not really committing to any vision because nothing appealed. After this cycle I am immensely motivated to be involved in the local and state level as well as to participate and advocate at a national level.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  2. #1602
    Sheep Pen Emperor
    DIAMOND STATUS
    bueno bob's Avatar
    Member No
    6645
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 03:09 AM
    Location
    The Sheep Pen
    Age
    50
    Posts
    22,816
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,307
    Thanked 1,327 Times in 856 Posts


    Rep Power
    55
    I'd never vote for him based on several reasons, but predominant among them I think is his view on abortion.

    Crazy this thread's still alive...
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  3. Thanked bueno bob for this KICKASS post:

    jhale667 (03-16-2012)


  4. #1603
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    there's so many things to worry about these days over abortion... but I think his point of view is probably better for everyone. Let the states decide whether or not to allow abortion and don't let the federal government decide one way or another for everyone.

    Think of it like this. Today the government says it's legal to have abortions, and every state has to accept that. I'm guessing you're in favor of that. But look at how conservative the supreme court continues to grow.

    What will happen if some day another case comes up and they change their mind and say, No, abortion is illegal and shouldn't be allowed. Or if the right-wingers get their wish and put in a constitutional amendment to define life in a way that makes abortion a crime?

    If you take that power away from the federal government, and leave it to the states, abortion will always exist in the US, because each state will decide for itself if it wants to allow it or not, and many of them will, and many of them won't. But there won't be any way the federal government can force everyone to do it one way or the other.

    That's Ron Paul's view on how the federal government should manage (or rather, not manage) abortion.

  5. #1604
    Loon
    SUPER MODERATOR

    Nickdfresh's Avatar
    Member No
    8719
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:40 AM
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    49,064
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    3,454
    Thanked 4,562 Times in 3,449 Posts


    Rep Power
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    there's so many things to worry about these days over abortion... but I think his point of view is probably better for everyone. Let the states decide whether or not to allow abortion and don't let the federal government decide one way or another for everyone.
    ....

    It's a fundamental hypocrisy and internal contradiction in your messiah you choose to ignore. If Paul were actually elected, many more would follow. If I'm a bitter old man, you're a naive punk!..
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  6. Thanked Nickdfresh for this KICKASS post:

    jhale667 (03-16-2012)


  7. #1605
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Let's say your teenage daughter gets raped and gets pregnant from it. Honestly. Do you want the government involved in what to do in that situation? I sure as hell don't. Abortion is not a cut and dry topic. There is a lot of grey in it. If society degrades to the point where having abortions is no big deal then it's a bigger issue than just the government. You can't legislate morals. That deals with personal character issues and individual choice. I think the government should just stay out of it period. If the church's want to preach about the evils of abortion and help adopt out the unwanted babies then fine but they have no right to tell someone what to do with their body. It's an individual choice issue.

    Ok. Ron Paul wants to repeal Roe vs. Wade. He will have better luck auditing the fed and bringing the troops home than he will getting legal abortion appealed.
    Last edited by Nitro Express; 03-15-2012 at 04:31 AM.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  8. Thanked Nitro Express for this KICKASS post:

    jhale667 (03-16-2012)


  9. #1606
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickdfresh View Post
    It's a fundamental hypocrisy and internal contradiction in your messiah you choose to ignore. If Paul were actually elected, many more would follow. If I'm a bitter old man, you're a naive punk!..
    Nick, I don't follow you. What's the 'fundamental hypocrisy' and 'internal contradiction' here? And what 'many more would follow'?

    You haven't given me enough information to understand what you're talking about.

  10. #1607
    Open 8am-5pm M-F
    Full Member Status

    Jagermeister's Avatar
    Member No
    25273
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Online
    01-08-2015 @ 01:06 PM
    Location
    south
    Posts
    4,510
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked 322 Times in 244 Posts


    Rep Power
    21
    Here is what I think. I think anybody is an improvement to Obama. This dick head is still convinced the road to lower gas prices is reducing dependency on oil.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  11. #1608
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43


    I think I'm starting to understand why the GOP is so concerned about election fraud!

  12. #1609
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    Nick, I don't follow you. What's the 'fundamental hypocrisy' and 'internal contradiction' here? And what 'many more would follow'?

    You haven't given me enough information to understand what you're talking about.
    The problem is Ron Paul isn't a Democrat. Simple as that. If a Republican did the exact same things Obama has done the Democrats would be all over him. So what I have learned is you have to waive the correct banner to be accepted more than your actions.

  13. Thanked Nitro Express for this KICKASS post:

    ELVIS (03-15-2012)


  14. #1610
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Rick Santorum, Ron Paul On Track To Get Most Of Iowa's Delegates
    Posted: 03/15/2012 1:30 pm Updated: 03/15/2012 1:50 pm

    WASHINGTON -- Rick Santorum and Ron Paul are best positioned to win the most delegates in Iowa as the Republican primary process moves forward, making Mitt Romney the odd man out, state insiders told The Huffington Post.

    Santorum and Romney finished first and second on Jan. 3, with Paul finishing about 3,000 votes behind the 29,000 votes Santorum and Romney both got.

    Rep. Paul (R-Texas) is currently estimated by The Associated Press to have zero delegates in Iowa. The AP numbers give former Sen. Santorum (R-Pa.) 13 delegates and former Massachusetts Gov. Romney 12. But Iowa Republican operatives scoffed at the AP figure.

    "Can I just be bold and tell you that they don't know what they're talking about," Steve Scheffler, one of the state's three Republican National Committee members, told The Huffington Post. "Our delegates are not tied to the percentages of who got what in the straw poll."

    "That's just not valid information at all," he reiterated. "That's just not correct information at all."

    Santorum, banking on the fact that delegates are not "bound" by rule or law in Iowa to vote for any presidential candidate at the Republican National Convention -- which is similar to other caucus states -- has predicted he'll win the "overwhelming majority" of Iowa's 28 delegates.

    But as he is likely to find out in many caucus states, Santorum faces a roadblock: Paul's passionate and organized supporters, working to position themselves for spots as delegates at the national convention in Tampa, Fla., this August.

    "They're going to be feisty and they're going to fight," said Craig Robinson, a former state GOP official who now writes a popular state politics blog, The Iowa Republican.

    "I think that Santorum will get the delegates he should get but I think Ron Paul will get way more delegates than he should get," Robinson said, adding that he worries that Paul could potentially give Iowa a black eye by winning the most delegates.

    The winner of Iowa's caucuses has already changed once, after the state Republican Party announced Santorum the winner three weeks after saying Romney had won the night of the caucuses.

    "It would be terrible for Iowa if you had Romney the winner on caucus day, three weeks later Santorum, and then three months later Ron Paul," Robinson said.

    But Paul's supporters are not worried about the state's reputation. They just want to snatch delegate spots, and are prepared to use all the flexibility allowed by the rules to get them.

    "Ron Paul's respecting the voters of Iowa and the delegates of Iowa who represent them by campaigning for delegates. He didn't just stop at the straw poll on Jan. 3," said Drew Ivers, a member of Iowa's 17-member central committee who was a co-chair of Paul's campaign in Iowa.

    Paul's supporters drew attention this past Saturday when they caused a ruckus at several county conventions in Iowa. In Polk County, which includes Des Moines, they urged the county chairman, Kevin McLaughlin, to allow them to nominate delegates to the state convention who had not been elected at the Jan. 3 caucuses.

    "They gave us the impression that we owed them something," McLaughlin told HuffPost. "It was like, let's throw out the rules and do it our way. And let's throw temper tantrums if you won't."

    Ivers, sensitive to that criticism, said that Paul's supports were "engaging in the normal healthy process."

    "It seems to be a little bit concerning among some of the regular Republicans that we are respectful enough to ask for delegates, and because the other [campaigns] are not it makes us an exception," Ivers said.

    It's not as if the Paul movement in Iowa is simply a bunch of outsiders crashing the gates of the state GOP. In fact, the state party chairman -- as of early February -- is another former co-chair of Paul's presidential campaign in Iowa, A.J. Spiker. Spiker was elected by the central committee after former chairman Matt Strawn resigned.

    Spiker automatically gets one of the 28 delegate spots at the national convention. He did not return an e-mail seeking comment, but Spiker is a likely vote for Paul at the convention.

    Yet the Paul line of attack in Iowa is both a frontal assault and an under-the-radar operation. Ryan Rhodes, a Tea Party activist in Iowa, said that as the delegate process goes forward to the congressional district conventions on April 21 and then the state convention on June 15 and 16, there will be an element of suspense about which delegates running for national convention spots are Paul supporters.

    "You're not going to know how half these people vote until Tampa. You might have Ron Paul people in there who you won't know how they're going to vote until they get into the arena," Rhodes told HuffPost.

    Ivers admitted as much.

    "Because the other three [campaigns] are doing very little, there tends to be some caution about the Ron Paul people," Ivers said. "So it does tend to drive the Ron Paul supporters a little more quiet in the way they speak about the candidate. A little more cautious is a better word."

    The common theme among Iowa Republicans who spoke with HuffPost is that Paul's supporters have been the only ones who are noticeably aggressive and active so far in angling for delegate spots at the two remaining conventions in the state, all with an eye toward landing as many of the 28 delegate spots for Tampa as possible.

    But Santorum is very popular among a great number of Iowa's grassroots conservative base, and so he too is expected to get around half of the delegates.

    "If I had to be a betting man I would say that the Santorum and Ron Paul campaigns are best positioned to get their fair share of delegates," Scheffler, the Iowa RNC member, said. "That's where I see most of the energy coming from."

    That leaves Romney as potentially the odd man out, getting just a handful of delegates. Such a scenario would only be possible if Romney and Santorum were still locked in a close fight. Romney's state co-chair, Brian Kennedy, did not return phone calls.

    But if the national primary does remain competitive through May or June, that will make conventions in many states into high-stakes battles for delegates to the national convention, essentially setting the stage for a floor fight in Tampa.

    If that is the case, Santorum is looking to caucus states like Iowa, and other primary states like Arizona where delegate rules are very loose and open to interpretation, in order to chip away at the delegate lead that Romney has in current estimates. The AP count has Romney with 495 delegates to 252 for Santorum, 131 for former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and 48 for Paul.

    The magic number that clinches the nomination is 1,144 delegates.

    The only problem for Santorum is that his attempts at prying delegates away is limited by the Paul campaign's determination to secure their own number of seats in Tampa.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...ef=mostpopular


  15. #1611
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43



  16. #1612
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43


    looks like Ron Paul's campaign is winding down and not getting much turnout when he speaks anymore


  17. #1613
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43


    Regardless of the vote counts, it really makes me happy to see so many people turn out to hear the ideas.

  18. #1614
    The true JBC
    TOASTMASTER GENERAL
    kwame k's Avatar
    Member No
    24030
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last Online
    11-14-2018 @ 03:27 PM
    Location
    Holly, MI
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,302
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    2,369
    Thanked 2,298 Times in 1,690 Posts


    Rep Power
    52
    The more I read about Grandpa Paul's strategy to influence the party's platform by holding his delegates hostage until he gets what he wants......the more I think it isn't, in theory, a bad idea or as naive as I had once thought.

    Now it seems like there is a real possibility the GOP will have a brokered convention....Frothy and Newt both are banking on this. Coupled with the reality that no one wants Mitt.....it's going to make for an interesting convention. I still think it's a long shot but the odds are getting better every day. The GOP doesn't want a fractured convention because it makes them all look weak going into the nationals but with no candidate willing to step down it could be a reality.

    Changing the course of the debate and getting his followers involved in running for office or using their delegates to ensure party influence might make a difference in the long term. The more I think about his strategy the more I think it could effect the GOP in 2014 and in 2016....long after Paul is out of the picture or is merely a figurehead by then.

    Paul's having a minor influence on the debates and not as major of an impact as his supporters have wanted but he has brought a few things into the debate that wouldn't be there without him. As far as his influence goes come Nov......a coin toss at best. Any promises that Romney may make are not enforceable and he can't publicly promise any cabinet position for support because it's illegal.....so even if a backdoor deal is made.....it's only Romney's word that can keep it and that's a lot of faith to put in that scumbag.

    Looking back to Pat Robertson's run in 1988....he started this religious reich madness that people like Dubya and Frothy are converts to. Ruined the GOP, IMO but he brought religion into the forefront of the GOP.

    Barry Goldwater had a similar influence on the GOP in the '60's.

    The big test to the Ron Paul movement is what happens to his supporters after Nov......will his supporters die off and fade away or will another person come in and take the mantle in 2014's mid-terms. That is going to be the test if Paul's ideas will last beyond his time or not. If his supporters don't mobilize and have a cohesive direction in the mid-terms the same thing will happen to Paul that happened to Perot's supporters.

    I still am cynical enough to think money and fear and not ideas will run the GOP for years to come but I am man enough to admit I was wrong about Paul's strategic plan......especially with Newt and Frothy now playing the same game.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  19. 2 users say thank you to kwame k for this KICKASS post:

    Dr. Love (03-16-2012),ELVIS (03-17-2012)


  20. #1615
    Loon
    SUPER MODERATOR

    Nickdfresh's Avatar
    Member No
    8719
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:40 AM
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    49,064
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    3,454
    Thanked 4,562 Times in 3,449 Posts


    Rep Power
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    Nick, I don't follow you. What's the 'fundamental hypocrisy' and 'internal contradiction' here? And what 'many more would follow'?

    You haven't given me enough information to understand what you're talking about.
    We were talking about the abortion issue you "don't care about." I mean, really? Stop fucking playing Caveman Lawyer, already.



    Stop beating around the bush...

  21. #1616
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Still not following

    Are you saying its hypocrisy that Ron Paul doesn't agree with abortion but is a libertarian? And for the many more to follow, do you mean abortions?

    Perhaps if you took the time to express your ideas coherently I could follow. I'd be glad to join the conversation you're having. I just need you to pull a few sentences together that make sense.

  22. #1617
    Loon
    SUPER MODERATOR

    Nickdfresh's Avatar
    Member No
    8719
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:40 AM
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    49,064
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    3,454
    Thanked 4,562 Times in 3,449 Posts


    Rep Power
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    Still not following
    Okay.

    Are you saying its hypocrisy that Ron Paul doesn't agree with abortion but is a libertarian? And for the many more to follow, do you mean abortions?
    I'm saying Ron Paul can "disagree" all he wants, but after that I lost you as well...

    Perhaps if you took the time to express your ideas coherently I could follow.
    You mean like posting Ron Paul meme pics?

    I'd be glad to join the conversation you're having. I just need you to pull a few sentences together that make sense.
    Check your nonsensical third sentence in your post, then get back to me on making sense...

    You're too much of a pussy to have any real conversation. You long ago stated that you 'don't care about abortion' in order to stifle any discussion. But the fact is that Ron Paul if a bit of a frothing and disingenuous hypocrite based on his belief that government should regulate womens' bodies. But you don't care about that, do you? You simply ignore what you find inconvenient...

  23. #1618
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Take a few deep breaths! It's okay if someone disagrees with you on the internet.

    Here's what you originally said (which I still don't understand):

    It's a fundamental hypocrisy and internal contradiction in your messiah you choose to ignore. If Paul were actually elected, many more would follow.
    Many more what would follow?

    You seem to misunderstand -- Abortion isn't important to me in comparison with a lot of other issues which I think are much more pressing. Therefore, Ron Paul's stance on it doesn't really factor into my support. I'm happy to discuss it all day long, but that isn't going to make me care about it. It's not an attempt to stifle conversation, it's an explanation for why Ron Paul's stance on abortion doesn't bother me (whereas it very, very clearly bothers you).

    But I'll repeat again; Ron Paul has stated that he thinks the federal government shouldn't be involved in deciding whether or not abortions should be legal; It should be up to the states and municipalities to decide for themselves. That isn't regulating women's bodies. It would actually be more consistent with his "no regulations" philosophy. He has stated he thinks abortions are wrong and should be treated as violent crimes, but that goes back to how libertarians view liberty. You are free to do whatever you want, so long as you don't harm another person. I'm certain he views abortion as harmful to a person. And beyond that, I'm sure his time as a doctor and the amount of babies he has delivered has really helped to set that perception.

    Good for him. I don't have to agree with every single position someone holds to support the person. The world isn't so black and white. I would have thought you would know that.

    I think you're making wild leaps of judgement based on very little data with regard to what conversations I'm willing to have, or why I think the things I do, resulting in some pretty startling (and pretty funny) logical fallacies.

    You respond in anger and aggression far, far more often than you do with candor and reason. So if you think I'm too much of a pussy to have a real conversation with you, consider this: I'm not convinced it's possible to have a real conversation with you, based on the content, tone and character of the vast majority of your responses, despite my repeated attempts in this thread to understand what on earth you were saying so that I actually COULD attempt to have a conversation with you.
    Last edited by Dr. Love; 03-17-2012 at 02:56 AM.

  24. #1619
    Loon
    SUPER MODERATOR

    Nickdfresh's Avatar
    Member No
    8719
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:40 AM
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    49,064
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    3,454
    Thanked 4,562 Times in 3,449 Posts


    Rep Power
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    Take a few deep breaths! It's okay if someone disagrees with you on the internet.
    Um, there's a difference to "disagreeing on the internet" and using it as a venue for being a smarmy dick....

    Here's what you originally said (which I still don't understand):
    You keep saying you 'didn't understand,' yet you responded articulately to exactly the issue I stated. I mean, really? I mean I thought I was speaking incomprehensible gibberish!

    You seem to misunderstand -- Abortion isn't important to me in comparison with a lot of other issues which I think are much more pressing.
    Well of course not, white male approaching middle age!

    Therefore, Ron Paul's stance on it doesn't really factor into my support. I'm happy to discuss it all day long, but that isn't going to make me care about it. It's not an attempt to stifle conversation, it's an explanation for why Ron Paul's stance on abortion doesn't bother me (whereas it very, very clearly bothers you).
    But it's not really Ron Paul's stance on abortion, it's more his stance on legislating morality...

    But I'll repeat again; Ron Paul has stated that he thinks the federal government shouldn't be involved in deciding whether or not abortions should be legal; It should be up to the states and municipalities to decide for themselves. That isn't regulating women's bodies. It would actually be more consistent with his "no regulations" philosophy. He has stated he thinks abortions are wrong and should be treated as violent crimes, but that goes back to how libertarians view liberty. You are free to do whatever you want, so long as you don't harm another person. I'm certain he views abortion as harmful to a person. And beyond that, I'm sure his time as a doctor and the amount of babies he has delivered has really helped to set that perception.
    Wow. In all my life I have never seen such a fucking cop out! Really, so you're essentially saying that though Ron Paul personally believes that abortion is a "violent crime," he believes that the (federal) state has no right in legislating against such violent murders, nor infringing upon the sanctity of the state governments in either sanctioning or restricting such violent crimes. So, theoretically Ron Paul believes that when he is President of a government that he both instinctively and ideologically hates (despite being well paid as a senator in it), that if a given state decides to commit violent crimes against a segment of its population, that there are "no regulations" provided against them doing so and that he would be powerless as a president to act against state or municipal level tyranny (as Ike, Kennedy, and LBJ did). No?

    Good for him. I don't have to agree with every single position someone holds to support the person. The world isn't so black and white. I would have thought you would know that.
    I know of no one that would disagree with this. But we're talking about more than a single position here!

    I think you're making wild leaps of judgement based on very little data with regard to what conversations I'm willing to have, or why I think the things I do, resulting in some pretty startling (and pretty funny) logical fallacies.
    Tell me all about "logical fallacies." You seem to be drawn to them...

    You respond in anger and aggression far, far more often than you do with candor and reason.
    Pot meets tea kettle...

    So if you think I'm too much of a pussy to have a real conversation with you, consider this: I'm not convinced it's possible to have a real conversation with you, based on the content, tone and character of the vast majority of your responses, despite my repeated attempts in this thread to understand what on earth you were saying so that I actually COULD attempt to have a conversation with you.
    Then why are you conversing with me?

  25. #1620
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Abortion, gun control, and the death penalty are those wonderful topics that will continue to be debated and argued over after we are long gone. Also nuclear waste and improving education have been constantly addressed and argued over as long as I can remember and the situations with both have not improved over the last 40 plus years. I doubt a pro choice candidate could get the nomination in the Republican party.

  26. #1621
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickdfresh View Post
    Um, there's a difference to "disagreeing on the internet" and using it as a venue for being a smarmy dick....
    For such an aggressive personality you use a lot of passive language. Yes, there is a difference. I am not sure you (or I) care if there is one. Neither of us resist the urge to be dicks in our own way. Mine is more snide and yours is more personally attacking. Who gives a shit.



    You keep saying you 'didn't understand,' yet you responded articulately to exactly the issue I stated. I mean, really? I mean I thought I was speaking incomprehensible gibberish!
    Context... you eventually give enough of it for me to piece together your train of thought if I sift beyond the hyperbole and personal attacks enough.

    You should ask yourself why it takes so many posts from you for someone else to get to the crux of your point (assuming it was, and assuming you had one).

    But it's not really Ron Paul's stance on abortion, it's more his stance on legislating morality...
    And what's his stance on legislating morality? The federal government shouldn't be involved.



    Wow. In all my life I have never seen such a fucking cop out! Really, so you're essentially saying that though Ron Paul personally believes that abortion is a "violent crime," he believes that the (federal) state has no right in legislating against such violent murders, nor infringing upon the sanctity of the state governments in either sanctioning or restricting such violent crimes.
    Practically all violent crime is handled at the state level.

    So, theoretically Ron Paul believes that when he is President of a government that he both instinctively and ideologically hates (despite being well paid as a senator in it), that if a given state decides to commit violent crimes against a segment of its population, that there are "no regulations" provided against them doing so and that he would be powerless as a president to act against state or municipal level tyranny (as Ike, Kennedy, and LBJ did). No?
    Congressman, not senator. One of the only few that returns a fair portion of his budget every year to the treasury. And I don't think you get the whole concept of liberty. Would he act as president to stop a state from violently harming its citizenry? I believe he would. It is consistent with the philosophy, which is pretty straightforward: You can do what you want so long as you don't harm someone else in doing it. When that occurs, the government steps in to protect the people.



    I know of no one that would disagree with this. But we're talking about more than a single position here!
    You've fixated on abortion as an area of hypocrisy (which I disagree with). The only other things we've discussed is philosophy on where federal and state boundaries lie. So I don't think we're talking about much more than a single position.

    Tell me all about "logical fallacies." You seem to be drawn to them...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

    In logic and rhetoric, a fallacy is usually an improper argumentation in reasoning resulting in a misconception or presumption. Literally, "an error in reasoning that renders an argument logically invalid". By accident or design, fallacies may exploit emotional triggers in the listener or participant (appeal to emotion), or take advantage of social relationships between people (e.g. argument from authority). Fallacious arguments are often structured using rhetorical patterns that obscure any logical argument.

    Fallacies can be used to win arguments regardless of the merits. Among such devices, discussed in more detail below, are: "ignoring the question" to divert argument to unrelated issues using a red herring, making the argument personal (argumentum ad hominem) and discrediting the opposition's character, "begging the question" (petitio principi), the use of the non-sequitur, false cause and effect (post hoc ergo propter hoc), bandwagoning (everyone says so), the "false dilemma" or "either-or fallacy" in which the situation is oversimplified, "card-stacking" or selective use of facts, and "false analogy". Another favorite device is the "false generalization", an abstraction of the argument that shifts discussion to platitudes where the facts of the matter are lost. There are many, many more tricks to divert attention from careful exploration of a subject.
    I believe several of those apply.

    Pot meets tea kettle...
    I think you mistake my responses. I am completely happy to speak candidly and reasonably. That is by far the exception around here. No one is interested in a real debate. My responses aren't personal attacks, they are parody of the people involved in the conversation.



    Then why are you conversing with me?
    There's the rhetorical question/red herring.

    Maybe when you are finally queefed out of that vagina you live in, and stop giving handjobs for handouts while obama fucks you in your asshole, you can figure out why.



    This over-the-top, hyperbolic, personal-attack thing is going to take some time to get just right.
    Last edited by Dr. Love; 03-17-2012 at 04:09 AM.

  27. #1622
    ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

    Seshmeister's Avatar
    Member No
    11
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:43 AM
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    35,078
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    2,815
    Thanked 9,347 Times in 6,031 Posts


    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by kwame k View Post
    The more I read about Grandpa Paul's strategy to influence the party's platform by holding his delegates hostage until he gets what he wants......the more I think it isn't, in theory, a bad idea or as naive as I had once thought.

    Now it seems like there is a real possibility the GOP will have a brokered convention....Frothy and Newt both are banking on this. Coupled with the reality that no one wants Mitt.....it's going to make for an interesting convention. I still think it's a long shot but the odds are getting better every day. The GOP doesn't want a fractured convention because it makes them all look weak going into the nationals but with no candidate willing to step down it could be a reality.

    Changing the course of the debate and getting his followers involved in running for office or using their delegates to ensure party influence might make a difference in the long term. The more I think about his strategy the more I think it could effect the GOP in 2014 and in 2016....long after Paul is out of the picture or is merely a figurehead by then.

    Paul's having a minor influence on the debates and not as major of an impact as his supporters have wanted but he has brought a few things into the debate that wouldn't be there without him. As far as his influence goes come Nov......a coin toss at best. Any promises that Romney may make are not enforceable and he can't publicly promise any cabinet position for support because it's illegal.....so even if a backdoor deal is made.....it's only Romney's word that can keep it and that's a lot of faith to put in that scumbag.

    Looking back to Pat Robertson's run in 1988....he started this religious reich madness that people like Dubya and Frothy are converts to. Ruined the GOP, IMO but he brought religion into the forefront of the GOP.

    Barry Goldwater had a similar influence on the GOP in the '60's.

    The big test to the Ron Paul movement is what happens to his supporters after Nov......will his supporters die off and fade away or will another person come in and take the mantle in 2014's mid-terms. That is going to be the test if Paul's ideas will last beyond his time or not. If his supporters don't mobilize and have a cohesive direction in the mid-terms the same thing will happen to Paul that happened to Perot's supporters.

    I still am cynical enough to think money and fear and not ideas will run the GOP for years to come but I am man enough to admit I was wrong about Paul's strategic plan......especially with Newt and Frothy now playing the same game.
    If all that is true would that not also mean that Santorum, with lots more delegates is going to wield a lot of power too? Scary...
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  28. #1623
    Rice Cooker
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    knuckleboner's Avatar
    Member No
    120
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-07-2024 @ 03:10 PM
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    2,927
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 241 Times in 190 Posts


    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    I am glad to Ron Paul for one thing ... previous to this cycle I've always sat on the side and been snarky, not really committing to any vision because nothing appealed. After this cycle I am immensely motivated to be involved in the local and state level as well as to participate and advocate at a national level.
    outstanding, doc. improvements will not happen over night. but if more people had your attitude, it WILL happen.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  29. Thanked knuckleboner for this KICKASS post:

    Dr. Love (03-17-2012)


  30. #1624
    Rice Cooker
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    knuckleboner's Avatar
    Member No
    120
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-07-2024 @ 03:10 PM
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    2,927
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 241 Times in 190 Posts


    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Jagermeister View Post
    Here is what I think. I think anybody is an improvement to Obama. This dick head is still convinced the road to lower gas prices is reducing dependency on oil.
    of course, he's producing more U.S. oil than bush ever did. but i guess the republican talking point still holds...

  31. #1625
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Great news on the delegate front!

    Ron Paul is sweeping various counties/districts as his supporters get ready for the state conventions.

    Here's a recount of the county caucus in King County (seattle, I believe), WA:

    Right off the bat it was evident that Paul supporters were the majority, around 120 of the 222 delegates. So when it came time to replace the temporary chairman with a permanent one, the Paul voters won and put in their candidate who in turn was able to reappoint the rest of the administrative positions (teller, secretary, sergeant at arms, etc.). This pissed off the Romney people immensely, and a woman at their table got up and ran out with two boxes (which we later learned had our bubble sheet ballots) she was stopped by a Paul supporter who asked what she was carrying, and she said it was 'republican property and they couldn't have it' . Everyone at the caucus was a republican…

    So it comes time to vote, and the new chairman asks for the ballots and there is no response from the people who organized the caucus. Then they said that there were no ballots. Then they said that the candidate list that we were given WAS the ballot (it was just a list of all the electable delegates, ). They were doing this because they knew there were no other ballots, so we would have to resort to some sort of public vote (which is illegal by state GOP rules) this would invalidate all delegates from our District. The language of the GOP rule was that it had to be a printed ballot with all the delegates names on it, which the delegate list qualified as. So the chairman decided to declare the list a valid ballot and we would circle the candidates we were voting for. Several Romney supporters protested this saying that they had marked on the ballots, and had fears multiple ballots would be turned in. After some lengthy arguments over bylaws and robert's rules, they decided that authorized tellers, (comprised of delegates from all 4 factions) would collect the ballots and mark on our credentials stickers that we had turned in one. After the votes were tallied, all of the people in the Ron Paul slate (group promoted by the party to fill the exact number of spots, so as not to split their vote) had 110+ votes, while the Romney slate were all around 70-85. A motion was brought to, in the name of speeding things up, appoint the next 21 highest vote receivers as the alternates. This motion failed by a majority vote. After another lengthy discussion on weather the alternate candidates would get to speak prior to voting, and a fellow paul supporter (not from the district) running to Kinkos to print alternate ballots, Ron Paul ended up with all the delegates and all of the alternates. This was all accomplished by having about 55% of the vote.

    TL,DR Ron Paul won all the delegates and alternates in district 36 of King County, Washington State
    Here's what the reports are for today:

    WA:

    36th district, King County: RP wins all 21 delegates, all alternates, supporters take over all GOP offices for that county
    46th district, King Country: RP wins all 20 delegates


    MN:

    60th district - RP takes all delegates for the congressional and state conventions


    MO:

    Taney County - RP takes all 22 delegates
    Greene County - Paul 65 Romney 40 Santorum 6
    Jasper County - Santorum 24, Paul 11, Romney 7, Newt 3
    Franklin County - RP gets 24/40 delegates (60%)
    Christian County - Santorum takes all 37 delegates
    Buchanan County - Santorum takes all delegate (no count given) - "The committee were all Santorum supporters and had all the delegates preselected and gave no chance for any other slates to be nominated."
    St. Charles County - no delegates selected - "They tried to do that in St Charles CO but when Romney and Paul supporters were outraged the meeting was adjourned with nothing completed. I'll post details as soon as I can."
    Hadley township (St. Louis) - 3 Romney 2 Santorum 2 Paul 1 Gingrich
    Meramac (St. Louis) - Santorum took all delegates (no count given)
    Cole County - RP 26, Romney 44
    Creve Coeur (St. Louis) - Romney takes 12 all delegates


    Obviously not comprehensive, but nice to see him overperforming vs the straw poll. Looking at Missouri, it looks like RP got x of the y delegates (%) of what was posted about today!

    For example, here's Missouri's totals from this sample set:

    Ron Paul - 150 (38%)
    Mitt Romney - 113 (29%)
    Rick Santorum - 116 (30%)
    Newt Gingrich - 6 (<1%)

    Numbers won't add up to 100% because of rounding. From what I've been reading most caucuses around all the caucus states are going either like this (with RP people controlling them) or with a lot of arguing and disregard for the rules. In most cases, the RP people represent a very large part of the caucus proceedings, if not the majority.

    I'm looking forward to seeing what the numbers are after the state conventions, and if they try to subvert the process to keep RP from getting any delegates.

  32. #1626
    Loon
    SUPER MODERATOR

    Nickdfresh's Avatar
    Member No
    8719
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:40 AM
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    49,064
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    3,454
    Thanked 4,562 Times in 3,449 Posts


    Rep Power
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    For such an aggressive personality you use a lot of passive language. Yes, there is a difference. I am not sure you (or I) care if there is one. Neither of us resist the urge to be dicks in our own way. Mine is more snide and yours is more personally attacking. Who gives a shit.
    Fair enough...but you know I gotz nothing but love for you Dr. Loves...

    Context... you eventually give enough of it for me to piece together your train of thought if I sift beyond the hyperbole and personal attacks enough.

    You should ask yourself why it takes so many posts from you for someone else to get to the crux of your point (assuming it was, and assuming you had one).
    Part of your style is in fact ignoring a point you'd rather not discuss and just dismissing away what is a major chink in Ron Paul's libertarian armor...

    And what's his stance on legislating morality? The federal government shouldn't be involved.
    Which means that the tyranny can just be shifted to individual state gov'ts and municipalities. Sort of like Segregation...

    Practically all violent crime is handled at the state level.
    You may be right, but I'd like to see the stats on that one. However, I can tell you I was just discussing a local case (see David Cain Tree Service for more info) where some psychotic asshole basically terrorized an entire town to the extent that it took a federal task force to take him down. Major violent crimes by more powerful criminal syndicates drawing on large resources are prosecuted by the feds...

    Congressman, not senator. One of the only few that returns a fair portion of his budget every year to the treasury. And I don't think you get the whole concept of liberty. Would he act as president to stop a state from violently harming its citizenry? I believe he would. It is consistent with the philosophy, which is pretty straightforward: You can do what you want so long as you don't harm someone else in doing it. When that occurs, the government steps in to protect the people.
    I'm pretty sure I get the concept of liberty, and it applies to women, not just males. Would Ron Paul intervene? He probably would or would be deposed via some form of impeachment. However, one must also reckon what has happened in history with those of Ron Paul's beliefs of Laize Faire. The U.S. suffered much more in the Great Depression largely because of the inaction by the Hoover Admin. And since it is St. Patrick's weekend, I'd also point out the Irish Potato Famine of 1845-52 was vastly worsened by the British gov'ts notion that government has no place in relief efforts, and that was the job of charities. Tens of thousands perished or were forced to emigrate from their homes as a result.

    You've fixated on abortion as an area of hypocrisy (which I disagree with). The only other things we've discussed is philosophy on where federal and state boundaries lie. So I don't think we're talking about much more than a single position.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy...

    I think you mistake my responses. I am completely happy to speak candidly and reasonably. That is by far the exception around here. No one is interested in a real debate. My responses aren't personal attacks, they are parody of the people involved in the conversation.

    Your responses are in the eye of the beholder. Once one write something, he or she loses complete ownership of the syntax...

    There's the rhetorical question/red herring.

    Maybe when you are finally queefed out of that vagina you live in, and stop giving handjobs for handouts while obama fucks you in your asshole, you can figure out why.



    This over-the-top, hyperbolic, personal-attack thing is going to take some time to get just right.
    Oh my Dr. Love, what was ever on your mind this evening? Being in a vagina is kind of nice, I don't give handjobs for handouts, but if I did, it really wouldn't be a "handout" since I earned it! And I don't think Obama has ever tried to fuck my asshole. In fact, I support his policies of middle class tax breaks while striving for a fair tax burden...
    Last edited by Nickdfresh; 03-18-2012 at 11:04 AM.

  33. #1627
    Kill A Commie For Mommy
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Kristy's Avatar
    Member No
    7609
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:50 PM
    Location
    Denver, Colo
    Posts
    16,290
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,860
    Thanked 2,750 Times in 2,061 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    64
    Ron Paul 2012. What an inevitable reality.

    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  34. #1628
    Kill A Commie For Mommy
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Kristy's Avatar
    Member No
    7609
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:50 PM
    Location
    Denver, Colo
    Posts
    16,290
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,860
    Thanked 2,750 Times in 2,061 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post

    Regardless of the vote counts, it really makes me happy to see so many people turn out to hear the ideas.

    Those are not people those are a bunch of over-privileged 20-something college grads pissed off beacuse they can't find a job, or if they do find a job, feel they are entitled to a minimum of $65K/y. Wonder how many of them served as grunts in Iraq, much less ever wondered where their next meal came from. Paul is nothing more than a limp-wristed daddy figure to these miscreants. And what "ideals" does Paul have? Is he going to abolish the Fed for good? No? Maybe give reprieve on student loans for these shitheads? No? Make healthcare affordable for all? No? So where does this mindset of Paul having some sort of Utopian future for America come from? Paul is noting more than another rich, white Rethuglican pandering a non-religious angle to America's dumbed-down youth for votes. He's not going to change a single thing.

  35. #1629
    Kill A Commie For Mommy
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Kristy's Avatar
    Member No
    7609
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:50 PM
    Location
    Denver, Colo
    Posts
    16,290
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,860
    Thanked 2,750 Times in 2,061 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickdfresh View Post
    Okay.



    I'm saying Ron Paul can "disagree" all he wants, but after that I lost you as well...





    You mean like posting Ron Paul meme pics?



    Check your nonsensical third sentence in your post, then get back to me on making sense...

    You're too much of a pussy to have any real conversation. You long ago stated that you 'don't care about abortion' in order to stifle any discussion. But the fact is that Ron Paul if a bit of a frothing and disingenuous hypocrite based on his belief that government should regulate womens' bodies. But you don't care about that, do you? You simply ignore what you find inconvenient...
    Your quote & paste counter-arguments are really starting to get old, Nick. Please fuck off.

  36. #1630
    Head Fluffer
    Headly1984's Avatar
    Member No
    27001
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Online
    01-01-2016 @ 03:22 AM
    Location
    CNY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    364
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 42 Times in 32 Posts


    Rep Power
    13
    - Ron Paul has support of some of the troops who are sick of being part of longer rotations in a currently never ending war with expanding fields of engagement

    How long was WWII ? How man yrs has Gulf I, Gulf II, Afghanistan been ? and maybe next Iran, oh yeah, Libya - maybe Syria .. Are we the UN ? what an amazing coalition we have with US - UK lol! wow 2 out of how many nations ?

    - Thank Ron Paul for being a person of real opinion unlike Mitt the weather vain or McOld in the last election or Barry shallow elected for skin color by many who thought why not him, lets try something different - it was him or Gramps - what a selection last time ..

    this election too - who picks these winners Mitt? Santorum? oh man - if these guys are the best lets just let the Military run the country like Egypt lol!

    Ron Paul is if nothing else, injecting debate and opinion into the process again and his grass roots supporters may just keep the GOP honest for the next couple of yrs - I hope he gets to the convention and gets the VP or some concession of fiscal matters by whoever gets the nod

    Why was it after the bubble crash - after TARP - which never did purchase troubled assets as a relief program, why was the FED never audited to see where it placed its bets regarding our market - when fannie mae's finances were looked at we saw that they were placing bets on home owners defaulting contrary to the mission of Fannie Mae -oops!

    How do we know what our nations bank is doing if we are not allowed to audit them ?
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  37. Thanked Headly1984 for this KICKASS post:

    Dr. Love (03-18-2012)


  38. #1631
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Oh, I love you too nick. :P

    I disagree but I understand where you are coming from. I agree it's not so simple, but I still like a lot of the ideas, and I like hearing someone speak about solving problems rather than prolonging them, bring honest about how they see the world instead of using talking points, and answering questions directly instead of using sound bites.

    I don't think he has all the answers and I don't think he is right on everything but I do think he is more genuine than the rest.

  39. Thanked Dr. Love for this KICKASS post:

    Nickdfresh (03-18-2012)


  40. #1632
    Loon
    SUPER MODERATOR

    Nickdfresh's Avatar
    Member No
    8719
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:40 AM
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    49,064
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    3,454
    Thanked 4,562 Times in 3,449 Posts


    Rep Power
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Kristy View Post
    Your quote & paste counter-arguments are really starting to get old, Nick. Please fuck off.
    Okay, I'll fuck off then. But only because you asked nicely...

  41. #1633
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by Kristy View Post
    Those are not people those are a bunch of over-privileged 20-something college grads pissed off beacuse they can't find a job, or if they do find a job, feel they are entitled to a minimum of $65K/y. Wonder how many of them served as grunts in Iraq, much less ever wondered where their next meal came from. Paul is nothing more than a limp-wristed daddy figure to these miscreants. And what "ideals" does Paul have? Is he going to abolish the Fed for good? No? Maybe give reprieve on student loans for these shitheads? No? Make healthcare affordable for all? No? So where does this mindset of Paul having some sort of Utopian future for America come from? Paul is noting more than another rich, white Rethuglican pandering a non-religious angle to America's dumbed-down youth for votes. He's not going to change a single thing.
    Those aren't people, huh. You do realize that Ron Paul's campaign receives more contributions from the military than all of the other candidates (including the President) combined, right?

    RP's plan is fairly straight forward - give people the freedom to choose how to live their lives and the accountability that goes along with it. Think about what that means if you apply it to every question you asked.

    Aside form that, yes, he will try to abolish the fed. His audit bill is only 4 cosponsors away from a majority in the House.

    If you listen to what he says and proposes, I highly doubt it's pandering. Pandering is telling someone you're going to give them everything they want. Ron Paul's plan is a bitter pill to swallow -- basically that he's going to start taking government control of things away and return that control to the people, which is practically the opposite of saying that the government will give you everything you want.

  42. #1634
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Kristy View Post
    Ron Paul 2012. What an inevitable reality.

    We can give Ron the same battery powered heart pump Dick Cheney has to keep him going.

  43. #1635
    Kill A Commie For Mommy
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Kristy's Avatar
    Member No
    7609
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:50 PM
    Location
    Denver, Colo
    Posts
    16,290
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,860
    Thanked 2,750 Times in 2,061 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    Those aren't people, huh. You do realize that Ron Paul's campaign receives more contributions from the military than all of the other candidates (including the President) combined, right?

    RP's plan is fairly straight forward - give people the freedom to choose how to live their lives and the accountability that goes along with it. Think about what that means if you apply it to every question you asked.

    Aside form that, yes, he will try to abolish the fed. His audit bill is only 4 cosponsors away from a majority in the House.

    If you listen to what he says and proposes, I highly doubt it's pandering. Pandering is telling someone you're going to give them everything they want. Ron Paul's plan is a bitter pill to swallow -- basically that he's going to start taking government control of things away and return that control to the people, which is practically the opposite of saying that the government will give you everything you want.
    Wasn't Obama pretty saying the same 4 years ago? Isn't that how you win the heart of a liberal - tell them what they want to hear? The definition of pandering. You say Paul takes in more contribution for the military? Are we talking the industry complex or ex disgruntled vets? Even if grandpa was elected, I doubt he would end the Fed in 4 years, give reprieve to a single student college loan or let anyone live their life to their own accountability. He's just another Rethuglican puppet.

  44. #1636
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    From active duty members of the military. And you're right, RP wouldn't give any student loan relief. He's pretty clear about that.

    Obama wasn't saying he'd reduce government involvement in nearly anything that I can remember (correct me if I'm wrong).

    RP is pretty much unanimously agreed upon to be genuine and would try to uphold his interpretation of the constitution. My guess is that a RP presidency would result in a lot of veto threats (and vetoes). He could work to get things done on both sides of the aisle (as he agrees with issues important to both sides). There would certainly be a risk that Congress would get a taste for overriding his vetoes.

    If he connected with the voters, hopefully he'd be able to get other like-minded libertarians elected as well. But it's all a great stretch of the imagination; He likely won't get elected. Right now it's about attention and changing the party from within. Given what I read about caucses and precinct/district/county GOP meetings... it's going to be a huuuge fight.

  45. #1637
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Politicians who have an 18% approval rating get elected 95% of the time. What this means there is no accountability. I personally feel the political process is broken as is. Once we amended the constitution to where senators were elected and not appointed by state legislatures it made the senate a lifetime job. Hell, 60% of our budget is spent inside the executive branch on agencies that have no public accountability.

    We need to get rid of the party system and have a system where the candidates meet two months before the election and then we have a series of elections locally until one is finally chosen and they sign a contract that makes them agree to serve the people in specific ways and if they violate the contract they can be removed from office.

    www.goooh.com
    Last edited by Nitro Express; 03-18-2012 at 10:03 PM.

  46. #1638
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Kristy View Post
    Wasn't Obama pretty saying the same 4 years ago? Isn't that how you win the heart of a liberal - tell them what they want to hear? The definition of pandering. You say Paul takes in more contribution for the military? Are we talking the industry complex or ex disgruntled vets? Even if grandpa was elected, I doubt he would end the Fed in 4 years, give reprieve to a single student college loan or let anyone live their life to their own accountability. He's just another Rethuglican puppet.
    You don't end the FED you flank it. The president by executive order can issue money out of the US Treasury Department. When you have Ben Bernanke running the presses non stop and he's only loaning to the big boys, the president can send the money to the smaller banks that serve you and I. You run that first and then you work on auditing the FED.

  47. #1639
    Kill A Commie For Mommy
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Kristy's Avatar
    Member No
    7609
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:50 PM
    Location
    Denver, Colo
    Posts
    16,290
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,860
    Thanked 2,750 Times in 2,061 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post

    Obama wasn't saying he'd reduce government involvement in nearly anything that I can remember (correct me if I'm wrong).
    Obama was saying what was relevant in 2008: economy, Gitmo, Iraq, jobs. Obama sold the American people one of the biggest lies of all time: that government can solve problems if you throw enough money at them - the mindset of a liberal. And you're right right, Obama has chipped away more at the Constitution that makes Bush "Monkey Boy" Junior blush. Now it's the economy on the verge of collapse, Afghanistan/Iran, jobs and a lot of fresh college grads who can't find a job, or like I said, believe they are entitled to a pay that they haven't deserved while wanting their outrageous student loans defaulted on. Out of all the Rethuglicans running, Paul seems the most sane and mature and his contingent of voters are more educated and aware of what in the fuck is going on not only in this country but the world as well although I find their agenda to be quite selfish. It's sad that the Rethuglican party is running on the same outdated principles of tax breaks for the uber rich (i.e., corporations are people, too), religiosity and pseudo-patriotism. I will give credit to Paul in that he does genuinely see beyond such bullshit in which case, he's really a Libertarian in wolf's clothing. He would stand a better chance of winning if he ran as one.

  48. #1640
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    The government has just become a enforcer, a holding company, and collection agency for some corporate and banking interests. The mistake people are making is they get stuck on the social issues that divide us. What made the Tea Party fail is they got political and the Republicans lapped them up. The only kind of movement that is going to work is one that stays non-partisan and focuses on restoring basic constitutional rights. If it gets into social politics, it's ruined. We need to stop arguing about the small shit and just focus on the big simple shit together and then we can turn things around.

    Personally I don't want much from the government. Just the basics. Bridges, roads, water works, sewers and those things. Much is provided by the local government. I do like the interstate system and enjoy the cheap electricity that comes from federally managed dams. Other than that I can take care of myself thank you. I won't be a big load on the system so I want to keep more of my money to spend as I please because I earned it. It's mine. We've tried the big government thing and it's been a total failure for the most part. Most these agencies do nothing for us now and they suck up 60% of our yearly budget. The Department of Energy has done nothing to change the energy situation for the better. Maybe some of the EPA and FDA stuff can be ran at the state level by a committee of state governors over seeing it. We need to spread the power out because having it all condensed into the executive branch is being abused.

    Ron Paul only has so much money to spend on his campaign. He doesn't have deep pockets. He chose to run as a Republican because by doing so it can get him on all the country ballots in the country. If you run as an independent you have so spend a fortune to get on each ballot. Ralph Nader explained the process and he has to spend millions of dollars and have a big staff of people. I think Ron is trying to do two things here. Win the presidency running a grass roots internet campaign and bring attention to all the corruption in the Republican Party. We will see how his delegate strategy pays off. In some of these caucuses the delegates aren't chosen until months after the voting is done.
    Last edited by Nitro Express; 03-19-2012 at 02:17 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 5 Most Kickass CVH Songs
    By OfficerJimmy in forum VH/DLR Songs And Albums
    Replies: 122
    Last Post: 10-15-2012, 06:36 AM
  2. Kickass Photography
    By Hardrock69 in forum Max's Non VH/DLR Related Stuff
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-06-2010, 09:58 PM
  3. Paul Rodgers + Paul Stanley = WEIRD!!
    By rustoffa in forum House of Music
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-14-2007, 09:56 PM
  4. vh day kickass
    By sammysucks65 in forum House of Music
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-21-2005, 08:44 PM
  5. Kickass Websites!
    By ALMOSTsaved in forum Max's Non VH/DLR Related Stuff
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-19-2004, 11:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •