ok ok Ron Paul 101

[xtratabasco]

some of you bird brains read about as well as you play risk.


I didnt say Ron would win.

I didnt say he gets the most votes.

I didnt say he is electable.

I didnt say he is the most popular.

I didnt say he is un-failable.



I said he is the only one that can beat Hillary.




also back to the war for oil, Iraq and Kuwait were gonna pump the shit out of oil before we invaded, that would have lowered the price. When someone says we went in for oil, its not to steel it, its to stop or slow the flow, that way the price goes up.....the first thing we did when we secured (laugable) Iraq was to put military on the oil fields, to SLOW THE FLOW of oil, pumping it out and steeling it is the hard way to do it, put a cap on it and charge double, then your swimming in money, and our leaders are lazy criminals.

comon thats business 101.

[radiojake]

And come on, how can you still logically say that this has been a "war for oil"? If it really was, then why haven't we secured the oil yet? Why should we be in Baghdad, if all we want is the oil? In fact, why invade Iraq at all? We were already in Saudi, and Qatar, and Bahrain, and Kuwait, why not just claim their oil? And after taking it, why aren't we selling it? And importing it very cheaply back home? Have you noticed how much we're paying for gasoline these days? 10 years ago, when I first started driving, I remember a few weeks where the price actually dropped below a buck a gallon. Now, here in Detroit at least, we're sometimes paying $3. If we stole all that oil for our own use, we'd be paying much less. So stop with the nonsense, if you don't mind.

If you don't believe the war is over oil than you're a fool. The reason your paying $3 a gallon is because the companies don't give a shit who is paying an over inflated price for it. If people are gonna pay $3 for it (and lets face, what choice do you have if you're gonna drive?) then they'll charge it. You said it yourself when America are already in Saudi, Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait, so why is it hard to believe America wants in on the Iraqi fields? They aren't stealing the oil for YOUR use, they're stealing it to make more money.


By the way, I have nothing to say about Ron Paul, as not being an American, I haven't heard of him at all (except for this board) so I know nothing about him. Hopefully whoever you guys vote in is a better choice than the current Administration

Unfortunately for Australia, our election next month is a choice between an old prick who has been in power 11 years, and a smug younger prick who is just as much an asshole. Yay..

[xtratabasco]

And come on, how can you still logically say that this has been a "war for oil"? If it really was, then why haven't we secured the oil yet? Why should we be in Baghdad, if all we want is the oil? In fact, why invade Iraq at all? We were already in Saudi, and Qatar, and Bahrain, and Kuwait, why not just claim their oil? And after taking it, why aren't we selling it? And importing it very cheaply back home? Have you noticed how much we're paying for gasoline these days? 10 years ago, when I first started driving, I remember a few weeks where the price actually dropped below a buck a gallon. Now, here in Detroit at least, we're sometimes paying $3. If we stole all that oil for our own use, we'd be paying much less. So stop with the nonsense, if you don't mind.

If you don't believe the war is over oil than you're a fool. The reason your paying $3 a gallon is because the companies don't give a shit who is paying an over inflated price for it. If people are gonna pay $3 for it (and lets face, what choice do you have if you're gonna drive?) then they'll charge it. You said it yourself when America are already in Saudi, Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait, so why is it hard to believe America wants in on the Iraqi fields? They aren't stealing the oil for YOUR use, they're stealing it to make more money.

cool

somebody else took business 101 too

[F1fth]

I'll definitely be sad if our picks are Giuliani and Clinton is all I'm going to say.

Oh and Xtra, out of curiousity, what do you think of Kucinich?

[xtratabasco]

I'll definitely be sad if our picks are Giuliani and Clinton is all I'm going to say.

Oh and Xtra, out of curiousity, what do you think of Kucinich?

loved him and wanted to vote for him in 2004, but hes a gun-grabber and I love the Constitution and Bill of Rights more.

[silvanricky]

I'll definitely be sad if our picks are Giuliani and Clinton is all I'm going to say.

I think that says a lot about what's available to us next time around. You either vote for another Clinton & get more corruption or you just get someone who is...not Clinton.

Can we just skip to 2012?

[DaGip]

Ron Paul is NOT electable. Why isn't he polling higher, Xtra? Please explain this for us. He has zero chance. Most of what you say here sounds good, except he's completely wrong on the war. And come on, how can you still logically say that this has been a "war for oil"? If it really was, then why haven't we secured the oil yet? Why should we be in Baghdad, if all we want is the oil? In fact, why invade Iraq at all? We were already in Saudi, and Qatar, and Bahrain, and Kuwait, why not just claim their oil? And after taking it, why aren't we selling it? And importing it very cheaply back home? Have you noticed how much we're paying for gasoline these days? 10 years ago, when I first started driving, I remember a few weeks where the price actually dropped below a buck a gallon. Now, here in Detroit at least, we're sometimes paying $3. If we stole all that oil for our own use, we'd be paying much less. So stop with the nonsense, if you don't mind.

Greenspan said it's a war for oil... or maybe he's just dumb.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... &plindex=0

Vote Ron Paul! (see, I didn't forget )

[got tonkaed]

dagip...you forgot to put vote ron paul at the bottom of the post, it therefore does not count and you will not see an addition to your total post count number

-management.

[DaGip]

dagip...you forgot to put vote ron paul at the bottom of the post, it therefore does not count and you will not see an addition to your total post count number

-management.

Hold on..you responded while I was still editing!!!

Vote Ron Paul!

[F1fth]

dagip...you forgot to put vote ron paul at the bottom of the post, it therefore does not count and you will not see an addition to your total post count number

-management.

Hold on..you responded while I was still editing!!!

Vote Ron Paul!

Why not just make it your siggy?

[DaGip]

dagip...you forgot to put vote ron paul at the bottom of the post, it therefore does not count and you will not see an addition to your total post count number

-management.

Hold on..you responded while I was still editing!!!

Vote Ron Paul!

Why not just make it your siggy?

Why didn't I think of that! Thanks, F1fth! "V" rocks!

[Iliad]

What is up with the kajillion Ron Paul threads? xtra stop starting new threads and keep it in one!

[xtratabasco]

Take a look around at this country today. Do you think it resembles the kind of country that the founding fathers aimed to establish? We have land confiscation to be sold to corporations; imprisonment without charges; torture; pre-emptive war under false pretenses; the Federal Reserve's inflation; IRS domestic terrorism; deficit spending financed by China; and a dollar that is continuing a freefall in value. We have loss of sovereignty through GATT, NAFTA, CAFTA, the UN. We have a secretive movement to establish a North American Union to integrate the US with Mexico and Canada. We have the government taxing you and I to pay for the welfare of illegal aliens. Meanwhile the government wants to force you to get a National ID Card so that the law enforcement can Gestapo you for your "papers" at a whim.

This is not what the founding fathers wanted for America. But there is only one candidate for president who is right on all those issues. He stands for the Constitution. He stands for personal liberty, as granted us by our Creator. He wants sound money and a humble foreign policy. He wants fair trade instead of managed trade for the benefit of insiders. He wants a small, fiscally responsible government. He wants to get the government out of manipulating your health care. And he supports your right to bear arms. He has been referred to as the founding father of our time. And, John McCain once said -- before he vied for president -- that this man is the most honest man in Washington. The man I am speaking of is Ron Paul. If you want your country back then vote for Ron Paul for president. And let freedom ring, as it did in 1787.


Eric Roth
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/supporter-sp ... eric-roth/

[Dancing Mustard]

n sociology, Nalini Kotamraju has argued that constructing arguments around "class" is extremely difficult in the United States. Terms like "working class" and "middle class" and "upper class" get all muddled quickly. She argues that class divisions in the United States have more to do with lifestyle and social stratification than with income. In other words, all of my anti-capitalist college friends who work in cafes and read Engels are not working class just because they make $14K a year and have no benefits. Class divisions in the United States have more to do with social networks (the real ones, not FB/MS), social capital, cultural capital, and attitudes than income. Not surprisingly, other demographics typically discussed in class terms are also a part of this lifestyle division. Social networks are strongly connected to geography, race, and religion; these are also huge factors in lifestyle divisions and thus "class."

I'm not doing justice to her arguments but it makes sense. My friends who are making $14K in cafes are not of the same class as the immigrant janitor in Oakland just because the share the same income bracket. Their lives are quite different. Unfortunately, with this framing, there aren't really good labels to demarcate the class divisions that do exist. For this reason, I will attempt to delineate what we see on social network sites in stereotypical, descriptive terms meant to evoke an image.

The goodie two shoes, jocks, athletes, or other "good" kids are now going to Facebook. These kids tend to come from families who emphasize education and going to college. They are part of what we'd call hegemonic society. They are primarily white, but not exclusively. They are in honors classes, looking forward to the prom, and live in a world dictated by after school activities.

MySpace is still home for Latino/Hispanic teens, immigrant teens, "burnouts," "alternative kids," "art fags," punks, emos, goths, gangstas, queer kids, and other kids who didn't play into the dominant high school popularity paradigm. These are kids whose parents didn't go to college, who are expected to get a job when they finish high school. These are the teens who plan to go into the military immediately after schools. Teens who are really into music or in a band are also on MySpace. MySpace has most of the kids who are socially ostracized at school because they are geeks, freaks, or queers.

In order to demarcate these two groups, let's call the first group of teens "hegemonic teens" and the second group "subaltern teens." (Yes, I know that these words have academic and political valence. I couldn't find a good set of terms so feel free to suggest alternate labels.) These terms are sloppy at best because the division isn't clear, but it should at least give us terms with which to talk about the two groups.

The division is cleanest in communities where the predator panic hit before MySpace became popular. In much of the midwest, teens heard about Facebook and MySpace at the same time. They were told that MySpace was bad while Facebook was key for college students seeking to make friends at college. I go into schools where the school is split between the Facebook users and the MySpace users. On the coasts and in big cities, things are more murky than elsewhere. MySpace became popular through the bands and fans dynamic before the predator panic kicked in. Its popularity on the coasts and in the cities predated Facebook's launch in high schools. Many hegemonic teens are still using MySpace because of their connections to participants who joined in the early days, yet they too are switching and tend to maintain accounts on both. For the hegemonic teens in the midwest, there wasn't a MySpace to switch from so the "switch" is happening much faster. None of the teens are really switching from Facebook to MySpace, although there are some hegemonic teens who choose to check out MySpace to see what happens there even though their friends are mostly on Facebook.

[xtratabasco]

n sociology, Nalini Kotamraju has argued that constructing arguments around "class" is extremely difficult in the United States. Terms like "working class" and "middle class" and "upper class" get all muddled quickly. She argues that class divisions in the United States have more to do with lifestyle and social stratification than with income. In other words, all of my anti-capitalist college friends who work in cafes and read Engels are not working class just because they make $14K a year and have no benefits. Class divisions in the United States have more to do with social networks (the real ones, not FB/MS), social capital, cultural capital, and attitudes than income. Not surprisingly, other demographics typically discussed in class terms are also a part of this lifestyle division. Social networks are strongly connected to geography, race, and religion; these are also huge factors in lifestyle divisions and thus "class."

I'm not doing justice to her arguments but it makes sense. My friends who are making $14K in cafes are not of the same class as the immigrant janitor in Oakland just because the share the same income bracket. Their lives are quite different. Unfortunately, with this framing, there aren't really good labels to demarcate the class divisions that do exist. For this reason, I will attempt to delineate what we see on social network sites in stereotypical, descriptive terms meant to evoke an image.

The goodie two shoes, jocks, athletes, or other "good" kids are now going to Facebook. These kids tend to come from families who emphasize education and going to college. They are part of what we'd call hegemonic society. They are primarily white, but not exclusively. They are in honors classes, looking forward to the prom, and live in a world dictated by after school activities.

MySpace is still home for Latino/Hispanic teens, immigrant teens, "burnouts," "alternative kids," "art fags," punks, emos, goths, gangstas, queer kids, and other kids who didn't play into the dominant high school popularity paradigm. These are kids whose parents didn't go to college, who are expected to get a job when they finish high school. These are the teens who plan to go into the military immediately after schools. Teens who are really into music or in a band are also on MySpace. MySpace has most of the kids who are socially ostracized at school because they are geeks, freaks, or queers.

In order to demarcate these two groups, let's call the first group of teens "hegemonic teens" and the second group "subaltern teens." (Yes, I know that these words have academic and political valence. I couldn't find a good set of terms so feel free to suggest alternate labels.) These terms are sloppy at best because the division isn't clear, but it should at least give us terms with which to talk about the two groups.

The division is cleanest in communities where the predator panic hit before MySpace became popular. In much of the midwest, teens heard about Facebook and MySpace at the same time. They were told that MySpace was bad while Facebook was key for college students seeking to make friends at college. I go into schools where the school is split between the Facebook users and the MySpace users. On the coasts and in big cities, things are more murky than elsewhere. MySpace became popular through the bands and fans dynamic before the predator panic kicked in. Its popularity on the coasts and in the cities predated Facebook's launch in high schools. Many hegemonic teens are still using MySpace because of their connections to participants who joined in the early days, yet they too are switching and tend to maintain accounts on both. For the hegemonic teens in the midwest, there wasn't a MySpace to switch from so the "switch" is happening much faster. None of the teens are really switching from Facebook to MySpace, although there are some hegemonic teens who choose to check out MySpace to see what happens there even though their friends are mostly on Facebook.

If I can get banned for saying fucking beanor then you can be banned for spamming and clogging up this.

knock it off, take your bull shit to the flame area.

[got tonkaed]

n sociology, Nalini Kotamraju has argued that constructing arguments around "class" is extremely difficult in the United States. Terms like "working class" and "middle class" and "upper class" get all muddled quickly. She argues that class divisions in the United States have more to do with lifestyle and social stratification than with income. In other words, all of my anti-capitalist college friends who work in cafes and read Engels are not working class just because they make $14K a year and have no benefits. Class divisions in the United States have more to do with social networks (the real ones, not FB/MS), social capital, cultural capital, and attitudes than income. Not surprisingly, other demographics typically discussed in class terms are also a part of this lifestyle division. Social networks are strongly connected to geography, race, and religion; these are also huge factors in lifestyle divisions and thus "class."

I'm not doing justice to her arguments but it makes sense. My friends who are making $14K in cafes are not of the same class as the immigrant janitor in Oakland just because the share the same income bracket. Their lives are quite different. Unfortunately, with this framing, there aren't really good labels to demarcate the class divisions that do exist. For this reason, I will attempt to delineate what we see on social network sites in stereotypical, descriptive terms meant to evoke an image.

The goodie two shoes, jocks, athletes, or other "good" kids are now going to Facebook. These kids tend to come from families who emphasize education and going to college. They are part of what we'd call hegemonic society. They are primarily white, but not exclusively. They are in honors classes, looking forward to the prom, and live in a world dictated by after school activities.

MySpace is still home for Latino/Hispanic teens, immigrant teens, "burnouts," "alternative kids," "art fags," punks, emos, goths, gangstas, queer kids, and other kids who didn't play into the dominant high school popularity paradigm. These are kids whose parents didn't go to college, who are expected to get a job when they finish high school. These are the teens who plan to go into the military immediately after schools. Teens who are really into music or in a band are also on MySpace. MySpace has most of the kids who are socially ostracized at school because they are geeks, freaks, or queers.

In order to demarcate these two groups, let's call the first group of teens "hegemonic teens" and the second group "subaltern teens." (Yes, I know that these words have academic and political valence. I couldn't find a good set of terms so feel free to suggest alternate labels.) These terms are sloppy at best because the division isn't clear, but it should at least give us terms with which to talk about the two groups.

The division is cleanest in communities where the predator panic hit before MySpace became popular. In much of the midwest, teens heard about Facebook and MySpace at the same time. They were told that MySpace was bad while Facebook was key for college students seeking to make friends at college. I go into schools where the school is split between the Facebook users and the MySpace users. On the coasts and in big cities, things are more murky than elsewhere. MySpace became popular through the bands and fans dynamic before the predator panic kicked in. Its popularity on the coasts and in the cities predated Facebook's launch in high schools. Many hegemonic teens are still using MySpace because of their connections to participants who joined in the early days, yet they too are switching and tend to maintain accounts on both. For the hegemonic teens in the midwest, there wasn't a MySpace to switch from so the "switch" is happening much faster. None of the teens are really switching from Facebook to MySpace, although there are some hegemonic teens who choose to check out MySpace to see what happens there even though their friends are mostly on Facebook.

i think its supposed to go in the myspace facebook thread.

[Titanic]

Take a look around at this country today. Do you think it resembles the kind of country that the founding fathers aimed to establish? We have land confiscation to be sold to corporations; imprisonment without charges; torture; pre-emptive war under false pretenses; the Federal Reserve's inflation; IRS domestic terrorism; deficit spending financed by China; and a dollar that is continuing a freefall in value. We have loss of sovereignty through GATT, NAFTA, CAFTA, the UN. We have a secretive movement to establish a North American Union to integrate the US with Mexico and Canada. We have the government taxing you and I to pay for the welfare of illegal aliens. Meanwhile the government wants to force you to get a National ID Card so that the law enforcement can Gestapo you for your "papers" at a whim.

This is not what the founding fathers wanted for America. But there is only one candidate for president who is right on all those issues. He stands for the Constitution. He stands for personal liberty, as granted us by our Creator. He wants sound money and a humble foreign policy. He wants fair trade instead of managed trade for the benefit of insiders. He wants a small, fiscally responsible government. He wants to get the government out of manipulating your health care. And he supports your right to bear arms. He has been referred to as the founding father of our time. And, John McCain once said -- before he vied for president -- that this man is the most honest man in Washington. The man I am speaking of is Ron Paul. If you want your country back then vote for Ron Paul for president. And let freedom ring, as it did in 1787.


Eric Roth
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/supporter-sp ... eric-roth/

Im not going to bother arguing all the points, your past record shows that your just ignorant so its not worth it, but two points. The UN has resulted in a loss of sovereignty for you? How?

Secondly, who cares what the founding fathers wanted? They lived in a different time period when the world was completely different. You should adapt to changing times and make your country the best it can be in the present time, and serve your current citizens, not the original founders.

[Dancing Mustard]

If I can get banned for saying fucking beanor then you can be banned for spamming and clogging up this.

knock it off, take your bull shit to the flame area.

And the same to you sir. These propaganda threads which you bump endlessly, and in which you never attempt to debate sensibly, are simply clogging up the forum. They're spam my man, and they'll be met with the contempt that they deserve.

Return to the Flame Wars, it's where trolls meet and mingle.








































f*ck yeah those smilies are annoying.

[xtratabasco]

If I can get banned for saying fucking beanor then you can be banned for spamming and clogging up this.

knock it off, take your bull shit to the flame area.

And the same to you sir. These propaganda threads which you bump endlessly, and in which you never attempt to debate sensibly, are simply clogging up the forum. They're spam my man, and they'll be met with the contempt that they deserve.

Return to the Flame Wars, it's where trolls meet and mingle.








































f*ck yeah those smilies are annoying.

keep your shit in the flame war

[Dancing Mustard]

If I can get banned for saying fucking beanor then you can be banned for spamming and clogging up this.

knock it off, take your bull shit to the flame area.

And the same to you sir. These propaganda threads which you bump endlessly, and in which you never attempt to debate sensibly, are simply clogging up the forum. They're spam my man, and they'll be met with the contempt that they deserve.

Return to the Flame Wars, it's where trolls meet and mingle.








































f*ck yeah those smilies are annoying.

keep your shit in the flame war

You keep your shit in the flame war

























































Familiar looking chaps? Yeah, they should be...

[xtratabasco]

If I can get banned for saying fucking beanor then you can be banned for spamming and clogging up this.

knock it off, take your bull shit to the flame area.

And the same to you sir. These propaganda threads which you bump endlessly, and in which you never attempt to debate sensibly, are simply clogging up the forum. They're spam my man, and they'll be met with the contempt that they deserve.

Return to the Flame Wars, it's where trolls meet and mingle.








































f*ck yeah those smilies are annoying.

keep your shit in the flame war

You keep your shit in the flame war

























































Familiar looking chaps? Yeah, they should be...

if you dont like the topic then stay the f*ck off....go spam the flame area

[Snorri1234]

Im not going to bother arguing all the points, your past record shows that your just ignorant so its not worth it, but two points. The UN has resulted in a loss of sovereignty for you? How?

Well obviously they can't attack anyone anymore without the UN's permission.....



(except for last time....)

[Dancing Mustard]

If I can get banned for saying fucking beanor then you can be banned for spamming and clogging up this.

knock it off, take your bull shit to the flame area.

And the same to you sir. These propaganda threads which you bump endlessly, and in which you never attempt to debate sensibly, are simply clogging up the forum. They're spam my man, and they'll be met with the contempt that they deserve.

Return to the Flame Wars, it's where trolls meet and mingle.








































f*ck yeah those smilies are annoying.

keep your shit in the flame war

You keep your shit in the flame war

























































Familiar looking chaps? Yeah, they should be...

if you dont like the topic then stay the f*ck off....go spam the flame area

Nuh Uh.

If you want to spam propaganda then go to a propaganda spamming board.


















Don't come spam the clubhouse

























You know you love em




















Hoo ya

[s.xkitten]

i may have supported Ron Paul at some point...But i can't do that anymore...because Xtra does

[muy_thaiguy]

i may have supported Ron Paul at some point...But i can't do that anymore...because Xtra does

I think that almost did the same for Ambrose.