Forum

by **PLAYER57832** on Thu Sep 20, 2012 4:19 pm

tzor wrote:In most of the Muslim world, the ideal government is a theocracy.

Sadly, that seems to be the push of the conservative right wing in this country as well. Just because its Christianity pushing the rules doesn't mean its not pushing rules.

by **PLAYER57832** on Thu Sep 20, 2012 4:22 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote: I believe I read it quite well... People don't want to pay taxes, but they want the things those taxes provide.

Yeah, that's not what it says.

Really, then let me requote it for you:
Frigidus wrote:
Because a lot of the people that claim to be libertarians actually just mean "I want low tax rates". They see Paul's stances on the military, the war on drugs, his desire to end the federal reserve and social security, and all of a sudden they don't like libertarianism quite as much.

by **Phatscotty** on Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:20 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
tzor wrote:In most of the Muslim world, the ideal government is a theocracy.

Sadly, that seems to be the push of the conservative right wing in this country as well. Just because its Christianity pushing the rules doesn't mean its not pushing rules.

wait, what? How are Christians pushing for a theocracy and not Muslims? Oh, because 33 states in America burned down the American flag at their capitals and raised the Christian flag???

I think you have your global hemispheres mixed up

by **Phatscotty** on Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:23 pm

bedub1 wrote:
jay_a2j wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:Are we in a deeper sleep now than we were on September 10th, 2001?

People Jumping from World Trade Center

NEVER forget

What we've "forgotten" is how to be a free nation.

I'll agree to that.

Unbelievably, me too.

The terrorist won already. They didn't manage to take away our freedom. We did it to ourselves. Between the NDAA, the TSA, the NSA spying on American's, we no longer have freedom. Who is worse than a terrorist? The person that reacts improperly and causes more damage than the terrorist ever could have imagined. In this instance, the NDAA, TSA, and NSA are all terrorist organizations/implementations.

United we stand, divided (on social issues only?) we fell.

by **Phatscotty** on Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:24 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
Frigidus wrote:
jay_a2j wrote:
tkr4lf wrote:I think we can all agree to that.

Then why is Ron Paul not the GOP candidate? He was the only guy talking about this stuff.

Because a lot of the people that claim to be libertarians actually just mean "I want low tax rates". They see Paul's stances on the military, the war on drugs, his desire to end the federal reserve and social security, and all of a sudden they don't like libertarianism quite as much.

and they "don't like it" because they realize that many of those things, contrary to the Phatt-view really contribute to real freedom for most Americans.

Again, what is the Phatt-view?

by **john9blue** on Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:51 pm

Nola_Lifer wrote:
WOW someone miss the boat on this one. I'd say there are plenty who are still asleep. Look at some on these forum who say they are staunch Ron Paul supporters but as soon as he doesn't have a chance it is Mitt this and Mitt that. Talk about fail.

who are these people?

by **thegreekdog** on Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:11 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote: I believe I read it quite well... People don't want to pay taxes, but they want the things those taxes provide.

Yeah, that's not what it says.

Really, then let me requote it for you:
Frigidus wrote:
Because a lot of the people that claim to be libertarians actually just mean "I want low tax rates". They see Paul's stances on the military, the war on drugs, his desire to end the federal reserve and social security, and all of a sudden they don't like libertarianism quite as much.

Fucking-a.

The point is that the only thing most Republicans liked about Ron Paul was the "lower taxes." What they didn't like were his stancces on the military, the war on drugs, his desire to end the federal reserve, etc.

by **BigBallinStalin** on Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:14 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote: I believe I read it quite well... People don't want to pay taxes, but they want the things those taxes provide.

Yeah, that's not what it says.

Really, then let me requote it for you:
Frigidus wrote:
Because a lot of the people that claim to be libertarians actually just mean "I want low tax rates". They see Paul's stances on the military, the war on drugs, his desire to end the federal reserve and social security, and all of a sudden they don't like libertarianism quite as much.

Fucking-a.

The point is that the only thing most Republicans liked about Ron Paul was the "lower taxes." What they didn't like were his stancces on the military, the war on drugs, his desire to end the federal reserve, etc.

Except, the real sum zero bit is when the majority of real wealth is created by trading stocks and holding loans for interest, not selling products or generating real services outside of the financial industry supports. (watering plants in GE offices is a gain... accounting for stockbrockers, not).

by **thegreekdog** on Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:16 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:Except, the real sum zero bit is when the majority of real wealth is created by trading stocks and holding loans for interest, not selling products or generating real services outside of the financial industry supports. (watering plants in GE offices is a gain... accounting for stockbrockers, not).

Etc.

by **Phatscotty** on Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:51 pm

Nola_Lifer wrote:
Look at some on these forum who say they are staunch Ron Paul supporters but as soon as he doesn't have a chance it is Mitt this and Mitt that. Talk about fail.

WOW, so a Ron Paul supporter should continue to support Ron Paul even when he is no longer running for office/seeking support?

Or... to follow your brainfart all the way through, are are you saying that if Ron Paul drops out of the race, Ron Paul supports should not vote????? And if they make the intelligent choice to vote for someone who is running for office, then they cannot talk about any other candidate?

Fail is 100% your buddy. Even deeper fail, what the F does this have to do with 9-11??

:-s

by **thegreekdog** on Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:06 am

Phatscotty wrote:
Nola_Lifer wrote:
Look at some on these forum who say they are staunch Ron Paul supporters but as soon as he doesn't have a chance it is Mitt this and Mitt that. Talk about fail.

WOW, so a Ron Paul supporter should continue to support Ron Paul even when he is no longer running for office/seeking support?

Or... to follow your brainfart all the way through, are are you saying that if Ron Paul drops out of the race, Ron Paul supports should not vote????? And if they make the intelligent choice to vote for someone who is running for office, then they cannot talk about any other candidate?

Fail is 100% your buddy. Even deeper fail, what the F does this have to do with 9-11??

You should vote for Gary Johnson who more closely aligns with Ron Paul's political views than Mitt Romney.

by **Woodruff** on Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:55 am

Phatscotty wrote:
bedub1 wrote:
jay_a2j wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:Are we in a deeper sleep now than we were on September 10th, 2001?

People Jumping from World Trade Center

NEVER forget

What we've "forgotten" is how to be a free nation.

I'll agree to that.

Unbelievably, me too.

The terrorist won already. They didn't manage to take away our freedom. We did it to ourselves. Between the NDAA, the TSA, the NSA spying on American's, we no longer have freedom. Who is worse than a terrorist? The person that reacts improperly and causes more damage than the terrorist ever could have imagined. In this instance, the NDAA, TSA, and NSA are all terrorist organizations/implementations.

United we stand, divided (on social issues only?) we fell.

The views you express in these fora are a direct representation of how and why we are divided, so well done on that.

by **Woodruff** on Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:56 am

john9blue wrote:
Nola_Lifer wrote:
WOW someone miss the boat on this one. I'd say there are plenty who are still asleep. Look at some on these forum who say they are staunch Ron Paul supporters but as soon as he doesn't have a chance it is Mitt this and Mitt that. Talk about fail.

who are these people?

Seriously?

by **Woodruff** on Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:58 am

Phatscotty wrote:
Nola_Lifer wrote:
Look at some on these forum who say they are staunch Ron Paul supporters but as soon as he doesn't have a chance it is Mitt this and Mitt that. Talk about fail.

WOW, so a Ron Paul supporter should continue to support Ron Paul even when he is no longer running for office/seeking support?

A Ron Paul supporter should support the candidate that actually holds Ron Paul's views. You know...Gary Johnson.

Phatscotty wrote:Or... to follow your brainfart all the way through, are are you saying that if Ron Paul drops out of the race, Ron Paul supports should not vote????? And if they make the intelligent choice to vote for someone who is running for office, then they cannot talk about any other candidate?

Do you like to pretend to be stupid, or is it actually not an act?

by **AndyDufresne** on Fri Sep 21, 2012 11:45 am

Woodruff wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
Nola_Lifer wrote:
Look at some on these forum who say they are staunch Ron Paul supporters but as soon as he doesn't have a chance it is Mitt this and Mitt that. Talk about fail.

WOW, so a Ron Paul supporter should continue to support Ron Paul even when he is no longer running for office/seeking support?

A Ron Paul supporter should support the candidate that actually holds Ron Paul's views. You know...Gary Johnson.

Ron Paul did make it a point to not endorse Romney, but he also said he wouldn't endorse Gary Johnson or anyone else (maybe looking out for his son's future presidential run).

--Andy