it's this partisan bullshit that will ruin this country. i'm glad someone else sees it too.Spearhead wrote:
Kind of like Bush back in the day.
old concept is old
Herp derp did anybody forget they killed something like 3000-ish people? I'm all for bringing the troops dead now that Osama is dead but no need to pretend we're evil when we're JDAMing terrorists.
Herp derp did anybody forget they killed something like 3000-ish people? I'm all for bringing the troops dead now that Osama is dead but no need to pretend we're evil when we're JDAMing terrorists.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
do you know why al qaeda did the 9/11 attacks?-Sh1fty- wrote:
old concept is old
Herp derp did anybody forget they killed something like 3000-ish people? I'm all for bringing the troops dead now that Osama is dead but no need to pretend we're evil when we're JDAMing terrorists.
You don't understand it I see.-Sh1fty- wrote:
old concept is old
Herp derp did anybody forget they killed something like 3000-ish people? I'm all for bringing the troops dead now that Osama is dead but no need to pretend we're evil when we're JDAMing terrorists.
Ron Paul makes sense on foreign policy, not much else unfortunately.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Overly simplistic comparison, ignoring obvious differences that would make the two situations like apples and armchairs in nearly every other respect other than "foreign troops are here doing things we don't like."
One would hope it would get you to think about the entirety of the issue, not the faulty argument being put forth. Some of Ron Paul's positions have merit WRT foreign policy, but not many. That commercial doesn't help, tbh.
One would hope it would get you to think about the entirety of the issue, not the faulty argument being put forth. Some of Ron Paul's positions have merit WRT foreign policy, but not many. That commercial doesn't help, tbh.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Whether it's Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, or Ralph Nader, people should vote for the "outside" candidates.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
people want something new. they want to hear candidates talk about stuff other than what the mainstream (for lack of a better descriptor) people talk about. Of course people are going to latch on to that. Its why Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura and Ralph Nader were popular when they tried to break into the race.
All the establishment ones suck horribly.
Granted, not voting is an option too. With the Electoral College, the presidential election is kind of a joke anyway.
Watched the florida debate yesterday and I'd have to agree they 'suck horribly'. 90% was typical party line blabber and Romney aiming below Gingrich's belt.Turquoise wrote:
Whether it's Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, or Ralph Nader, people should vote for the "outside" candidates.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
people want something new. they want to hear candidates talk about stuff other than what the mainstream (for lack of a better descriptor) people talk about. Of course people are going to latch on to that. Its why Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura and Ralph Nader were popular when they tried to break into the race.
All the establishment ones suck horribly.
Granted, not voting is an option too. With the Electoral College, the presidential election is kind of a joke anyway.
inane little opines
cause they're jealous their women don't wear bikinisCybargs wrote:
do you know why al qaeda did the 9/11 attacks?-Sh1fty- wrote:
old concept is old
Herp derp did anybody forget they killed something like 3000-ish people? I'm all for bringing the troops dead now that Osama is dead but no need to pretend we're evil when we're JDAMing terrorists.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Go Ron Go..
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
If you're one of those people who uses their vote to vote for "the lesser of two evils" Ron paul is probably the only realistic candidate for such a voter. As far as I can tell, as a brit.
The video is overly simplistic but it's a step in the right direction, kinda, sorta.
The video is overly simplistic but it's a step in the right direction, kinda, sorta.
Last edited by jord (2012-01-25 09:53:01)
I think more than anything it just illustrates the philosophy of non-interventionism. Anti-war people have been saying those things for years now. It looks like the campaigns attempt to court "middle of the road" anti-war voters, like independents and maybe some liberals.
Last edited by Spearhead (2012-01-25 12:35:21)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
So you're all about Obama getting re-elected, then?Turquoise wrote:
Whether it's Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, or Ralph Nader, people should vote for the "outside" candidates.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
people want something new. they want to hear candidates talk about stuff other than what the mainstream (for lack of a better descriptor) people talk about. Of course people are going to latch on to that. Its why Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura and Ralph Nader were popular when they tried to break into the race.
All the establishment ones suck horribly.
Granted, not voting is an option too. With the Electoral College, the presidential election is kind of a joke anyway.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Watch the video I posted above. It doesn't really matter who you vote for.FEOS wrote:
So you're all about Obama getting re-elected, then?Turquoise wrote:
Whether it's Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, or Ralph Nader, people should vote for the "outside" candidates.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
people want something new. they want to hear candidates talk about stuff other than what the mainstream (for lack of a better descriptor) people talk about. Of course people are going to latch on to that. Its why Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura and Ralph Nader were popular when they tried to break into the race.
All the establishment ones suck horribly.
Granted, not voting is an option too. With the Electoral College, the presidential election is kind of a joke anyway.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Very "Overton Window"-ish.
But even if Paul were elected, overall policies wouldn't change. It's the entrenched bureaucrats who control the implementation of policy (or lack thereof). Those graybeards aren't going anywhere...their union is too good.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Which is why I don't understand why people go on about electibility, or why he sticks in so many peoples craw. The president is largely just a figurehead office. Unless both houses of Congress are wiped out by an irate Japanese pilot the status quo will remain.FEOS wrote:
Very "Overton Window"-ish.
But even if Paul were elected, overall policies wouldn't change. It's the entrenched bureaucrats who control the implementation of policy (or lack thereof). Those graybeards aren't going anywhere...their union is too good.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
The flaw in the argument is that most people wouldn't care if Texas were occupied by the Chinese.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
this thread is funny
Tu Stultus Es
Another ridiculous Ron Paul commercial
It's funny how the guy who is trying to come off as the voice of reason whose followers hail him as a messiah, puts out the most infantile ads. I wonder why.
It's funny how the guy who is trying to come off as the voice of reason whose followers hail him as a messiah, puts out the most infantile ads. I wonder why.
You might be onto something.eleven bravo wrote:
he appeals to idiots.
meh they can have texas
Wouldn't this echo what Jay just said?FEOS wrote:
Very "Overton Window"-ish.
But even if Paul were elected, overall policies wouldn't change. It's the entrenched bureaucrats who control the implementation of policy (or lack thereof). Those graybeards aren't going anywhere...their union is too good.
I could choose to vote for Romney (who's pretty obviously going to get the nomination), but that wouldn't be much different from Obama.
Even if Gingrich won it, it would be the same (although he's actually worse than Obama).
So, all I'm left with is two choices.
1) Voting for candidates like Paul that don't have a real chance at winning but who represent something different from the status quo.
2) Not voting at all, since it's rather futile to begin with.
Admittedly, #2 is looking more attractive over time.
So Jay what do you think about the Citizens United ruling? Just curious.
Last edited by Spearhead (2012-01-26 12:00:40)
I think its a win for free speech. Corporations get their say regardless, now its just more open. Republicans were at a disadvantage before because they get zero union camapign contributions, now its fairly even. Dems only whine because it fucked up thei artificial competitive advantage: see MoveOn among others.Spearhead wrote:
So Jay what do you think about the Citizens United ruling? Just curious.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
So you do not believe it negatively affects third party campaign financing?
Why would it?Spearhead wrote:
So you do not believe it negatively affects third party campaign financing?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat