Has Ron Paul reached you yet?

Has Ron Paul reached you yet?


  • Total voters
    105
So would you say that I merely have a "disagreement" with the flat earth society?





Couldn't give a ****.

you make my case. just because barack won't wear his lapel does not make him any less american, just like ron paul's religious beliefs does not make him anti drug or prostitution.

I know what I saud earlier and I meant religious people that vote and make laws based on their crazy religious beliefs.
 
I don't see anything funny about having a humble foreign policy.

There's a big difference between "humble" and "sticking your head in the ground." Paul is an isolationist.

I don't know if you realize this TCS but we have american men and women DYING IN IRAQ FOR CORPORATE INTERESTS! And YOU'RE laughing about it! We got dead kids in iraq and TCS is ****ing laughing.

Hey, if Paul is so against the Iraq War, why is he still in the party that started it??
He should denounce his party and leave in protest. He doesn't have anything to lose.

The only candidate that will truly bring all the troops home and thusly making ourselves safer from a potential threat by using that money on intelligence and a strong national defense.

What about Ralph Nader?

What's funny about having sound money? What's funny about ending the "war on drugs" scam? What's funny about having a balanced budget?

What makes you think that Paul could balance a budget? Without an IRS?!
Paul is not the only candidate that wants to end drug prohibition. See Ralph Nader, above.
 
There's a big difference between "humble" and "sticking your head in the ground." Paul is an isolationist.



Hey, if Paul is so against the Iraq War, why is he still in the party that started it??
He should denounce his party and leave in protest. He doesn't have anything to lose.



What about Ralph Nader?



What makes you think that Paul could balance a budget? Without an IRS?!
Paul is not the only candidate that wants to end drug prohibition. See Ralph Nader, above.

Paul is not an isolationist. Sorry. He wants to talk with people and trade with people. He does not agree with the beliefs of the neo cons.

You can balance a budget without an IRS. Ever think of cutting spending?

why is he still in the party that started it??[/I]

it has to do with politics. It is very hard to win as a third party candidate. He has always been a republican. Republicans were elected to STOP the war in korea, stop the war in viet nam, the current republican party is not a true republican party. They have lost there way. the neo cons hijacked the republican party which has a long history of anti war. George bush ran on a humble foreign policy, no nation building, no poilicing of the world etc. The question you should ask yourself is why are the others disguising themselves as republicans when what they believe in is not real republican beliefs? Romney mccain huckabee giuliani are not true conservatives. Ron Paul is a true fiscal conservative. Taft didn't even want us to be in NATO!
 
Last edited:
Ron Paul may be a Christian but he wants to legalize marijuana, therefore he is not letting his religion affect his political judgments.
The criminalization of marijuana was never motivated by religion. In fact, there are passages in the Bible that could be construed as supporting marijuana use. Just ask your local Rasta.
 
Or a Nobel prize winner, or a Congressional Gold Medal winner, or a Pacem in Terris award winner, or a Grammy winner...

Yeah well Ron Paul wasn't a dirty monkey ******!


Just kidding just kidding. My humor is not for everyone. If I get banned for this then we are in trouble as a society.
 
The criminalization of marijuana was never motivated by religion. In fact, there are passages in the Bible that could be construed as supporting marijuana use. Just ask your local Rasta.

ok then use the prostitution reference.

I thought your body is a temple of god? and you're not supposed to damage it with drugs and alcohol?

The pages of the bible were made from hemp!

Hypocritical religion = water is wet.
 
I don't see anything funny about having a humble foreign policy. I don't know if you realize this TCS but we have american men and women DYING IN IRAQ FOR CORPORATE INTERESTS!

Non-interventionism isn't humble, it's the epitome of unilateralism: ignoring what other countries want and doing your own thing. A humble foreign policy would be one which is heavily guided by the advice of foreign countries, participating heavily in organizations like the UN and NATO and whatnot. Ron Paul isn't exactly in favor of that, though.
 
Paul is not an isolationist. Sorry. He wants to talk with people and trade with people. He does not agree with the beliefs of the neo cons.

OK, I may give you that one. Of all of Paul's views, his foreign policy is the one I agree most with.

You can balance a budget without an IRS. Ever think of cutting spending?

But where would the money be coming from?

it has to do with politics. It is very hard to win as a third party candidate. He has always been a republican.

Liberal Democrats think they can reform their party, too. They've been trying unsuccessfully for the past 20 years or so.

The truth is that the corporations have become so entrenched in both parties, that to attempt to overthrow them from within the party is all but impossible.

Sure, it is very hard to win as a third party. But can Paul do any worse than he's doing now? Like I said, what has he got to lose?
 
How do you know?

He's written a pretty powerful book.

Really? It's "powerful"? And how has it exhibited it's power? Did he use it to pull a Willow and go dark? Or perhaps it's the Book of Three, and he'll use it to find a way to destroy Arawn? Is it going to be made into a movie, and if so, who stars and who directs? What mountains has this mighty tome relocated?

It's "power" hasn't trickled up to me, yet, anyway.
 
OK, I may give you that one. Of all of Paul's views, his foreign policy is the one I agree most with.



But where would the money be coming from?



Liberal Democrats think they can reform their party, too. They've been trying unsuccessfully for the past 20 years or so.

The truth is that the corporations have become so entrenched in both parties, that to attempt to overthrow them from within the party is all but impossible.

Sure, it is very hard to win as a third party. But can Paul do any worse than he's doing now? Like I said, what has he got to lose?



He has too much integrity. I wanted him to run as a third party candidate, but he has principles. He believes that the true conservatives should have a true conservative candidate to choose from. John mccain is not that candidate. If you look back on W, he was voted NOT to nation build, NOT to police the world. That's how he got the votes.
 
Really? It's "powerful"? And how has it exhibited it's power? Did he use it to pull a Willow and go dark? Or perhaps it's the Book of Three, and he'll use it to find a way to destroy Arawn? Is it going to be made into a movie, and if so, who stars and who directs? What mountains has this mighty tome relocated?

It's "power" hasn't trickled up to me, yet, anyway.


Arawn, schmarawn. Can it give me Thin Thighs in 30 Days?
 
Really? It's "powerful"? And how has it exhibited it's power? Did he use it to pull a Willow and go dark? Or perhaps it's the Book of Three, and he'll use it to find a way to destroy Arawn? Is it going to be made into a movie, and if so, who stars and who directs? What mountains has this mighty tome relocated?

It's "power" hasn't trickled up to me, yet, anyway.

He's a congressman. That holds power.
 
Blade there are excise taxes property taxes, sin tax etc. There are TONS of taxes out there other than the income tax.
 
I don't like these people who are motivated by religion to change things in politics.

Then what do you make of Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life Act of 2007? It defines human life as beginning at conception. This idea has absolutely no scientific backing, and is only held by religious anti-abortion activists.
 
Last edited:
Then what do you make of Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life Act of 2007? It defines human life as beginning at conception. This idea has absolutely no scientific backing, and is only held by religious anti-abortion activists.

Well does it grant the ruling to be at the state level?


If they want to ban abortion entirely, I won't lose any sleep over it. If I was a woman and I just had sex with a guy and I don't want to get pregnant, I would go to a pharmacy and buy a morning after pill.
 
If they want to ban abortion entirely, I won't lose any sleep over it. If I was a woman and I just had sex with a guy and I don't want to get pregnant, I would go to a pharmacy and buy a morning after pill.

Well, there ya go. I don't agree.
And that is why I don't support Ron Paul.
 
Well does it grant the ruling to be at the state level?
No, it doesn't let states rule on the definition. The bill ostensibly lets states choose their own abortion policies, but the effect of that definition is to make abortion equal to murder, so in reality it would ban abortion nation-wide at the federal level.


If they want to ban abortion entirely, I won't lose any sleep over it. If I was a woman and I just had sex with a guy and I don't want to get pregnant, I would go to a pharmacy and buy a morning after pill.
Um, well, good thing you aren't a woman... I guess.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom