Ron Paul - 1 Week, 1 Million Dollars

[RenegadeRick]

Ron Paul raised over 1 million dollars in campaign contributions in less than 1 week.
Not special interest contributions. This came from the hard-earned money of the American people.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

And, no I am not personally responsible. :rolleyes:
(I did send in a little money though.)

[jimmydean]

You and n8 both, right?

[RenegadeRick]

You and n8 both, right?

I think n8 must have sent in $1,999,900.00 because I only sent in another inefficiently campaign bankrupting $100 contribution.

[BurlyShirley]

What is it all the hippies like about this guy? His fencing out of the hispandex or his love of assault weapons? And what's his stance on healthcare? That "health freedom" link isnt going to cut it for me.

[skatetokil]

He wants to limit the power of the federal government. The state where you live can enact all the expansive entitlement policies it wants if thats what your people vote for. Just don't expect the rest of the country to kick in for it.

[Jeremy R]

What is it all the hippies like about this guy? His fencing out of the hispandex or his love of assault weapons? And what's his stance on healthcare? That "health freedom" link isnt going to cut it for me.

He puts up anti-establishment signs everywhere.
They look all ghetto and not mass produced.
Hippies eat that $hit up.:disgust1:

[BurlyShirley]

He wants to limit the power of the federal government. The state where you live can enact all the expansive entitlement policies it wants if thats what your people vote for. Just don't expect the rest of the country to kick in for it.

Awesome.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qosIg22dw4Q

[BurlyShirley]

So really, no one has anything to add here? I dont get the hype.

[H8R]

Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record:

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.


If he was elected he'd be executed a week after being sworn in.

[BurlyShirley]

So he's just a states-rightsist libertarian who calls himself republican. Fair enough I suppose, but I still dont get why the very liberal are all over this guy's jockstrap.

[H8R]

So he's just a states-rightsist libertarian who calls himself republican. Fair enough I suppose, but I still dont get why the very liberal are all over this guy's jockstrap.

He's old school republican. The "feds get the fvck out of the state's business" type.

I'm sure sovereign citizen groups and state militias are creaming there pants over someone like him.

[ohio]

I still dont get why the very liberal are all over this guy's jockstrap.

Anti-war republican. That's all it takes.

[DavidMakalaster]

He's a real Republican. The neo-cons have warped what the GOP stands for. He's also the only hope for a GOP win. Liberals and moderates will vote for him. That's more than can be said for any other republican.

[Westy]

He's a real Republican. The neo-cons have warped what the GOP stands for. He's also the only hope for a GOP win. Liberals and moderates will vote for him. That's more than can be said for any other republican.

But Republicans will not vote for him. If he can't make it out of the primaries he'll never make it to the oval office.

[SkaredShtles]

The South shall RISE AGAIN!! :p

[BurlyShirley]

The South shall RISE AGAIN!! :p

Just wednesday I saw this girl wearing a shirt that says "The more I learn about Yankess, the more I wonder how WE lost the war" and of course this was overlayed on a rebel flag background.
WTF are you even talking about beyotch?

[SkaredShtles]

Just wednesday I saw this girl wearing a shirt that says "The more I learn about Yankess, the more I wonder how WE lost the war" and of course this was overlayed on a rebel flag background.
WTF are you even talking about beyotch?
States' Rights. ;)

[BurlyShirley]

I wonder if the hippies know, in general, that states rightist types hate things like:

National Parks
National Forests
NEPA
Bureau of Land Management
Wild and Scenic Rivers
...the list goes on.

Im taking a law class at the moment where Im learning alot about the different acts that created the Natl. parks and all that stuff, the biggest opposition has been from the western republican, states rights types that hate federal ownership of land of any kind.

[Westy]

Just wednesday I saw this girl wearing a shirt that says "The more I learn about Yankess, the more I wonder how WE lost the war" and of course this was overlayed on a rebel flag background.
WTF are you even talking about beyotch?

She probably reckoned that all that searchin for mates outside a kin that they wouldn't have had no time to learn no shoot'n.

[RenegadeRick]

Anti-war republican. That's all it takes.

Amen!

All the other republicans are pro-war. Leading democrats are too. :disgust1:
I can think of no more important issue than bringing this dog-dammmed mutherfunkin stoopid corrupt waste of lives and cash to an end.

Plus, I am all for being left the motherfunk alone. :clapping:

[RenegadeRick]

I wonder if the hippies know, in general, that states rightist types hate things like:

National Parks
National Forests
NEPA
Bureau of Land Management
Wild and Scenic Rivers
...the list goes on.


I am all for supporting nature, but why can't state and local governments be responsible for such things?

Those folks are closer to their electorate and therefore more accountable to them. Why should NY tax dollars go to support some big hole in the AZ desert? I understand this hole in question is a nice and pretty hole, but it would still be there without any cash outlay as long as the LOCAL government blocked development. If the local government failed to see the wisdom of protecting said hole, then they would have their constituency to answer to. For all I know, their constituency would actually support development in said hole and they would be perfectly within their rights to do so if they saw fit.

I believe in local solutions for local issues. And just think of the revenue that could be generated by the Grand Canyon Burro Burger Bistro Resort and Spa (if that is what the people wanted).

[SkaredShtles]

I am all for supporting nature, but why can't state and local governments be responsible for such things?

Those folks are closer to their electorate and therefore more accountable to them. Why should NY tax dollars go to support some big hole in the AZ desert? I understand this hole in question is a nice and pretty hole, but it would still be there without any cash outlay as long as the LOCAL government blocked development. If the local government failed to see the wisdom of protecting said hole, then they would have their constituency to answer to. For all I know, their constituency would actually support development in said hole and they would be perfectly within their rights to do so if they saw fit.

I believe in local solutions for local issues. And just think of the revenue that could be generated by the Grand Canyon Burro Burger Bistro Resort and Spa (if that is what the people wanted).
Some times such things should not be left to the states. I'd hate to see what the Tetons and Yellowstone might be with jurisdiction falling solely with Wyoming. :disgust1:

It's bad enough the way things are going with the commercialization of the National Parks.

I think we have, as a nation, a responsibility for maintaining national public lands.

[BurlyShirley]

[QUOTE=RenegadeRick;2686489]I am all for supporting nature, but why can't state and local governments be responsible for such things?

At one point they were, and what you saw was the decline of natural resources, from fish and game to timber across the country. Also, compare your local state park to the nearest national park if you want to see the difference in quality of how the states vs. the feds treat natural resources.

Those folks are closer to their electorate and therefore more accountable to them. Why should NY tax dollars go to support some big hole in the AZ desert? I understand this hole in question is a nice and pretty hole, but it would still be there without any cash outlay as long as the LOCAL government blocked development. If the local government failed to see the wisdom of protecting said hole, then they would have their constituency to answer to. For all I know, their constituency would actually support development in said hole and they would be perfectly within their rights to do so if they saw fit.
Some "treasures" IMO belong to humanity, and not simply the constituents of a particular voting district. The grand canyon being a perfect example. If locals decide to make it a trash dump, that's not ok just because they voted it so. That is actually a great description of the need for federal oversight on such matters.
Also, the people of New York, the citizens anyway, are as of now, part owners of the Natl. Parks and that's a good thing and also why their tax dollars should be sent in that direction. Imagine the state of Wyoming with little to no industry trying to set aside money for conservation....ain't happening w/ out federal help. There is no real economy there anymore to be so "frivilous" with money.



I believe in local solutions for local issues. And just think of the revenue that could be generated by the Grand Canyon Burro Burger Bistro Resort and Spa (if that is what the people wanted).

Because of the parks, tons of those kinds of places do generate revenue. Go to any town outside a national park, and they literally live off the tourism provided by the fed gov't. And also, the parks system is just one system of many that work better on a federal level than on a state.

[RenegadeRick]

I think we have, as a nation, a responsibility for maintaining national public lands.
I can support this position, and I agree that this is a real problem as well:

It's bad enough the way things are going with the commercialization of the National Parks.
But who can you complain to if the Federal Government wants to suck the oil out of Fruita, CO?

It's not as if they have to listen to you. You are no more than a teensy fly on their radar.

[SkaredShtles]

I can support this position, and I agree that this is a real problem as well:

But who can you complain to if the Federal Government wants to suck the oil out of Fruita, CO?
WTF are you talking about? :confused:

[RenegadeRick]

WTF are you talking about? :confused:

you are joking, right?

http://www.imba.com/news/action_alerts/04_06/04_25_fruita.html
http://www.trailcentral.com/dirt/index.php?key=20

I am willing to concede that maybe natural resources are better managed by the feds...
just want to make the point that it is difficult to complain to a distant authority in most situations.

[BurlyShirley]

you are joking, right?


http://www.trailcentral.com/dirt/index.php?key=20

BLM lands are a different matter altogether, than a Natl. Park or forest, and dont belong to the state at all either. If you ask me though, having those lands in the BLM's hands is still better than in the hands of private developers in most cases.

[SkaredShtles]

you are joking, right?

http://www.imba.com/news/action_alerts/04_06/04_25_fruita.html
http://www.trailcentral.com/dirt/index.php?key=20

I am willing to concede that maybe natural resources are better managed by the feds...
just want to make the point that it is difficult to complain to a distant authority in most situations.
Jeezus, man - Fruita ain't no National Park. Nor should it be, IMO. This is why we have local, state, and federal oversight of lands such as these.

I personally don't think the impact would be all that huge if they worked with the local groups to minimize impact. Those gas wells are really quite innocuous once they get the drilling done.

Besides - I need natural gas to heat my house. :thumb:

[ohio]

I am all for supporting nature, but why can't state and local governments be responsible for such things?

Because as soon as they're cash-strapped, they'll log Yellowstone. Places like that are a national treasure, and the whole country hurts when they're lost. There's a reason it's the UNITED States.

edit: ****, I guess i should read everyone else's responses before i write my own.

[SkaredShtles]

Because as soon as they're cash-strapped, they'll log Yellowstone. Places like that are a national treasure, and the whole country hurts when they're lost. There's a reason it's the UNITED States.

edit: ****, I guess i should read everyone else's responses before i write my own.
Yeah, dumba$$. Get with the program. :p

[OrthoPT]

Because as soon as they're cash-strapped, they'll log Yellowstone. Places like that are a national treasure, and the whole country hurts when they're lost. There's a reason it's the UNITED States.

edit: ****, I guess i should read everyone else's responses before i write my own.

OMG! I just agreed with you. Mark your calendars, everybody! :p

[DavidMakalaster]

But Republicans will not vote for him. If he can't make it out of the primaries he'll never make it to the oval office.

I guess the neo-cons will vote for Hillary then?

[OrthoPT]

I guess the neo-cons will vote for Hillary then?

yeah, that's what we need... :twitch:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=933655066956595162&q=snl+hillary&total=105&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

[N8]

I am only voting in this election to vote against hillary otherwise i have no care

[ummbikes]

BLM lands are a different matter altogether, than a Natl. Park or forest, and dont belong to the state at all either. If you ask me though, having those lands in the BLM's hands is still better than in the hands of private developers in most cases.


When did you turn into a friggin hippie?

[RenegadeRick]

If so, today is the day to donate to the campaign at http://ronpaul2008.com.

Today, ThisNovember5th (http://www.thisnovember5th.com/), has organized a donation day with the goal of raising $10,000,000 for Ron Paul's campaign in a single day.

At this site http://ronpaulgraphs.com/nov_5_extended_total.html you can watch the donation progress in real time. As of this posting it is at $850,000 collected today. At this rate it seems that the campaign will easily collect over $1,000,000 today, not in a week, TODAY.

If you believe in an end to this fiasco of a war and a return to constitutional government, now is the time to step up. Every little bit helps.

Oh and to save you the trouble, here is our friend Mr. :spam:.
But it is :spam: for the end of the IRS. A worthy cause indeed.

Thanks for listening :monkey:s. Donate today!

[$tinkle]

i found one of your tactics to reach your financial goals: oops! (http://shadowdemocracy.wordpress.com/2007/11/05/ron-paul-campaign-possibly-stealing-credit-card-numbers-to-boost-fundraising/)
most candidates seem to attract a diverse group of people with common goals/ideals.

paulanesians are apeschyte ex-wife crazy.

[Transcend]

Oh and to save you the trouble, here is our friend Mr. :spam:.
But it is :spam: for the end of the IRS. A worthy cause indeed.

You keep thinking that. Another promise a politician has no intention and no chance of keeping.

[$tinkle]

oh, wait: today is guy fawkes day. gather round kids, let's sing a few lyrics (http://www.bcpl.net/~cbladey/guy/html/verse.html):“Don’t you remember the 5th of November
Is gunpowder treason and plot?
I don’t see the reason why gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot
A stick and a stake, for Queen Victoria’s Sake
I pray master give us a faggit
If you dont give us one well take two
The better for us and the worse for you” do you watch The Wall w/ your paulinesians every friday night while live blogging?

[stevew]

If so, today is the day to donate to the campaign at http://ronpaul2008.com.

Today, ThisNovember5th (http://www.thisnovember5th.com/), has organized a donation day with the goal of raising $10,000,000 for Ron Paul's campaign in a single day.

At this site http://ronpaulgraphs.com/nov_5_extended_total.html you can watch the donation progress in real time. As of this posting it is at $850,000 collected today. At this rate it seems that the campaign will easily collect over $1,000,000 today, not in a week, TODAY.

If you believe in an end to this fiasco of a war and a return to constitutional government, now is the time to step up. Every little bit helps.

Oh and to save you the trouble, here is our friend Mr. :spam:.
But it is :spam: for the end of the IRS. A worthy cause indeed.

Thanks for listening :monkey:s. Donate today!

I hope you are getting a cheerleaders uniform and some pom poms out of this.

[RenegadeRick]

i found one of your tactics to reach your financial goals: oops! (http://shadowdemocracy.wordpress.com/2007/11/05/ron-paul-campaign-possibly-stealing-credit-card-numbers-to-boost-fundraising/)
most candidates seem to attract a diverse group of people with common goals/ideals.

paulanesians are apeschyte ex-wife crazy.

It is a pretty big stretch that his campaign is responsible for a shocking $60 in attempted credit card fraud... especially when they were the ones that reportedly discovered it. Did you actually read the article, or are you just grasping at any way you can to discredit him and his campaign?

The ad-hominems are flattering. Campaign contributions are up to 1.6 million already today (obviously much of it from fraud :rolleyes: :busted:).
How much did YOUR candidate collect?

No pom poms for me, just the promise of a Constitutional government. :banana::banana::banana:? Yeah, I know.

[Transcend]

The ad-hominems are flattering. Campaign contributions are up to 1.6 million already today (obviously much of it from fraud :rolleyes: :busted:).
How much did YOUR candidate collect?

No pom poms for me, just the promise of a Constitutional government. :banana::banana::banana:? Yeah, I know.

That's fantastic, he is wasting 1.6 million more of some other people's money. You know he stands absolutely no chance of being elected right? May as well just flush those dollars down the drain.

Latest Gallup poll...

Gallup Poll
10/6/2007
Margin of Error = 4.5% [?]

Rudy Giuliani 32%
Fred Thompson 20%
John McCain 16%
Mitt Romney 9%
Mike Huckabee 7%
Ron Paul 2%

[$tinkle]

It is a pretty big stretch that his campaign is responsible for a shocking $60 in attempted credit card fraud... especially when they were the ones that reportedly discovered it..granted, it's a stretch; point is, don't mistake him for the next saint, or that his campaign shall be entirely above board. have a healthy dose of cynicism for any politician, especially a career one.

what do you think of his dismissal of iran as a legitimate western threat (by proxy), in spite of history counter to that? (source: cnn vid (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2007/11/02/intv.ron.paul.cnn), money quote: “I wouldn’t do that much about it” around 1:30)

i don't trust the guy, however wildly popular he may appear to be (by internet "polls")

[RenegadeRick]

That's fantastic, he is wasting 1.6 million more of some other people's money. You know he stands absolutely no chance of being elected right? May as well just flush those dollars down the drain.

Latest Gallup poll...

Gallup Poll
10/6/2007
Margin of Error = 4.5% [?]

Rudy Giuliani 32%
Fred Thompson 20%
John McCain 16%
Mitt Romney 9%
Mike Huckabee 7%
Ron Paul 2%

We have already covered the issues with polling methodologies. Your flawed numbers don't scare me.

A Google News Search (http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=thisnovember5th) of this huge fundraising event reveals a scant 4 articles. None of them from the major media. I wonder why. Maybe if they don't report it it just won't happen. Perhaps someone should let them know that Ron Paul might spend some of the 1.7 million raised so far (http://ronpaulgraphs.com/nov_5_extended_total.html) on major media advertising.

[Transcend]

We have already covered the issues with polling methodologies. Your flawed numbers don't scare me.

A Google News Search (http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=thisnovember5th) of this huge fundraising event reveals a scant 4 articles. None of them from the major media. I wonder why. Maybe if they don't report it it just won't happen. Perhaps someone should let them know that Ron Paul might spend some of the 1.7 million raised so far (http://ronpaulgraphs.com/nov_5_extended_total.html) on major media advertising.

Um, polling methodologies work just fine, your candidate doesn't.

[drakan]

Ron paul 08 represent

[RenegadeRick]

what do you think of his dismissal of iran as a legitimate western threat (by proxy), in spite of history counter to that? (source: cnn vid (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2007/11/02/intv.ron.paul.cnn), money quote: “I wouldn’t do that much about it” around 1:30)
I agree with Ron. They are a third rate power and at this point they are no threat to the US. Can you provide some evidence to the contrary?

have a healthy dose of cynicism for any politician, especially a career one.
...
i don't trust the guy, however wildly popular he may appear to be (by internet "polls")
Can you post some facts about this? Some reasons to mistrust him?
I am naturally skeptical of any politician, be he just doesn't set of my warning bells. I would be very interested in hearing more about this.

Especially before I invest more in his campaign. $1.75 million and counting.

[Transcend]

i don't trust the guy, however wildly popular he may appear to be (by internet "polls")

2% of the vote is not wildly popular Stinkle, ha.

[Transcend]

I am naturally skeptical of any politician, be he just doesn't set of my warning bells. I would be very interested in hearing more about this.

Promising to eradicate the IRS doesn't set off warning bells? BWAHAHA. :twitch:

[RenegadeRick]

Um, polling methodologies work just fine, your candidate doesn't.

Um, no they don't (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/pitkaniemi1.html).

[Transcend]

Um, no they don't (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/pitkaniemi1.html).

Sweet, 1 biased blogger must be right. A hundred years of the scientific method is certainly wrong!

You like to grasp at straws don't you? The guy is a lame duck, making hollow promises supported but a fringe set of voters. He stands no chance.

[RenegadeRick]

Promising to eradicate the IRS doesn't set off warning bells? BWAHAHA. :twitch:

:twitch: me if you must, but he provides a valid method for being able to do this. Get the US to mind its own funking business and get our military out of foreign nations. It sounds pretty simple to me.

[RenegadeRick]

Sweet, 1 biased blogger must be right. A hundred years of the scientific method is certainly wrong!

You like to grasp at straws don't you? The guy is a lame duck, making hollow promises supported but a fringe set of voters. He stands no chance.

Believe what you will. Here are some more links for your perusal. Enjoy.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ron+paul+polling+methodology

[Transcend]

:twitch: me if you must, but he provides a valid method for being able to do this. Get the US to mind its own funking business and get our military out of foreign nations. It sounds pretty simple to me.

The US gov't will never allow the abolishment of the IRS. End of story. It is their main source of income. Those interstates, military, space program, FAA, DEA, CIA, FBI etc need to get their budget's from somewhere. Or should he just eradicate all of the above as well? Back to the wildwest!

[blue]

Have we found someone more nuts than Knuckleslammer?

Why is it that every time I hear the words "Ron Paul" I think of Kool-Aide, orgies focused on a wrinkly old man, and opiates?

[Transcend]

Believe what you will. Here are some more links for your perusal. Enjoy.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ron+paul+polling+methodology

Sweet, a set of links to Ron Paul campaign related people complaining the polls are wrong because Ron Paul is way more popular than the polls demonstrate.

You suck at supporting an argument, Rick.

[Transcend]

Have we found someone more nuts than Knuckleslammer?

Why is it that every time I hear the words "Ron Paul" I think of Kool-Aide, orgies focused on a wrinkly old man, and opiates?

I can see the headlines now.

Ron Paul in 2008
The polls are wrong!

[$tinkle]

I agree with Ron. They are a third rate power and at this point they are no threat to the US. Can you provide some evidence to the contrary?i could. would you accept it as such?
let's start w/ moqtada al-sadr, who gets his marching orders from iran. he controls/influences the shiite militias. you know, the same guys who use iranian shape charges in their IEDs. silly me, i see this as a threat against the u.s. do you not consider our troops as citizens w/ full rights to the same?

but, threats go beyond just killing a bunch of soldiers stuck in iraq. there's also regional stability they threaten, which despite all the closed-eyed-heel-clicking ron paul may do, is still very real.

need i go on about hezbollah? your google works as well as mine. i'm sure it even goes back as far to remind us about 1983 marine barracks bombing in beirut. there's a history. should we minimize it, or even go so far as to ignore it?
Some reasons to mistrust him?
2 first names
wesley clark lookalike
conspiracy theorist
does not have a hot wife
he's a free mason

i mean seriously, those are 5 damn good reasons to throw him under a bus.

[Transcend]

i could. would you accept it as such?
let's start w/ moqtada al-sadr, who gets his marching orders from iran. he controls/influences the shiite militias. you know, the same guys who use iranian shape charges in their IEDs. silly me, i see this as a threat against the u.s. do you not consider our troops as citizens w/ full rights to the same?

but, threats go beyond just killing a bunch of soldiers stuck in iraq. there's also regional stability they threaten, which despite all the closed-eyed-heel-clicking ron paul may do, is still very real.

need i go on about hezbollah? your google works as well as mine. i'm sure it even goes back as far to remind us about 1983 marine barracks bombing in beirut. there's a history. should we minimize it, or even go so far as to ignore it?
.

Well to be fair, all of those issues would be resolved by getting us forces out of places they shouldn't be in the first place.

[$tinkle]

Well to be fair, all of those issues would be resolved by getting us forces out of places they shouldn't be in the first place.stay focused: TWO FIRST NAMES!

[RenegadeRick]

The US gov't will never allow the abolishment of the IRS. End of story. It is their main source of income. Those interstates, military, space program, FAA, DEA, CIA, FBI etc need to get their budget's from somewhere. Or should he just eradicate all of the above as well? Back to the wildwest!

try this article on for size.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/105/cough-up/

[$tinkle]

this thread needs hammers (http://www.betterman.com/attachments/986d1193359889-funny-jugglehammer.wmv)

[Transcend]

stay focused: TWO FIRST NAMES!

Even better.... TWO PERCENT.

[Transcend]

try this article on for size.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/105/cough-up/

Ya, that's fantastic. Let's illustrate his main reasoning shall we?

But could America exist without an income tax? The idea seems radical, yet in truth America did just fine without a federal income tax for the first 126 years of her history. Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker's paycheck

In 1913 you had no real infrastructure to maintain, no governmental agencies to subsidize and a much less expensive military to fund. This article, as well as most of his reasoning, is complete and utter nonsense.

[RenegadeRick]

he's a free mason

Got a link for this? My google seems to be broken.


conspiracy theorist

I don't link so. Last I heard, Ron believes Muslim terrorists flew airplanes into the Pentagon and the WTC.

He sure does have two first names though.

Over $1.9 million in in fraudulent spambotnet contributions so far today. :rolleyes:

[$tinkle]

Got a link for this? My google seems to be broken.he's running for president & hates jews.
1+1=???

oh, and a slight correction is in order. he doesn't look so much like wesley clark as he does marshall applewhite:
http://www.nndb.com/people/781/000028697/marshappl.jpghttp://a.abcnews.com/images/Politics/ap_ron_paul_070507_ms.jpg
I don't link so. Last I heard, Ron believes Muslim terrorists flew airplanes into the Pentagon and the WTC.so why do you think efforts to link him to 9/11 conspiracy theorists (loose changers) have been so successful?

an honest question. they seem to find hope in him, despite his refusal to accuse our gov't of either an inside job or coverup?

[stevew]

Ya, that's fantastic. Let's illustrate his main reasoning shall we?



In 1913 you had no real infrastructure to maintain, no governmental agencies to subsidize and a much less expensive military to fund. This article, as well as most of his reasoning, is complete and utter nonsense.
Stop it. You're crushing RengadRicks hopes and dreams.

[Transcend]

Stop it. You're crushing RengadRicks hopes and dreams.

Naw, nothing can crush a lunatic's dreams, Steve. They will continue to believe, no matter how ridiculous they sound.

[RenegadeRick]

he's running for president & hates jews.
1+1=???
Oh come on now. You simply must provide a link for this or just stop making stuff up. Believing we should not provide unconditional support for Israel isn't even close to jew-hating.


so why do you think efforts to link him to 9/11 conspiracy theorists (loose changers) have been so successful?

an honest question. they seem to find hope in him, despite his refusal to accuse our gov't of either an inside job or coverup?
Interesting question. I suppose I am one of those 9-11 CT'ers and I find hope in Ron Paul. I am disappointed that Ron doesn't think that there is more to it than he does, but he believes the important things about the outcome from 9-11. He believes that the current administration exploited the attacks on 9-11 and lied about the threat of WMD in order to lead us into a war in Iraq. The fact that Ron Paul wants this war to end is the primary reason why I support his candidacy. I suppose that is the reason why many people support him.

$2.25 million and counting.

[SkaredShtles]

I'm still voting for Homer Simpson. :twitch:

[$tinkle]

Oh come on now. You simply must provide a link for this or just stop making stuff up. Believing we should not provide unconditional support for Israel isn't even close to jew-hating.same thing, goy-toy
He believes that the current administration exploited the attacks on 9-11 and lied about the threat of WMD in order to lead us into a war in Iraq.and how will the outing of curveball (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curveball_(informant)) change his - and your - opinion of "bush lied us into war"?
The fact that Ron Paul wants this war to end is the primary reason why I support his candidacy. I suppose that is the reason why many people support him.difference is this: ron paul wants to unconditionally pull out, which would embolden the M.E. power brokers, who aren't so friendly toward things like human rights & free expression of religion. i have a problem with that.

[RenegadeRick]

same thing, goy-toy

not even.


and how will the outing of curveball (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curveball_(informant)) change his - and your - opinion of "bush lied us into war"?

Do you read the articles that you post? The Germans told us the information was unreliable and yet we built a war upon it. Pretty foolish if you ask me.


difference is this: ron paul wants to unconditionally pull out, which would embolden the M.E. power brokers, who aren't so friendly toward things like human rights & free expression of religion. i have a problem with that.

It sucks to be them, but it isn't really our problem and I have a problem that you think that this is our problem. I have a problem that you would wish for our children to pay the bill for it.

I suppose that we will never agree on these points. That is OK. I love you anyhow.

As of now there have been over $2.5 million in campaign contributions today to a Jew-Hating, Unconditional Surrender Monkey, Freemason, Cult Leader with TWO FIRST NAMES and only 2% in the polls. Keep up the good work America. May god have mercy on our poor deluded souls. :twitch:

[SkaredShtles]

Some semblance of stability in the Middle East isn't our problem? :think:

[Transcend]

Again, Ron Paul is a lunatic, as are his supporters. All 2% of them.

[X3pilot]

By God, I'm starting to become intrigued. Keep talking, Rick.

[Transcend]

It sucks to be them, but it isn't really our problem and I have a problem that you think that this is our problem. I have a problem that you would wish for our children to pay the bill for it.

Are you retarded? It IS your problem. Your broke it, you bought it.

[RenegadeRick]

Some semblance of stability in the Middle East isn't our problem? :think:

I think it is an honorable pursuit, but our war in Iraq has created anything but stability in the region. If anything, the Middle East is less stable than it was when we illegally invaded Iraq. The Iraqi people are not better off and an awful lot of them are dead. This is our fault and we paid for it to happen.

Perhaps "staying the course" isn't the right answer. Maybe we should try something different.

Someone (the internet credits both Benjamin Franklin and Albert Einstein) once said that "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again -- and expecting different results."

[jimmydean]

It sucks to be them, but it isn't really our problem and I have a problem that you think that this is our problem. I have a problem that you would wish for our children to pay the bill for it.


The problem is that it IS our problem. I would love to drop everything and leave, but that's not an option. We need to back out slowly, but we also need to be out of there in less than a year.

We should never have gone in the first place, but the fact is we did and now things are sucking. But we can't pack up and walk out tomorrow, but we should at least give notice and start packing.

[RenegadeRick]

Are you retarded? It IS your problem. Your broke it, you bought it.

Please reread what I responded to. It is not our problem that the ME power brokers don't support freedom of religion. The internal affairs of a sovereign state should not be the business of America (or Canadians for that matter).

[Transcend]

Please reread what I responded to. It is not our problem that the ME power brokers don't support freedom of religion. The internal affairs of a sovereign state should not be the business of America (or Canadians for that matter).

Perhaps you should re-read what you wrote?

Originally Posted by $tinkle
difference is this: ron paul wants to unconditionally pull out, which would embolden the M.E. power brokers, who aren't so friendly toward things like human rights & free expression of religion. i have a problem with that.

It sucks to be them, but it isn't really our problem and I have a problem that you think that this is our problem.

It IS your problem that if the US pulls out, a power vaccuum the likes of which the region has never seen will take place opening the door to massive civil & human rights violations.

The vaccuum will only occur due to actions of the USA. It is indeed your problem.

[RenegadeRick]

The problem is that it IS our problem. I would love to drop everything and leave, but that's not an option. We need to back out slowly, but we also need to be out of there in less than a year.

We should never have gone in the first place, but the fact is we did and now things are sucking. But we can't pack up and walk out tomorrow, but we should at least give notice and start packing.

Hillary is ready to leave by 2013.
http://www.towncalleddobson.com/strips/2007/9-27-07.png

[jimmydean]

Please reread what I responded to. It is not our problem that the ME power brokers don't support freedom of religion. The internal affairs of a sovereign state should not be the business of America (or Canadians for that matter).

Again, I think everyone is in agreement that we shouldn't have done what we did. But the fact remains we did and now we have a mess to clean up.

My guess is in about a year the Iraqi fake government will be disbanded and all hell will break lose. I think it behooves us to be gone by then, but we won't be due to GWB still being seated in the big house.

[Transcend]

Hillary is ready to leave by 2013.

And it will more than likely take that long or longer to re-establish order. The country has no infrastructure, no defense force, no police force, no working government, no civil order and a bunch of power hungry neighbors.

[RenegadeRick]

The vaccuum will only occur due to actions of the USA. It is indeed your problem.

So what is your solution? Obviously this war thing is what created the potential vacuum, and in case you haven't noticed it isn't going very well...

[jimmydean]

And I will not vote for Hillary. So that's 2 votes against her.

[Transcend]

So what is your solution? Obviously this war thing is what created the potential vacuum, and in case you haven't noticed it isn't going very well...

Unfortunately, you have to stick around for the decade or 2 it is going to take to fix it. You broke it, you bought it. Literally.

[$tinkle]

Do you read the articles that you post? The Germans told us the information was unreliable and yet we built a war upon it. Pretty foolish if you ask me.iraq survey group went in after the war started to make the assessment of the intel received. time machine had not yet been invented.
It sucks to be them, but it isn't really our problem and I have a problem that you think that this is our problem. so much for "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." (http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres56.html)

[RenegadeRick]

iraq survey group went in after the war started to make the assessment of the intel received. time machine had not yet been invented.

Nope. Germany and France both told us there was no basis for war. They said that there was no evidence of WMD.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq
No time machine required.


so much for "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." (http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres56.html)
You must have skipped over the preceding paragraph...
...unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed...

hmmmm... what has been going on in America today? Torture anyone?

[jimmydean]

Unfortunately, you have to stick around for the decade or 2 it is going to take to fix it. You broke it, you bought it. Literally.

That won't fix it either. No amount of money or time will "fix" the area because there was a level of broken there before with f@cked it up worse. We need to cut our losses and leave soon. Too many lives have been wasted on both sides and the longer we are there the worse it will get.

Do you think we have a chance in hell of "fixing" anything over there? I would be interested in your plan if you have one for sure. Whatever we do now will only make things worse.

Think bull in a China shop. Getting the bull out in one piece is the only real option.

[RenegadeRick]

and generates a respectable amount of mainstream news coverage in the process.

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=ron+paul+4+million

Yesterday's fund raising was a great success:

Ron Paul, long shot no more (http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=151560)
Throw the polls out the window, Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul, made fund raising history today, raising more money online than any candidate in the history of presidential fund raising.

Ron Paul has raised 3.5 million from over 22,000 donors with just under 4 hours left in the day. Paul has also passed Mitt Romney’s one day haul of 3.1 million dollars in a single day fund raising effort, making it the largest one day fund raising effort among all Republicans this campaign.

The grass roots one day fund raising effort may have helped put Paul in the driver’s seat in the GOP presidential nomination contest. There is a chance that Paul may end up with the most cash in hand at the end of the quarter.

Paul’s campaign consistently draws large crowds and is raising more money than most of the other candidates. Paul clearly is gaining momentum and is now only considered a long shot to win the nomination by media outlets that believe their own polls.

Having by passed media censorship via the internet, Ron Paul’s message appears to be resonating across America.



Why? The article sums it up rather well.


Paul voted against the Iraq war and advocates a non interventionist foreign policy. He promises to withdraw troops from Iraq immediately and wants to prevent a war with Iran and a new Cold War with Russia.

Paul also wants to eliminate federal income taxes and reform the monetary system by authorizing competing currencies backed by gold and silver. Paul also voted against the Patriot Act and promises to restore the Bill of Rights.

[binary visions]

He promises to withdraw troops from Iraq immediately... [and] wants to eliminate federal income taxes
Awesome. Simply incredible. People funneling millions and millions of dollars into a candidate making insane and irrational promises who won't even come close to getting elected.

It's just amazing to me that people don't do a reality check against promises before supporting a candidate.

[$tinkle]

Nope. Germany and France both told us there was no basis for war. They said that there was no evidence of WMD.we can monday-morn 1/4-back this all day (in fact we are), but we have to acknowledge that curveball was a german asset that the BND was feeding our intelligence services his (now known to be fabricated) claims. don't hate the playa...
You must have skipped over the preceding paragraph...

hmmmm... what has been going on in America today? Torture anyone?baby & bathwater
would you have ron paul use "sins of the father" as an excuse to not take moral high ground? i would expect not.

bottom line: don't trust the krauts (http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,515459,00.html)

[RenegadeRick]

Awesome. Simply incredible. People funneling millions and millions of dollars into a candidate making insane and irrational promises who won't even come close to getting elected.


Say what you will, but here is the thing...

Yesterday's fund raising came from the American people. Not from special interests. Not from corporate donors. Not from political action committees. That money came from the people.

If I recall correctly, only one of those groups is entitled to vote.

[jimmydean]

Awesome. Simply incredible. People funneling millions and millions of dollars into a candidate making insane and irrational promises who won't even come close to getting elected.

It's just amazing to me that people don't do a reality check against promises before supporting a candidate.

Kinda like the Lottery. "You can't win if you don't play..." :rofl:

[binary visions]

Yesterday's fund raising came from the American people. Not from special interests. Not from corporate donors. Not from political action committees. That money came from the people.

If I recall correctly, only one of those groups is entitled to vote.
Sure. People who are perfectly willing to flush money directly into the toilet on a candidate who is impossible to elect. Just because the people who are spending money on him are entitled to vote doesn't mean it's an intelligent use of money or of a vote.

Nor does it make his claims less retarded...

[RenegadeRick]

... a candidate who is impossible to elect.

Please, oh great and wise Voice of Reason. Please tell me why he is impossible to elect.

It's Hillary, isn't it? :plthumbsdown:

[$tinkle]

Please, oh great and wise Voice of Reason. Please tell me why he is impossible to elect.b/c they count the votes?

[Transcend]

Please, oh great and wise Voice of Reason. Please tell me why he is impossible to elect.

It's Hillary, isn't it? :plthumbsdown:

Do we need to go over this again? You seemed to ignore some very valid points such as: ABOLISHING THE IRS IS IMPOSSIBLE. It will never happen. End of story.

Please do not post anymore nonsense about how the us did fine prior to 1913 without it. In 1913 there was no infrastructure to support.

You sound like that crazy guy with the UFO religious cult and the supposed clone babies.

[binary visions]

Please, oh great and wise Voice of Reason. Please tell me why he is impossible to elect.

Tell me, did you used to ride the short bus in the morning, and require supervision when using paste?

Oh, I don't know, maybe impossible and boarderline insane campaign promises, and a staggering 2% of the vote?

[jimmydean]

Last time I checked, you have to get a MAJORITY of the votes in a state to win the state. If you win enough states, you are elected.

Sounds to me like he has about 2% of the vote. Not sure how many people will be running next year, but my guess is 2% will be a bit shy.

[Transcend]

2% of the RNC primary vote. So what, like .05% of the actual population as a whole?

[$tinkle]

i bet kucinich could beat ron paul

[RenegadeRick]

i bet kucinich could beat ron paul

Not in the Republican Primary.

[jimmydean]

i bet kucinich could beat ron paul

"I call it, Friday night sissy fights!" -Don King

[Secret Squirrel]

Let's recap, shall we:

RR: Ron Paul will do great things for this nation...such as...
Everyone: No.
RR: Yes.
E: No.
RR: Yes.
E: No
RR: Yes. Take away the IRS and have alternative currencies based on silver and gold. Just like before 1913 when the IRS wasn't invented. It'll be glllloooorius.
E: No.
RR: Yes.
E: No.
RR: Yes.
E: Once you take away the governments income, infrastructure will collapse...how is Paul going to remedy this.
RR: Ron Paul will do great things for this nation. Such as...
E: No.
RR: Yes.
E: No.
RR: Yes.
E: TWO FIRST NAMES!!!!!111oneoneone!!1!

[RenegadeRick]

The current battle is for the Republican nomination to be won at the Primary elections. Ron Paul is the only anti-war candidate among the party. Period.

70% of Americans want the war to end and want us to withdraw from Iraq. Certainly some of these people must be Republicans.

I have never voted in a Primary Election before, but I will this time. Dr. Paul has a motivated group of supporters and they recognize the importance of the Primaries and they will vote. How many will be new Primary voters like me? I bet a lot of them.

It is the mainstream old school landline telephone polls of the unemployed and retired mass media consuming public that shows 2% support. The online modern polls typically show Ron Paul dominating the results. Sure the mass media claims that this comes from the spambots, but the spambots don't have any money. These are real people that put $4 million on the table yesterday.

Ron Paul has won (and placed respectably) in numerous Straw Polls (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/). I believe he can win in the Primary elections.

You kids stick to your 2% and your "it's impossible" naysaying. I'll be over here enjoying this fine new bottle of paste. :twitch:

[Transcend]

The current battle is for the Republican nomination to be won at the Primary elections. Ron Paul is the only anti-war candidate among the party. Period.

He is also a stark raving lunatic, so good luck with that.

If you want to base your success on campaign donations...

Clintont: $90,935,788
Obama: $80,256,427
Romney: $62,829,069
Guiliani: $47,253,521


Paul: $8,268,453

Ron Paul is 5th in the Republican rankings, forget overall. 100% of that is by individuals, not a single business will back this guy. Seriously, keep dreaming bucko. I think the paste killed off to many braincells.

[RenegadeRick]

Businesses don't get to vote. Neither do Canadians.

[ohio]

The online modern polls typically show Ron Paul dominating the results.

Define "dominating."

[$tinkle]

Define "dominating."http://orothon.com/FunnyStuff/Monty_Python/Images/monty_python_hg_002_black_knight.jpg

2% is just a flesh wound

[RenegadeRick]

Define "dominating."

Take this one (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/popup?id=3746547&POLL310=4000000000000000000000000000) running on ABCNews Politics (http://abcnews.go.com/politics) right now.

Ron's spambots have sure been busy...

[binary visions]

I can't even begin to tell you all the things wrong with believing a random internet poll like that to be representative of reality.

[jimmydean]

Businesses don't get to vote. Neither do Canadians.

But businesses have employees and investors (ie Sheeple) that do and will. GWB is a prime example.

[Transcend]

Take this one (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/popup?id=3746547&POLL310=4000000000000000000000000000) running on ABCNews Politics (http://abcnews.go.com/politics) right now.

Ron's spambots have sure been busy...

I just voted 3 times. Shows you how well that poll will work, huh?

Businesses don't get to vote. Neither do Canadians.

Business owners and employees do, and the lobbyists control what gets done. Also, Canadians with dual citizenship do.

[$tinkle]

Take this one (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/popup?id=3746547&POLL310=4000000000000000000000000000) running on ABCNews Politics (http://abcnews.go.com/politics) right now.

Ron's spambots have sure been busy...FWIW, he's DFL:
http://www.pollster.com/ANHTopReps600.png

lol

[Transcend]

I suggest that if Ron Paul wins, Bv and I will never post again in the Politics area. If anyone else wins, Rick is banished from Rm for life.

Any takers?

Edit: for typing and crap.

[Transcend]

FWIW, he's DFL:
http://www.pollster.com/ANHTopReps600.png

lol

Huckabee has him beat. And no one has ever heard of a Huckabee.

[$tinkle]

I just voted 3 times. Shows you how well that poll will work, huh?yeah, but you had to delete your cookie, and you know how that will stop duplicates. that's what cookies do: they defend democracy. also, the fine print from that site is money:
Not a scientific poll. For entertainment only.

whew! for a second there i thought....

oh, & this:

http://squawkboxnoise.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/ron-paul-cult.jpg

[binary visions]

I suggest that if Ron Paul wins, Bv and I will never post again in the Politics area. If anyone else wins, Rick is banished from Rm for life.

Any takers?

No way, dude. If Paul gets elected we're going to live in a glorious peaceful utopia and with so much joy that we'll all start spontaneously pissing rainbows and sh*tting fairies.

Then all the hostility and childishness will be gone out of the DH forum. Don't you want to be around to see that?

[Transcend]

No way, dude. If Paul gets elected we're going to live in a glorious peaceful utopia and with so much joy that we'll all start spontaneously pissing rainbows and sh*tting fairies.

Then all the hostility and childishness will be gone out of the DH forum. Don't you want to be around to see that?

Wait, will the IRS be abolished and we will have all the troops home from overseas?

If not, I'm gonna cry and eat rick's paste.

Also, I just thought of something. Is this Ron Paul's alter-ego? We need to google Bomb RON PAUL and this image.

http://www.rem.ufpr.br/REMv7/Brett_Wood/RuPaul.jpg

[jimmydean]

No way, dude. If Paul gets elected we're going to live in a glorious peaceful utopia and with so much joy that we'll all start spontaneously pissing rainbows and sh*tting fairies.

Then all the hostility and childishness will be gone out of the DH forum. Don't you want to be around to see that?

Pink Bike would implode, that would be awesome.

[$tinkle]

Huckabee has him beat. And no one has ever heard of a Huckabee.i happen to have a man-crush on huckabee, tyvm

[Transcend]

Best description of Ron Paul and his campaign yet comes from the national ledger (say what?).

Ron Paul likely won't win a single presidential primary. He's awful on television and even worse in debates. Still his rabid wild eyed supporters that range from the anti-war crowd to tin foil hat wearing nuts to white supremacists to Libertarians that dream of "taking back" the Republican Party will definitely heap some cash on the 71-year old doctor from Texas.

[RenegadeRick]

But businesses have employees and investors (ie Sheeple) that do and will.

But most of the proletariat won't. They are too busy worrying about the Biggest Loser and Dancing with the Stars to be bothered with the political process.

I know I won't convince you Ron Paul is a viable candidate and you can't convince me he isn't. He has thousands of motivated supporters that will vote in the primaries. 'Nuff said.

I don't wish to stifle anyone's opinion, so I won't be taking you up on your bet. I would miss out on your witty commentary that just had me lolling like mad. Pissing rainbows would be sweet. I can't wait.

[Toshi]

Ron Paul won't win, and frankly I wouldn't want that, but you hecklers are missing the point: he's the only politician out there with a spine, and he has excited a small but not insignificant part of the populace.

Now go back to your ham sandwich and colbert jokes...

[Transcend]

Making crazy claims like abolishing the IRS because it worked fine before 1913 is not having a backbone. It's either being clinically insane or a compulsive liar.

[jimmydean]

I think Ron Paul has some interesting points and some great ideas. But I don't agree with a lot of his message.

The true issue in this country is we are a 2 party system. After the primaries, the race is down to 2 people (douche and turd sandwich). The majority of the populous will vote for who the "think" will win because they would rather not vote for a loser.

Red states are solid examples of these types of people. Oregon is a much more intelligent state. I vote for who I feel stands for a majority of my views because there will NEVER be one person who I agree with on everything.

[Transcend]

I think Ron Paul has some interesting points and some great ideas. But I don't agree with a lot of his message.

The true issue in this country is we are a 2 party system. After the primaries, the race is down to 2 people (douche and turd sandwich). The majority of the populous will vote for who the "think" will win because they would rather not vote for a loser.

Red states are solid examples of these types of people. Oregon is a much more intelligent state. I vote for who I feel stands for a majority of my views because there will NEVER be one person who I agree with on everything.

The other major issue is the "one -issue" voters. Ie: they vote for whoever is for/against abortion, or for/against gay marriage or whatever hot button issue is in the news.

You should have to pass some test to show you at least understand the very basic issues at stake. Like why voting against abortion may cause you to lose the chance for your soon to be born baby to have health care.

I guess even worse are the people who vote Republican/Democrat because "that how mah daddy did it!"

[RenegadeRick]

The other major issue is the "one -issue" voters. Ie: they vote for whoever is for/against abortion, or for/against gay marriage or whatever hot button issue is in the news.

This election's hot-button issue is the clusterfunk of a war in Iraq.











































































Well it's mine anyhow.

[H8R]

I know I won't convince you Ron Paul is a viable candidate and you can't convince me he isn't. He has thousands of motivated supporters that will vote in the primaries. 'Nuff said.

He's your Ralph Nader for 08. Good luck with that sh1t.

[H8R]

(btw - nothing I post in the PAWN forum is actually intended to contribute to the conversation at hand - thanks)

[X3pilot]

Making crazy claims like abolishing the IRS because it worked fine before 1913 is not having a backbone. It's either being clinically insane or a compulsive liar.

Neither. It's having a thought and a view. now, that doesn't qualify anyone to be President, but it doesn't make you a liar or an insane person. If you paid in my tax bracket, you'd wonder where the level of service you get in return for your dollar was going. I always thought a national sales tax was the way to go because everyone buys stuff and it's equated across social demographics. The greedier you are, the more you pay. Before you say that we need to attend to the poor, in the people's republic of pennsyltucky, we don't pay sales tax on unprepared food and clothing.

The point, I think is this, that the electorate, we the people, not the lobbies, are in a foul mood due to a piss poor economy, a stalled war effort that we should have never have been put in, and typical pull the string and hear em talk responses from the "candidates"

Yeah this guys got some goofy ideas but so did those rebelsback in 1775 that decided it was a good idea to strike out on our own.

He's saying what a lot of people want to hear and geez, the elections a year away and the money party will win, so let's be entertained by all this.

[Transcend]

You cannot abolish the IRS and have a functioning government and Functioning infrastructure in 2007 in the United States. Forget about paying off the national debt. It's a pipe dream, and claiming that YOU WILL DO THIS, is insane. It is completely not based in fact. his own web site states that it worked in 1913 so why the hell not now!

Also, I am quite sure I am in a much higher tax bracket from you, being that I reside in Quebec and am in the top tax bracket here (second highest federally). I am just a few % behind sweden when it comes to income tax. 24% Provincially and 26% Federally.

You pay 3.07% to Pa. and maximum of 35% federally, which is less than 28% of your actual income due to the personal deduction.

[X3pilot]

You cannot abolish the IRS and have a functioning government and Functioning infrastructure in 2007 in the United States. Forget about paying off the national debt..

I know, just saying it's a thought..

Also, I am quite sure I am in a much higher tax bracket from you, being that I reside in Quebec and am in the top tax bracket here. I am just a few % behind sweden when it comes to income tax.

Wasn't trying to insult you about your income, just establishing a point of reference.

[Transcend]

I know, just saying it's a thought..



Wasn't trying to insult you about your income, just establishing a point of reference.

Ya i agree here, it's a thought and a statement that only someone who has no clue would actually believe.

No insult taken, just tired of people complaining about their taxes when they live in the US. a max of 38% is high, but I would jump for joy if my income was taxed at 38%! We get bent over here in Quebec. I complain, and i can still go 2 brackets higher federally???

Ouch.

[X3pilot]

Yep, that is indeed rough. Makes my 30%ish federal and no state tax and no local income tax look ok.

but as a point of levity, my random quote gadget came up with this a few minutes ago.

"Ron Paul is a congressman and a doctor. He's also a practicing gynecologist.

He's the only presidential candidate to tell women to take off their clothes more times than Bill Clinton."

- Jay Leno

[Toshi]

Fraser, being a libertarian is not necessarily equivalent to being insane. Read some Robert nozick and Milton Friedman...

[Transcend]

Yep, that is indeed rough. Makes my 30%ish federal and no state tax and no local income tax look ok.

but as a point of levity, my random quote gadget came up with this a few minutes ago.

"Ron Paul is a congressman and a doctor. He's also a practicing gynecologist.

He's the only presidential candidate to tell women to take off their clothes more times than Bill Clinton."

- Jay Leno

And now this thread is back on track. :busted:

[Transcend]

Fraser, being a libertarian is not necessarily equivalent to being insane. Read some Robert nozick and Milton Friedman...

I'm not saying it is. I am saying that claiming you will abolish the IRS if elected because they didn't need it before 1913 is insane.

You can't abolish the IRS, and it is no longer 1913. If the guy who wants to run the country can't tell that there is a big difference in funds needed to run a country between 2007 and 1913, there's a problem.

[jimmydean]

The other major issue is the "one -issue" voters. Ie: they vote for whoever is for/against abortion, or for/against gay marriage or whatever hot button issue is in the news.

I guess even worse are the people who vote Republican/Democrat because "that how mah daddy did it!"

My wife and I nearly got a divorce over the 2000 election. She voted for GWB because he was anti-abortion. I tried to talk sense into her at the time and we fought about it for about 3 months. She has since become an educated voter and researches people and issues prior to voting.

She and I now vote together MOST of the time, but she doesn't agree 100% of the time with me on issues, nor does she vote with me because I did.

[Westy]

My wife and I nearly got a divorce over the 2000 election. She voted for GWB because he was anti-abortion. I tried to talk sense into her at the time and we fought about it for about 3 months. She has since become an educated voter and researches people and issues prior to voting.

She and I now vote together MOST of the time, but she doesn't agree 100% of the time with me on issues, nor does she vote with me because I did.

I've decided to become a single issue voter. Kucinich is nuts but his wife his hot, he will get my vote.

[Transcend]

My wife and I nearly got a divorce over the 2000 election. She voted for GWB because he was anti-abortion. I tried to talk sense into her at the time and we fought about it for about 3 months. She has since become an educated voter and researches people and issues prior to voting.

She and I now vote together MOST of the time, but she doesn't agree 100% of the time with me on issues, nor does she vote with me because I did.

Voter education is key. The media doesn't help here at all, and the electorate is too damn apathetic to bother doing it on their own, unfortunately. Then they have the balls to complain about things.

[$tinkle]

I've decided to become a single issue voter. Kucinich is nuts but his wife his hot, he will get my vote.i miss jack ryan :(

[jimmydean]

I've decided to become a single issue voter. Kucinich is nuts but his wife his hot, he will get my vote.

Vote FLILF! That would be awesome if he won solely on his wifes hotness. You could see what all future politicians would strive for, a hot ass wife.

[Westy]

Vote FLILF! That would be awesome if he won solely on his wifes hotness. You could see what all future politicians would strive for, a hot ass wife.

If they started that years ago today we could have a hot candidate instead of Hilary.

[$tinkle]

If they started that years ago today we could have a hot candidate instead of Hilary.http://hotair.cachefly.net/hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/hillary-thumbs.jpg

from what i can tell, there's room for at least 3 of us (or 2 + 1 waiting room)

[stevew]

I've decided to become a single issue voter. Kucinich is nuts but his wife his hot, he will get my vote.
She does nothing for me.

Same for Fred Thompsons wife.

[H8R]

She does nothing for me.

I think it's going to become a "Vote for the candidate who has a wife you wouldn't have to be held at gunpoint to fvck" sort of an election.

Kucinich ftw.

[jimmydean]

She does nothing for me.

Same for Fred Thompsons wife.

You have to use a sliding scale, you can't compare her ACTUAL hot chicks. Look at the group as a whole, then she becomes quite attractive (think stranded on an island with political wives).

[Westy]

You have to use a sliding scale, you can't compare her ACTUAL hot chicks. Look at the group as a whole, then she becomes quite attractive (think stranded on an island with political wives).

Or just compare her to the real world and not volumes of internet porn.

[$tinkle]

Or just compare her to the real world and not volumes of internet porn.which season?
giselle had a stupid hotness about her

[jimmydean]

Or just compare her to the real world and not volumes of internet porn.

I was thinking it was more like trying to compare a flag girl to a cheerleader. But I guess that leads to internet porn too.

[RenegadeRick]

On FLILFs being the sole qualification, Thompson is my guy. If political opinion is a factor, I would go for Kucinich. Hey, is he short or is she tall? Long and lean... yummy.

Back to that loon with 2 first names, this is an interesting article with his Tonight Show appearance linked in.

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2007/11/06/the-ron-paul-juggernaut

It is good stuff. In the video, he explains a lot of his ideas including why eliminating the income the IRS generates would really only bring the budget back to 2000 levels.

[Transcend]

The USA collected 1 043 908 000 000 last year in income tax. Total receipts were 2 407 254 000 000. Just under half of the national budget is received via income tax.

Where exactly to you plan on getting this money from if there is no more income tax? Will you ever listen to reason?

Oh and just as a fun fact, 1934 receipts (as early as I could find, and a FAR cry from 1913 levels) was 420 000 000 via income tax and 2 955 000 000 overall. Ya, it worked before 1913!

[stevew]

Or just compare her to the real world and not volumes of internet porn.

That sh*t doesn't even register.

[stevew]

On the subject of Ron Paul......

There is no amount of angel dust that I could take that would even lead me to hallucinate that he had a snowballs chance in hell of winning.

[$tinkle]

caution, hit piece ahead:

[national review's] mona charen: What Paul Is Running For (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmU0ZDFhYjIxM2VlMTEzMjkyY2ZiNDA3Y2RiZmU1YTc=)Me mo to: Ron Paul supporters
Subject: Your e-mails

Okay, enough is enough. Like every other journalist in America, and who knows, maybe the world or even the universe, I’ve been deluged with your letters and e-mails. So I’ve done as you asked and taken a closer look at your candidate. Here is what I’ve found:

1. Ron Paul is inconsistent. Though he calls himself a man of principle and is apparently admired as such by his ardent fans, his principles seem somewhat elastic. He rails against the Bush administration for its supposed assault on civil liberties, yet when he was asked at one of the debates whether Scooter Libby deserved a pardon, he said no. “He doesn’t deserve one because he was instrumental in leading the Congress and the people to support a war that we didn’t need to be in.” Notice that he didn’t say it was because Libby was guilty of committing a crime. No, because Libby argued for a policy with which Paul disagreed, he deserved to serve time in prison. Ron Paul, the libertarian, who presumably values liberty above all, is willing to deprive someone else of his because of a policy disagreement?

2. Ron Paul is historically challenged. He argues that by embracing isolationism, he fits within a Republican tradition stretching back to Eisenhower “who stopped the Korean War” and including Nixon “who stopped the war in Vietnam.” Let’s recap. Eisenhower threatened to use nuclear weapons against China. It was the Eisenhower administration that had a hand in toppling Iran’s Mohammad Mossedegh (an intervention that Paul has elsewhere cited as causing the U.S. grief 25 years later when the Islamists took power). Eisenhower also intervened in Guatemala, Cuba (planning for the Bay of Pigs began during his tenure) and Lebanon.

Nixon, an isolationist? Most observers, whatever they may make of detente with the USSR and the opening to China, agree that Nixon was an emphatic internationalist. For the record, he intervened in many countries including Chili, Peru and Cambodia. And he saved Israel by resupplying her during the Yom Kippur war. Neither his successes nor failures grew out of a Paulesque policy of “minding our own business.”

3. Ron Paul is unserious. Suggesting that you will eliminate the IRS, the CIA, the FBI and other government agencies within weeks of taking office is ridiculous. These are bumper stickers, not serious reform proposals.

4. Ron Paul is too cozy with kooks and conspiracy theorists. As syndicated radio host Michael Medved has pointed out, Ron Paul’s newspaper column was carried by the American Free Press (a parent publication of the Hitler-praising Barnes Review). Paul may not have been aware of this. But though invited by Medved to disavow any connection, Paul has so far failed to respond.

Paul has appeared on the Alex Jones radio program not once, not twice, but three times. Jones is the sort who believes that black helicopters are coming to impose a police state on America. He is quite concerned about the Bohemian Grove, the Bilderbergers, the federal election system (it’s rigged, of course) and so on. Naturally, he believes that 9/11 was an inside job. Ron Paul has even appeared in a Jones film, Endgame, the point of which is apparently that the Bilderbergers are plotting to control the world. They’ve already got Europe (through the European Union) and now are on the verge of securing America by means of a North American union that would unite Mexico, the United States and Canada.

Even if Paul says nothing insane in this film, his appearance alone calls his judgment into question. I have not seen Endgame, but I have heard a tape of Paul on the Jones program just after the 2006 election. Jones asked the congressman whether the victory for the Democrats wasn’t a “rejection of neo-fascist imperialism.” Paul replied, “Yeah . . . This was a healthy election as far as I’m concerned.”

Ron Paul is the favorite candidate of a number of racist, neo-Nazi and conspiracist websites. While Paul cannot be held accountable for the views of cranks and kooks, he can disavow their support and return their checks. He received $500 from Don Black, the proprietor of Stormfront.org and former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. He has not yet returned it.

Moreover, Paul seems to be playing a sly game with his conspiracy-minded fans. He does not explicitly endorse the crazier theories out there, but he hints at dark forces in the U.S. government threatening our liberties, he inveighs against the “neo-cons” (shorthand for Jews in some circles) and he gives aid and comfort to the paranoid by appearing on their favorite radio shows.

No, Ron Paul is not my candidate. Not for president. He might make a dandy new leader for the Branch Davidians.damn.
just damn.

[X3pilot]

But he is a gynocologist!

And he did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[RenegadeRick]

Um. I can only address points 1, 3 and 4.

1. Scooter violated the law and committed treason. This isn't because he has a different political opinion, it is because what he did was treason and he did obstruct justice. Quite a weak argument.

3. How do you know he is not serious? He has seriously said he will do such things and it will be glooorious. You can't eliminate the IRS without cutting some expenses. Massive federal agencies seem like a good start.

4. Ron Paul is bad because of his supporters? Come on now. It is wrong for a candidate who gets little mainstream attention to seek press wherever he can get it? Who is crazy now?

[Transcend]

3. How do you know he is not serious? He has seriously said he will do such things and it will be glooorious. You can't eliminate the IRS without cutting some expenses. Massive federal agencies seem like a good start.

Ok one last time, as you appear to be illiterate, or just really, really slow.

RON PAUL WILL NOT ELIMINATE THE IRS BECAUSE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE. HE WILL NOT ELIMINATE THE FBI AND CIA BECAUSE THEY ARE NECESSARY AGENCIES TO THE SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES.

See figures about 3 posts up for why you cannot possibly, abolish the IRS.

Edit: Massive federal agencies. And the interstates. And the military.

[$tinkle]

1. Scooter violated the law and committed treason. This isn't because he has a different political opinion, it is because what he did was treason and he did obstruct justice. Quite a weak argument.speaking of weak: "treason"?
outstanding. you complete me. perhaps you meant perjury?

a better answer would have been "no, b/c a pardon cannot be deserved. it is an act of grace". see how simple that was? just another example of how he cannot speak in simple terms. he's always hedging & triangulating. what up?
3. How do you know he is not serious? He has seriously said he will do such things and it will be glooorious. You can't eliminate the IRS without cutting some expenses. Massive federal agencies seem like a good start.good point; dr paul is very much serious. which is what makes his run so troublesome (to me & even a few canadians here)
4. Ron Paul is bad because of his supporters? Come on now. It is wrong for a candidate who gets little mainstream attention to seek press wherever he can get it? Who is crazy now?do you know the definition of a supporter? if they support him, they influence him. you mind that he's being influenced by extremists? i do.

[Transcend]

He is never going to see reason $tinkle. Some people are just crackpots.

[RenegadeRick]

speaking of weak: "treason"?
outstanding. you complete me. perhaps you meant perjury?


Nope. I meant treason.
http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=192237

of course why should we believe Scott anyhow? He was nothing more than a Presidential Tool.

[discombob]

If you like the idea of less taxes, less foreign involvement, and defense against a North American Union, then you support the ideas that Ron Paul supports. Why then, would you not vote for him?

Just because he doesn't have much chance of winning, does that mean we should just cast our freedoms into the wind and vote for Hillary?

Or perhaps it means that you truly don't care about your country anymore? Maybe you need to attempt to not look stupid in front of your non-extremist friends? Yeah, "freedom" - what an extreme concept these days!

So maybe we live in a dictatorship that's going to get us lynched in a Global Economic jam-up... does that mean we shouldn't TRY to get out? Really, what do we have to lose?

Some of you might already be dead - you'd better check your pulse!

[Transcend]

Maybe because Ron Paul is a stark racing lunatic, or a liar. Your choice.

No one can get rid of the IRS, end of story. He claims he will, as it worked before 1932. Anyone with a small piece of common sense would see that that is not possible, and it is no longer 1932.

[RenegadeRick]

Maybe because Ron Paul is a stark racing lunatic, or a liar. Your choice.

No one can get rid of the IRS, end of story. He claims he will, as it worked before 1932. Anyone with a small piece of common sense would see that that is not possible, and it is no longer 1932.

Look, I hear what you are saying, but the Infernal Revenue Service is not the only income model possibility. The US tax code is cumbersome and complicated. It unfairly puts the burden on the working people instead of those who hold the nation's wealth.

Why do you believe that the IRS is the only possibility? Why do you hate freedom?

[discombob]

Maybe it's a social stigma to ask who is the "lesser evil" that we're taking votes from, but why is everyone trying so hard to smokescreen the guy who is most willing to help not only America, but defend Canada's sovereignty as well? Rick has told you who he thinks is a good pick, but you have nothing to constructive to say. Where's your solution?

Transcend: As you've said several times in this thread, the IRS abolition is pretty intense and maybe unrealistic, but please don't trash our "hope for america". You seem spiteful of our predicament because you make so much more money than most dirtbags and have been unjustly forced into a higher tax bracket. You say that this wasn't the case, but Rick eventually got the truth out of you, didn't he? Yeah, he played it cool while out of the abundance of the heart your mouth spoke.

Don't worry, we'll forgive you; just tell us what to do quick before we make the impossible mistake of voting Ron Paul!

[Transcend]

What? You are confused man.

It isn't "maybe unrealistic". It is absolutely impossible. End of story. He isn't a hope for America, he is a crackpot making promises that are impossible to hold him to.

Ron Paul is either lying through his teeth or completely out of touch with America and socio-economics in general. Either way, I wouldn't want him running my country. Seeing as he has gotten this far, i am pretty sure it's the former and not the latter.

Also, you make no sense at all. The only thing rick has gotten out of me is a series of laughing outbursts from the insanity of his posts. He also ignored the numbers in front of him time and time again. I made them clear enough for most 6th graders to grasp.

You can vote for him all you want, he doesn't stand a chance in hell of even wining the Republican nomination, let alone a Presidency. Remember, 2%.

[discombob]

Alright then - who do we vote for? Start the change you want to see in the world, since it is obviously not freedom.

You have imposed a limitation on yourself regarding this election and now you're telling us we're insane for trying to stand for Ron's compaign, which goes against your hugely evident personal rule of "give up hope - submit and pay taxes".

Let's have a conversation about what we're going to do about it!

[RenegadeRick]

Transcend:

Your reply is about as on topic as a Giuliani CNN/YouTube debate response.

Seriously. Why is the income tax the only revenue system you think is possible? Why couldn't a flat tax or a use tax or something else be implemented? And how would a dose of real fiscal restraint hurt?

You say that Paul must be a liar, but his record of voting against government expenditures speaks for itself. And he has been saying he wants to eliminate the IRS for over 10 years now.

[Transcend]

Alright then - who do we vote for? Start the change you want to see in the world, since it is obviously not freedom.

You have imposed a limitation on yourself regarding this election and now you're telling us we're insane for trying to stand for Ron's compaign, which goes against your hugely evident personal rule of "give up hope - submit and pay taxes".

Let's have a conversation about what we're going to do about it!

If you think the United States, as a sovereign nation, can continue to function without taxes, you are as insane as Ron Paul.

And shut u p about freedom already will you? You sound like a fox newsdesk anchor.
edit: forgot a comma.

[RenegadeRick]

Remember, 2%.

Latest Iowa polls (http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/iowa.html) show him leading McCain.

Rasmussen Reports
11/27/2007
Iowa
w/o Newt Gingrich
Margin of Error = 3.0% [?]

Mike Huckabee 28%
Mitt Romney 25%
Rudy Giuliani 12%
Fred Thompson 11%
Ron Paul 5%
John McCain 4%
Tom Tancredo 4%
Duncan Hunter 1%
Unsure 10%
Source

[Transcend]

You say that Paul must be a liar, but his record of voting against government expenditures speaks for itself.

I don't doubt that at all. That isn't in question. He isn't a liar for this. He is a liar for PROMISING to do something that is impossible to do. Lots of politicians (all?) make promises they don't intend to keep, but most aren't as ugh, outlandish, as this.

Voting against expenditures and promising in an election campaign that you will get rid of the IRS, are 2 very different things that you don't seem to understand.

Look at the numbers I posted, and the % of revenue based on income taxes. You need an income tax system of some sort to pay the bills. You need an organization to collect and keep track of said monies. Therefore, the IRS isn't going anywhere.

[Transcend]

Latest Iowa polls (http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/iowa.html) show him leading McCain.

Rasmussen Reports
11/27/2007
Iowa
w/o Newt Gingrich
Margin of Error = 3.0% [?]

Mike Huckabee 28%
Mitt Romney 25%
Rudy Giuliani 12%
Fred Thompson 11%
Ron Paul 5%
John McCain 4%
Tom Tancredo 4%
Duncan Hunter 1%
Unsure 10%
Source

Sweet, 2-5%. Huge progress. Now he has about 60 days to go from 5% to 28% to win a nomination. :rolleyes:

[RenegadeRick]

Voting against expenditures and promising in an election campaign that you will get rid of the IRs, are 2 very different things that you don't seem to understand.

I think we may be splitting hairs here. Paul has said he would like to eliminate the IRS, but does the President really have the power to do so? It is within the President's power to guide us toward a different revenue system, but to eliminate the IRS at the stroke of a pen? I am not sure.

Look at the numbers I posted, and the % of revenue based on income taxes. You need an income tax system of some sort to pay the bills. You need an organization to collect and keep track of said monies. Therefore, the IRS isn't going anywhere.
Of course you need a revenue stream, I just don't think it has to exist as it does today.

Anyhow, I am not backing Paul for his position on the IRS. I am backing him for his position on the war. I suppose I am a single issue voter and there is no other Republican candidate who is anti-war. The savings in ending the war alone would do much to reduce the deficit.

[RenegadeRick]

Sweet, 2-5%. Huge progress. Now he has about 60 days to go from 5% to 28% to win a nomination. :rolleyes:

Yep. And that is 5% with the phone poll bias. I would call that a huge success.

And why do the polling figures matter anyhow? You should support the candidate that most closely matches your values and funk what anyone else thinks.

[discombob]

Yeah, man, what *are* your values besides spreading discouragement?

Rick gives solutions. Transcend says "no". This seems to be a one-sided argument, but maybe we should just focus in a little more on this whole "US government can't survive without the IRS" thing, because I don't think I quite get it yet :rolleyes:

[Transcend]

Yeah, man, what *are* your values besides spreading discouragement?

Rick gives solutions. Transcend says "no". This seems to be a one-sided argument, but maybe we should just focus in a little more on this whole "US government can't survive without the IRS" thing, because I don't think I quite get it yet :rolleyes:

Rick has offerred no solutions. By his own admission, getting rid of the IRS is probably impossible. You still, clearly, do not get it.

Are you 14 by any chance? I ask simply because even a 14 year old should be able to grasp the simple mathematics presented.

[ohio]

his record of voting against government expenditures speaks for itself. And he has been saying he wants to eliminate the IRS for over 10 years now.

Wow. Are you really equating fiscal responsibility to ability to eliminate our largest source of tax revenue? The implicit chain of logic there looks like this:

A + insanity = 12

[stevew]

Sweet, 2-5%. Huge progress. Now he has about 60 days to go from 5% to 28% to win a nomination. :rolleyes:
You are RenegadeRick's kryptonite.

Crusher of souls.

[H8R]

I thought I'd read through this thread and see what was going on in this discussion.

Nevermind.

It's like listening to camp counselors talk to crack heads.

[$tinkle]

i think it's high time for this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsGSMJV_KqI

[discombob]

Obviously, I get the simple math of the whole point of income tax being to supply our government with the ammo it needs to get caught up in all kinds of tough scenarios. Canadians will be enjoying it too once they get sucked up in the North American Union.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hiPrsc9g98
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYGrn0hZlCQ

It's amazing how different our world views are - this planet is doomed because of the lack of compassion of its peoples. Are you afraid?

[Transcend]

There you go again, with the dreaming happy thought about things that will never happen. Seems like a common thread between Ron Paul supporters.

[discombob]

OK, well I hope it doesn't, but we'll see...

I'm just going to back off now. We really shouldn't be wasting our time arguing like this.

In the meantime, I'll just think happy thoughts of riding my bike again, even though it's snowing outside at the moment :(

[blue]

Are any of you cultists aware that during the debate he acted like a stark raving lunatic?

[Transcend]

Are any of you cultists aware that during the debate he acted like a stark raving lunatic?

Rick must, he transcribed it??

[blue]

Rick must, he transcribed it??

I'd never seen any real length of video before the debate. Before I thought "Eh, just a dude with some out-in-space ideas that will never get elected".

Now I think "WACO WACO WACO".

[RenegadeRick]

Are any of you cultists aware that during the debate he acted like a stark raving lunatic?

In which part? (i know, you are gonna say "in the entirety")

Here is a RP summary:


RP states that he has more campaign contributions from military service members than any other candidate.
Abortion laws should decided by the states.
There are plans for a North American superhighway that will only increase illegal immigration and make it easier for people who want to do bad things to get into the country.
Ron Paul said we should use peace to create allies in the middle east.
Paul said that they hate us for meddling in the middle east.


What's crazy about any of that?

And you didn't get the same vibe from any of the other candidates? What about when Duncan Hunter was talking so longingly about daddy's gun?

What about when they all talked about how we should be very afraid of some losers hiding in caves on the other side of the planet. Now that's crazy.

[blue]

In which part? (i know, you are gonna say "in the entirety")

And you didn't get the same vibe from any of the other candidates? What about when Duncan Hunter was talking so longingly about daddy's gun?

What about when they all talked about how we should be very afraid of some losers hiding in caves on the other side of the planet. Now that's crazy.

You guessed correctly! It wasn't so much what he said, but his demeanor and the way he came across. He definitely has the act to backup his whacko policies.

Regarding the other candidates: No one here takes them seriously already, and the general consensus is they're all tools.

[RenegadeRick]

You guessed correctly! It wasn't so much what he said, but his demeanor and the way he came across. He definitely has the act to backup his whacko policies.
I agree. His presentation at the debate was very poor. Unfortunately, his passion for many of the issues did not present well. Even though he was right, he seemed overly agitated about it.

Regarding the other candidates: No one here takes them seriously already, and the general consensus is they're all tools.
So there have been some suggestions here that we should be offering solutions. What's yours?

[blue]

I
So there have been some suggestions here that we should be offering solutions. What's yours?


Uhhh...NOT electing anyone from the Republican field? I'd favor Obama or *snort* Kucinich as a "solution".

[RenegadeRick]

Uhhh...NOT electing anyone from the Republican field? I'd favor Obama or *snort* Kucinich as a "solution".

hmmm... Kucinich wants to end the war, but he has poor poll numbers, so Transcend would say that he isn't viable. Then there is that whole kooky UFO thing.

Obama offers to consider bringing the troops home in 2013. This is not an end to the huge cash hemorrhage America is experiencing. Since Obama is from IL, my home state, I want to support him, but he has taken way too much money from AIPAC and as a result I find it difficult to believe that he would put America first.

[$tinkle]

I agree. His presentation at the debate was very poor. Unfortunately, his passion for many of the issues did not present well. Even though he was right, he seemed overly agitated about it.you've misplaced you affections for bush?

[N8]

whats not to like?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6A7Iggebm4&NR=1

[Transcend]

Is it just me, or does that chick have a MASSIVE mouth??

[Dartman]

Is it just me, or does that chick have a MASSIVE mouth??

Normal mouth. Small head. :twitch:

[RenegadeRick]

I liked it. When is the last time someone wrote a (complimentary) song about any of the other candidates?

[nh dude]

one hundred years ago if you wanted to kill someone and take something from them you had two choices. stab or shoot. maxiumum range 1 or 2 miles tops im not familair with ww1 tech. today we can kill a person from anywhere anytime

thats why we need the federal government. and to keep the king of england off my back, hate that guy

[RenegadeRick]

Her