Nothing changes, except the myths and half-truths I see everyone who has a hard-on for Ron Paul perpetuating in their masturbatory fantasies of Paul as the rebel, underdog outsider (whose served years in congress). And who only has a few members of the military voting for him and giving him their money.
Personally, I don't give a fuck who you vote for, but stop the silly charade of vanity and stop picking apart everything you hate about Obama while completely, dutifully ignoring all of the logical inconsistencies in Paul...
I get it! Paul is a spry geriatric son of God and a result of an immaculate conception. He walks on water, and will form a utopia spoken of only high highhandedly in the Communist Manifesto of when the governments of the world magically melt away.
But personally, I think he might be full of shit and completely ineffectual...
You sound the way I did when Obama was running the first time. I wasn't against having a black president but what had me shaking my head was people literally drinking the Kool Aid and losing their minds over the guy. That is never good. It's always good to be cautious and skeptical of any candidate.
I'd like Nick to take all the current "major" presidential contenders from the following list and order them from Most Corrupt to Least Corrupt.
President Obama
Speaker Gingrich
Congressman Paul
Senator Santorum
Governor Romney
I'm very interested to see where he ranks each in comparison to the other.
I don't know. But then, no one is continually lying about the amount of money he has in the warchest....
I think a good cure for part of the problem would be putting term limits on congressmen and forbidding federal employees from accepting lobbyist $$$.
If the president can only serve two terms, why are congressmen like Barney Frank allowed to be there for thirty years?
I'll let you provide the definition and the rankings
Let's face it. It was a big part of what all the excitement was about. You had a black candidate that looked like they finally could win and it was historical. Then of course if you criticized the guy, there was a certain group that would accuse you of not wanting a black president. So Obama did get a lot of special treatment another candidate would have not gotten. He was more protected by the press and others. Now it's history and that part of our past is done with. Now anyone that does run won't be anything special because we have already broken that barrier so I see it as a good thing because now we can focus on issues more than so and so is a woman, black, hispanic or whatever. It's a good thing.
These are the people you have to worry about.
I don't understand all the stuff you see about Obama being corrupt. Ineffective yes but what is the motivation for him to be corrupt money wise? He lives in a guilded cage. If he wants to go back to Chicago they close all the streets for a few blocks around his house and put black drapes over the windows to stop snipers. If he goes to Hawaii to go scuba diving they close the beach, the airspace above the beach and 30 Secret Service guys with underwater guns get in the sea with him.
When he retires he retains all sorts of shit, he gets a big pension and knows that he can make a few million a year salary from doing a dozen speeches a year. Money is not an issue for him.
I'm complaining more the older I get. I look back at Bush and I see a guy who never saw a spending bill he didn't like, got us involved in too much nation building, and generally was just a disappointment.
Obama said "get the special interests out of politics" back in 2007. Here we are in 2012 and he's just the same as all the other ones who rolled through. No "hope and change", just "more of the same". He's like George Bush on steroids.
In this case, money is only a means to an end ... the real goal is power. That's the goal for everyone that wants to become President. To be powerful. What they do with that power, how they go about getting that power, what bargains they make to get the money to get the power ... that's what you can judge about how corrupt they are. When politicians (any of them, including Ron Paul) sell out the people to appeal to a constituency that helps them get elected, or re-elected, that is corrupt behavior.
They are all corrupt to some degree or another. It just depends on how they get the power, and what they do with it once they get it.
Remember during the debate with McCain, Obama said:
"We need to eliminate a whole host of programs that don't work. And I want to go through the federal budget line by line, page by page, programs that don't work, we should cut. Programs that we need, we should make them work better."
What has he cut? He doubled down on everything. What's he going to add to the federal debt after one term? $6 trillion? Speaking of that, why hasn't Harry Reid passed a budget in the Senate in over 900 days? Isn't that dereliction of duty?
I think the big corruption in US politics is in plain view, it's campaign funding.
A system where you need to spend 5 hours a day the whole time you are in office begging money for your next campaign is completely insane. Shitty job too, so even if they aren't affected by who gives them money by definition you are going to get politicians who are good at getting money out of people for campaign funds which is not necessarily the same kind of person who is good at governing.
I agree (and Ron Paul doesn't ... gasp!! I'm turning a blind eye again!!)
I'll take a shot at this.... from most to least corrupt....
Newt
Mittens
Google Boy
Barry
Paul
Now that said, he's still a Randtard, and would still destroy this country, if not held back by a solid LIBERAL majority in both houses of Congress.
It may be true that "he can't be bought". But when the very things he professes to believe in - right wing Libertarianism - removes all regulation and kills half the government, they don't have to buy him. He's already theirs for free. Unless there's a Congress that can stop him from doing so.
Eat Us And Smile
Cenk For America 2024!!
Justice Democrats
"If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992
So why doesn't GE and other major corporations align behind him and use their corporate billions and media machines to put him in the Presidency?
Because he can't win...
oh, how could I forget!
Because GE is also a "defense" contractor, and they are making big piles of money off the Chimp's wars (and the fact that Obama kept them going). They like hearing Newt, Froth boy, and the dog abuser ranting about how they can't wait to start World War III in Iran.
Ron Paul's no use to the "defense" industry, but that would be the obvious execption to the corporate love of his total deregulation fantasies.
I've had dealings with GE over the years and while I've met people there I get on with the company ethos is fucking harsh.
They sack people not for being bad at their jobs but just for not being as good at their jobs as other people. For example they do shit like culls whereby they just sack their bottom 10% of people even of they have been doing ok. Very Glengarry Glen Ross.
Any time I wonder what I am doing without any security ducking and diving running my own little company with no company pension or security I only need to talk for 5 minutes to a GE person to remind me why.
Personally I think harsh company ethos like that is self defeating in the same way the Nazi's were doomed because they were cunts. I'm no expert and don't want to be but anecdotally I think fear is very bad for organisations and I can almost smell it when I meet GE people.
Sorry I've wandered off topic completely...
There are currently 6 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 6 guests)