Marijuana Is Illegal Because...

[no1brownsfan]

Originally Posted by Glitch

What part of "The 'manner' they chose in 1824 was the popular vote" did you not comprehend? And you expect me to believe you were a student that got As and Bs?



From his voting record. Ron Paul voted in favor of Public Law 107-40, which authorized the use of military force. Then every one of his subsequent votes were against funding the military that he just sent into combat. It does not get any more anti-military than that.



Ron Paul wants to completely abolish the US military. You are obviously not familiar with Ron Paul's voting record.

As to why we are more involved in the middle-east now than ever before, it is because Democrats have prevented us from developing our own natural resources since 1990 and we have no other alternative but to seek those resources elsewhere.

To reduce our involvement in the middle-east, we need to build more refineries and increase our domestic oil production by at least 26%.



Ron Paul wants to completely abolish the US military. I am not the one with the blinders on. You are obviously not familiar with Ron Paul's voting record.

Here is a clue, they call it "empty rhetoric" for a good reason. Perhaps if you paid more attention to how Ron Paul votes and less time listening to what he says you may come to a completely different conclusion. Actions should speak louder than words.

Believe what you want. You don't know me from Adam. Cite proof that Paul wants to abolish the military! Even that would be ludicrous to eliminate the military!

[Glitch]

Originally Posted by no1brownsfan

Believe what you want. You don't know me from Adam. Cite proof that Paul wants to abolish the military! Even that would be ludicrous to eliminate the military!

Of course it would be ludicrous. Why do you think everyone who is familiar with Ron Paul's voting record thinks he is a lunatic?

[Michael Di Meo]

Originally Posted by no1brownsfan

Believe what you want. You don't know me from Adam. Cite proof that Paul wants to abolish the military! Even that would be ludicrous to eliminate the military!

Why is he picking on you?
He still has not even addressed his incorrect declaration that the US was specifically founded as an anti-majority-tyranny republic.
I proved him wrong, and he totally ignores it

Look, it is clear that Glibichee has a logic problem.
He thinks that voting record is black and white and that voting patterns are not supposed to be based on principle. But Glibichee is a pro-war guy, so if it is not pro-war, he will not support it, so he tries to use logic to refute people who disagree, but he cannot do it correctly, although he asks some good questions.

I actually use the same Ron Paul technique in my daily affairs. As long as I can see that people do not understand me/or are unwilling to try to understand me, I do not move forward with them. Dr. Paul is like that. He wants people to use their own brains, take intellectual responsibility for the garbage in their heads, and use reason to understand him and his issues. But people are too lazy, or they have their own agendas, and so he votes on principle.

Dr. Paul is against silent compromise. If he would vote with the majority, even if he disagrees, that would mean his desire for people to understand the issues is not important - and that is not the case with him.

Glibichee, I suggest you make a sincere attempt to understand the above reasoning, merge it with Ron Paul's views on the Military, and any intelligent human being, which you probably are somewhat, can understand that he is not anti-military, unless you are lying to yourself - which is probably one of the worst human nature defects.

I am afraid if you are unable to understand another person's point of view, you will find that nobody will want to debate anything with you, because we would not even want to move past the first initial step

[LogicIsYourFriend]

Originally Posted by Glitch

You obviously do not know the difference between interstate and intrastate.

What? You're wrong, and how does this refute anything I said anyway? it's the Interstate Commerce Clause, supposed to allow congress to regulate interstate commerce. How is a person who's not selling inter- or even intrastate even under that jurisdiction?