Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While I still hope the best for my president, BO is not going to bring us change. He is merely going to give us a $1 return for every $5 or $10 he spends and leave us in a "better" position than Bush did. As a result the blind herd of American people will label him "great". But the blind democrats and republicans need to stop extrapolating the differences between Obama and Bush. They are both an absolute joke.
Look at it as a more inefficient version of the FDR plans. He thinks socialist policy, community organizing and soft BS messages of hope and change will do it. This stimulus is just stimulating the pockets of a select few.
Ron Paul's age is a huge problem. We need to either find a way to get Paul (or a successor) to revamp the republican party. Looking forward, Paul needs to groom a successor
Or we could maybe find a way to take the differing Nader ideas and the Paul ideas and meet halfway to get a powerful third party. They agree on big issues such as the Fed, the national debt, the Constitution, etc. So a candidate out of this camp could just take moderate stances on every other issue. I think any far left or far right believer of the third party politics would be willing to compromise if we can fix the REAL ISSUES that are being swept under the rug.
Why do you think Paul is crazy? He is a horrible speaker and debater but I liked a lot of his ideas. I knew there could never be a gold standard and there will always be a war on drugs. I knew there would always be federal taxes to support federal programs. I agreed with most of his other ideas though.
Do you think it is right to vote to send the military to war, then vote against funding them? Ron Paul does.
Do you go around claiming to be a supporter of "free trade", but vote against EVERY free trade bill introduced in Congress for the last 30 years, without exception? Ron Paul does.
Ron Paul is an anti-military hypocritical isolationist nut job that should be locked away in a rubber room for his own safety.
Do you think it is right to vote to send the military to war, then vote against funding them? Ron Paul does.
What wars would those happen to be that he voted for?
Oh, and "isolationist"? Actually he's following the advice of George Washington...avoiding foreign entanglements. Thank Woodrow Wilson for getting us to the point we're at now being so tangled up in foreign problems.
Obama stimulus plan is giving money to ACORN. Enough said
Not enough said. ACORN is a great organization, and deserves more funding. They work hard for poor people, and there are more of them than ever after 8 years of GOP rule. Spending on programs like this, that are already up and running, is a great idea.
What wars would those happen to be that he voted for?
Oh, and "isolationist"? Actually he's following the advice of George Washington...avoiding foreign entanglements. Thank Woodrow Wilson for getting us to the point we're at now being so tangled up in foreign problems.
Ron Paul voted for H.J.Res 64 (107th Session of Congress), which ultimately became Public Law 107-40, a.k.a. "War Against Terrorism." Then he proceeded to vote against every military spending bill. THAT is what makes him anti-military.
Voting for free trade with other countries does not mean you are involving yourself in "foreign entanglements." Ron Paul claims to support free trade, but has never introduced a single free trade bill himself, or voted in favor of anyone elses free trade agreement. THAT is what makes him a hypocritical isolationist.
While I still hope the best for my president, BO is not going to bring us change. He is merely going to give us a $1 return for every $5 or $10 he spends and leave us in a "better" position than Bush did. As a result the blind herd of American people will label him "great". But the blind democrats and republicans need to stop extrapolating the differences between Obama and Bush. They are both an absolute joke.
What is the basis of your conclusions? Give me an example, and we will discuss it right here.
As for change itself, we have seen plenty of it. What I want most from the government is transparency and accountability. Do you see any change from the past? If you do, give me an example of that.
Last edited by EinsteinsGhost; 02-04-2009 at 06:04 PM..
Ron Paul voted for H.J.Res 64 (107th Session of Congress), which ultimately became Public Law 107-40, a.k.a. "War Against Terrorism." Then he proceeded to vote against every military spending bill. THAT is what makes him anti-military.
You're really stretching things here...that resolution allows force to be used against those found responsible for the attacks on 9/11/01. It did not authorize a specific war. And have the "wars" (not really wars) been after those responsible? Iraq surely wasn't. Afghanistan, kind of questionable and more complicated. And Ron Paul actually reads each bill before voting on them, and votes against anything unconstitutional. Perhaps you should read the military spending bills and what they actually contain before spewing these silly statist talking points.
Quote:
Voting for free trade with other countries does not mean you are involving yourself in "foreign entanglements." Ron Paul claims to support free trade, but has never introduced a single free trade bill himself, or voted in favor of anyone elses free trade agreement. THAT is what makes him a hypocritical isolationist.
The foreign entanglement comment was directed at your "isolationist" statement not the free trade issue.
He has voted against unconstitutional measures masked as free trade. CAFTA, for instance. Just because something is labelled "free trade" doesn't make it so. NAFTA definately wasn't free trade.
You're really stretching things here...that resolution allows force to be used against those found responsible for the attacks on 9/11/01. It did not authorize a specific war. And have the "wars" (not really wars) been after those responsible? Iraq surely wasn't. Afghanistan, kind of questionable and more complicated. And Ron Paul actually reads each bill before voting on them, and votes against anything unconstitutional. Perhaps you should read the military spending bills and what they actually contain before spewing these silly statist talking points.
I've got news for you, anytime Congress authorizes the President to use military force against another nation, they are in fact making a formal declaration of war in accordance with Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution.
If Ron Paul supported the military then he should be funding them when he votes to send them to war. Since he chooses not to fund them, but send them in harms way anyway, he is making a statement about how much he loathes the military.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader
The foreign entanglement comment was directed at your "isolationist" statement not the free trade issue.
He has voted against unconstitutional measures masked as free trade. CAFTA, for instance. Just because something is labelled "free trade" doesn't make it so. NAFTA definately wasn't free trade.
Ron Paul is an isolationist because he doesn't believe in free trade, as evidenced by his voting record. He is a hypocrite for claiming that he supports free trade. If he merely had a problem with the way every free trade agreement has been written for the last 30 years, why hasn't he introduced his own free trade legislation? I'll tell you why - Ron Paul is an hypocritical isolationist wacko.
Apparently the only people who haven't figured this out are the fewer than 1% who actually support this dangerous lunatic.
Not enough said. ACORN is a great organization, and deserves more funding. They work hard for poor people, and there are more of them than ever after 8 years of GOP rule. Spending on programs like this, that are already up and running, is a great idea.
I wish we had a webcam so we could watch you giggling like mad after that post.
Ron Paul is an anti-military hypocritical isolationist nut job that should be locked away in a rubber room for his own safety.
Now, now. Dr. Paul is a fine, level-headed public servant.
It's his followers who need to be reined in a bit.
All those signs. Everywhere. And the slow-moving mobs of burly caucus-goers.
It was like the Night of the Living Brain Dead.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
