Ron Paul

[Lysolz]

Good debate so far.

Any RP fans?

[HarryTheHookaMaster]

Good debate so far.

Any RP fans?

He's not getting shit for votes though.........our 2 party monopoly sucks!!

Harry

[Bulldog_916]

He's just as much a part of the 2 party system.

I think MOST of the republicans are sorely mistaken when they say they want to offer competing big tax cuts. If anything, spending hasnt been cut really at all and it's getting worse. If we elect a republican, recession will follow, it will be the worst 4 years economically since the oil shortage of the 80s. None of these guys are really calling for good solutions, they are only calling for more rewards. They will squeeze out the lower and middle classes, if slowly. Look how far the middle class has fallen in recent years. You want that to keep going? We came further under Clinton as a country than at any other time in history. Among all the republicans, Ron Paul would be my favorite because he MAKES SENSE!

[MechAnt]

Peace, Love, and RON PAUL!

[oolatec]

Eh... he's still a... politician.

[TheScotsman]

He's just as much a part of the 2 party system.

I think MOST of the republicans are sorely mistaken when they say they want to offer competing big tax cuts. If anything, spending hasnt been cut really at all and it's getting worse. If we elect a republican, recession will follow, it will be the worst 4 years economically since the oil shortage of the 80s. None of these guys are really calling for good solutions, they are only calling for more rewards. They will squeeze out the lower and middle classes, if slowly. Look how far the middle class has fallen in recent years. You want that to keep going? We came further under Clinton as a country than at any other time in history. Among all the republicans, Ron Paul would be my favorite because he MAKES SENSE!

Pretty funny statement. The smart money in the market is saying the exact opposite, guess you should be making a fortune when everyone else starts moving $ to safe havens in the even those tax & spend dumbocrats just may win.

There has been one well known economist that said we could see a fall as much as 50% in mkt value within 6 months of a dem president. I have yet to hear of any predicting a rise in any but health care, and biotech stocks, in the event of a Dem. If you think a big mkt fall is going to help anyone then you are sadly misinformed.

by the way, Clinton was just riding the Reaganomics wave, even the dem strategists will admit that much.

[gaia.plateau]

If I was American, I would vote for Ron Paul, Republican, independent or otherwise.

As a Canadian, I think he's one of the worst candidates in history, up to and including Warren G. Harding. I think that Truman was your worst leader, followed by Reagan, then Bush.

Obama would be the best President for restoring international reputation.

I think that Hilary is your all-around best choice.

If you guys elect Huckabee/Colbert, I'll buy a castle for every forum member. Edited January 11, 2008 by gaia.plateau

[ubernerd83]

He's just as much a part of the 2 party system.

I think MOST of the republicans are sorely mistaken when they say they want to offer competing big tax cuts. If anything, spending hasnt been cut really at all and it's getting worse. If we elect a republican, recession will follow, it will be the worst 4 years economically since the oil shortage of the 80s. None of these guys are really calling for good solutions, they are only calling for more rewards. They will squeeze out the lower and middle classes, if slowly. Look how far the middle class has fallen in recent years. You want that to keep going? We came further under Clinton as a country than at any other time in history. Among all the republicans, Ron Paul would be my favorite because he MAKES SENSE!

Pretty funny statement. The smart money in the market is saying the exact opposite, guess you should be making a fortune when everyone else starts moving $ to safe havens in the even those tax & spend dumbocrats just may win.

There has been one well known economist that said we could see a fall as much as 50% in mkt value within 6 months of a dem president. I have yet to hear of any predicting a rise in any but health care, and biotech stocks, in the event of a Dem. If you think a big mkt fall is going to help anyone then you are sadly misinformed.

by the way, Clinton was just riding the Reaganomics wave, even the dem strategists will admit that much.

Here's a secret about economists: they are full of shit. Some are okay at fixing economic crises once they occur, but they suck at making predictions. Ceteris paribus, of course.

And while Democrats may be "tax and spend" (although I probably disagree with you there), the Repubs are "tax less and spend more." The Dems are the ones that instituted PAYGO in the first place, and then reinstituted it after the Repubs gutted it after Bush took office.

Also, Ron Paul is a crazy fuck. And not in that fun, oh-look-at-that-adorable-old-man kind of way the Mike Gravel is crazy.

[KillZedKill]

I'd Take Ron Paul over Hillary the feminazi any day, but as of current I'm still going for Obama.

I'd love to see Huckabee win as well, that would be wonderful =P

[KillZedKill]

PS, I'd vote for a female candidate (I'm not sexist) But I'd like to see one who doesnt milk the fact that they are a woman to get votes. Shes not very... Intelligent. Edited January 11, 2008 by KillZedKill

[ubernerd83]

I'd Take Ron Paul over Hillary the feminazi any day, but as of current I'm still going for Obama.

I'd love to see Huckabee win as well, that would be wonderful =P

I do hate Hillary, but I'm not sure I'd go as far as to vote for Ron Paul or Huckabee instead of her. Especially Huckabee, 'cause he loves fetuses but hates teh gays.

[Bulldog_916]

He's just as much a part of the 2 party system.

I think MOST of the republicans are sorely mistaken when they say they want to offer competing big tax cuts. If anything, spending hasnt been cut really at all and it's getting worse. If we elect a republican, recession will follow, it will be the worst 4 years economically since the oil shortage of the 80s. None of these guys are really calling for good solutions, they are only calling for more rewards. They will squeeze out the lower and middle classes, if slowly. Look how far the middle class has fallen in recent years. You want that to keep going? We came further under Clinton as a country than at any other time in history. Among all the republicans, Ron Paul would be my favorite because he MAKES SENSE!

Pretty funny statement. The smart money in the market is saying the exact opposite, guess you should be making a fortune when everyone else starts moving $ to safe havens in the even those tax & spend dumbocrats just may win.

There has been one well known economist that said we could see a fall as much as 50% in mkt value within 6 months of a dem president. I have yet to hear of any predicting a rise in any but health care, and biotech stocks, in the event of a Dem. If you think a big mkt fall is going to help anyone then you are sadly misinformed.

by the way, Clinton was just riding the Reaganomics wave, even the dem strategists will admit that much.

Seriously, even democrats know that we dont have much money to spend right now. They'd be the only candidates that I'd trust to actually pull money out of Iraq and realistically balance the budget (save for Ron Paul). Yea, we have to keep some money there to keep things going, but at almost a billion a day...tough to justify if you ask me. None of us will see a billion dollars in our lifetime, but the republicans are ready to spend it, and Huckabee is ready to spend that same amount on IRAN of all places. To any republican (4/5 so far) saying "let's go to Iran" I say, "blow me, you arent getting my vote!" (or America's for that matter, we're a battle weary bunch now!)

And Stephen Colbert isnt even a TINY bit serious when he says he's running on Huckabee's campaign. Colbert is a liberal flaming Bill O'Reilly's image and feeding it back to him with a straight face. Edited January 13, 2008 by Bulldog_916

[ASUSEAN1]

i would edit the drug references in the last post Edited January 12, 2008 by ASUSEAN1

[BillBrasky]

While I have no delusions of Ron Paul being elected our Commander and Chief, I have become a republican in the state of Mass for the sole purpose of voting for Ron in the primaries. If you read into his website you will see that his message is first and formost a intellectual one. We need to get people to think about a little document called the Constitution first and foremost. If he gets some votes along the way so be it. The election year is mainly a vessel for getting his message of constitutionalism out to the masses. I mean duh imagine that running the country based on the sole document that we began with. Crazy idea I know.

reLOVEution

[oolatec]

While I have no delusions of Ron Paul being elected our Commander and Chief, I have become a republican in the state of Mass for the sole purpose of voting for Ron in the primaries. If you read into his website you will see that his message is first and formost a intellectual one. We need to get people to think about a little document called the Constitution first and foremost. If he gets some votes along the way so be it. The election year is mainly a vessel for getting his message of constitutionalism out to the masses. I mean duh imagine that running the country based on the sole document that we began with. Crazy idea I know.

reLOVEution

Not only should you read his website... but you should read his newsletters as well...

Here's just a sampling:

http://reason.com/blog/show/124339.html

There is no way he is honestly saying he had nothing to do with those letters.

[ZenSilk]

Ohh God Huckabee.. Hell no. Anyonne who doesn't "believe in" Evolution should not have anyhting to do with the modern world.

Same with Mitt Romney... and i won't even get into that shit.

i like Obama and Ron Paul best. Hilary i have never cared for, McCain's a warmonger.

I might go for Obama because Ron Paul seems... too old, also too angry, and a tad on the Anarchist side of things...

[BillBrasky]

Thosenewsletters are bullshit. They came out in the 1980s and 1990s. How are they even relevant. It's pretty convinent that they just surfaced now...


...As long as its not Huckabee I'll be happy.

[r1v3th3ad]

I like Ron Paul, not 100%, but he covers change that I support. He is sorta a combination of both parties, after all he is technically a Liberterian, just couldn't get anywhere with that for the presidential election. I like his idea of throwing out the IRS and taxes to an extent. I think the current system is garbage. Why am I paying into social security that I won't see? Why not just throw out income tax and go for a national tax on all goods. It would effect everyone, including aliens, drug dealers, and under the table workers. And the Iraq war, he wants that gone. His foreign policy is one of such that we mind our own business, solve the dilemas currently plaqueing the U.S. rather than throwing billions a year into other countries[Israel(who are practically terrorists), Korea, Bosnia, Afghanistan(the forgotton war still going on), etc...].Maybe with this we can finally fix our health care and welfare systems. He's for the democratic views of personal liberties, yet also on the republican side with free market. I'm not saying he's perfect, I would change a lot. Yet, I still believe he is the best option at the time, he could fix a lot of the problems and fill the pot-wholes that the U.S. has dug itself into. I love how he thinks 9/11 is an inside job, goes to show he's a thinker....
Regardless, if he makes it to the secondary, he's got my vote, otherwise, I'm stuck democrat and still haven't fully settled just because I don't really like the candidates this time round.


Smokin Grapeful Dead shish outta a basic two hose lowriding hookah Listening to the sounds of VNV Nation

[timmediahOU]

the only problem i have with the democratic ideology is "raise taxes and increase police powers". seriously, the only reason people forget this is lawl patriot act (instituted by a bi-lateral congress, not GWB). Ron Paul and McCain both stand for small federal government. screw anyone like obama and hillary who are going to take my money and give it to chronic-welfare recipients. also screw them because they want to control us, it is the democratic (leftist) way, see france and england and their messed up tariffs and police force Edited January 17, 2008 by timmediahOU

[Bulldog_916]

First off, democrats never said anything about raising taxes on the middle and lower classes. If they did, they'd have nothing to run on because people would vote republican. Instead of cutting taxes and spending less, this new breed of republicans cuts taxes while spending more. Their party supports it, either indirectly or directly. The reason why I support Obama/Ron Paul is because instead of repairing OTHER countries' problems, we should focus on fixing our own damn country. Look at us, hunger in this country is as high as it has been in recent memory. More people are needing to go to food banks than in the last 30 years! Unemployment is set to run higher in the next year or 2 than it has since the early 90s. Hello recession? All I gotta say is the lowest national debt number came under Clinton, we had a surplus of around a trillion dollars. Now we have deficits in the 5 trillion dollar range, set to go higher. Guess who is calling for even MORE tax cuts while spending just as much money....you guessed it, 4 out of 5 republican candidates, excluding Ron Paul. I dont know what kind of country you want to live in, where classes are split 10/90 rich to poor. I'd rather live in a country with a strong middle class. Until Bush 2, we had that. Here's to hoping we get that back under Obama or Paul.

[TheScotsman]

The problem with taxing business is that it leaves the state, or country. Hell, even a small shop like mine gets custom-made parts from overseas. By the time I crunch the number it costs less than 1/3 of producing the same component here would... mainly as a result of taxes, and insane employment laws.

What has destroyed te middle class is those same oppressive taxes... not leveled AT the middle class, but aimed at business. (Dem's favourite "money cow" for the welfarites) When it's no longer cost effective to hire, the hiring quits, and the pink slips start. The most simple of economics. In many industries we are past the point of human staff being economical, and they are being replaced... so goes the middle class.

Funny, though, with all the talk about the economic problems none of the candidates is talking about deporting the illegal immigrants that are further confounding the whole problem.

Even more important is the impending deluge of "baby-boomers" getting ready to hit the dole. If you want to create an unimaginable mess just put a damper on the businesses that are propping up all those 401k's, then we have a mess. Just what do you think would happen if a good portion of all those retirement accounts went up in the smoke of a democrat-sponsored tax feeding frenzy? YOU would be paying for them, in the form of increased FICA. (How I am glad I am not a young laddie right now)


By the way, national debt was never a surplus under clinton. Let's at least get the basics straight before we spout the liberal drool. (it actually went from <6> trillion to <8> trillion) The only times since WW2 that the national debt went down were under Truman, and JFK. If the liberal fools can't even get that much right, how the hell can they ever have any reliable input on anything?

By the way, Clinton was/is a bozo... but I guess we all need a hero.

[Texico]

It's true that the national debt increased by about $1.5 trillion under Clinton. You have to realize that the national debt is not just a record of government spending, though. It includes imports/exports. It is a fact that we are importing WAY more in net worth than we are exporting. The problem is that we are sending manufacture industries abroad and keeping service industries located in the country. We are DECREASING our ability to export products in all areas except agriculture. This is why we have tax cuts for corporations and large companies. If we continue to move manufacture industries over seas then we are perpetuating our inability to pay off the national debt.

Government spending is one facet of our national debt; it is by no means the sole cause of the debt.

PS - I just had a thought. One of the problems with sending industrial plants overseas and thus losing our ability to increase our exports is environmental controls. I'm not saying that environmental controls are a bad thing, but increased environmental controls are a reason that industries are moving overseas. As long as we allow China, India, and others to operate with impunity in regards to environmental standards then we are seriously hampering the desire for companies to keep jobs in the US.

I also think that the treasury department should stop releasing more money into the economy. The more cash they release just keeps the value of the dollar down. If they were to only release as much as they destroy each year then the value of the dollar would slowly rise as its scarcity increases. It should slow down inflation. That's just conjecture, though; I'm not 100% sure it would work in practice.

[bunnymud]

Skinheads and Ron Paul are like peas in a pod

http://www.skinheads.net/forums/showthread.php?p=277977

[timmediahOU]

Skinheads and Ron Paul are like peas in a pod

http://www.skinheads.net/forums/showthread.php?p=277977

i believe you have some flaws in your left-sided logic but hey it's all good

[gaia.plateau]

Skinheads and Ron Paul are like peas in a pod

http://www.skinheads.net/forums/showthread.php?p=277977

i believe you have some flaws in your left-sided logic but hey it's all good

Assuming you're referring to politics when you say left-sided and not brain-functions... I believe you have some flaws in your understanding of the American political spectrum.

This is an accurate depiction of where Ron Paul sits.