Ron Paul climbs in the polls

[marf]

he's into rugged individualism? down with medicaid and medicare? Social security. Food stamps? (Democrat things)

[SCONES TO DIE FOR]

If he gets elected and we go back to the 19th century, do we get to wear the funny hats?

[eugene]

following this logic noam chomsky is also a "strong israel supporter" because he also lived in israel and supported a socialist-zionist movement called ha-shomer ha-tzair..which is actually affiliated with habonim dror.

 

you know what he meant by that=zionism, or the right of the Jewish people to have their own state. knock it the fuck off.

chillax, i think i can understand awep pretty well myself. zionism doesn't necessary imply strong support of israel. so if he wants to claim that cohen messed with paul for the very specific reason of being a strong israel supporter (and not for a myriad of other possible reasons), he better prove it.

[sup]

ron paul is down right wack

 

nuff said

[Guest rumbo]

I've got his signs in my yard.

 

I've never understood this. Why would you advertise who your political preference is? Let alone outside your house. Doesn't that invite hostility (in the US)?

 

People don't tend to wear their politics on their sleeve over here. It's largely considered a personal and private matter.

[MAXIMUS MISCHIEF]

thats how it should be thats why internet forums are like the deepst darkest places of the world where ppl let out their horrible secrets and show how friggin silly and wacked out they are as human beings lol

 

just friggin keep that weird stuf 2 urself guys u dont need to be all freaky and get mad at eachother for havin different opinions just be nice

[chenGOD]

you make it sound as if there shouldn't be any cost-benefit analysis.

 

The paper by the Harvard economics professor is exactly that.

you tore that quote out of the context, i meant cost-benefit analysis in the larger scale, when deliberating between candidates to support. you can apply it to your own example, paul is willing to legalize drugs but he might fuck up the whole economy up with his isolation tendencies. i'll trust you and others on the benefits of legalization.

Then you need to be clearer with what you mean when you say "cost-benefit analysis". You said cost-benefit analysis and then went on some spiel about obama being an islamo-communist and taxing the rich (which by the way would increase revenues about 50-60 billion a year according to various analyses around the web, so a bit less than legalizing drugs). It's not a cut and dry proposition. You can't have only one answer. It needs to be a combination of increasing revenue and cutting expenditures.

 

Smetty - it's a bit of both - more non-interventionist, but he definitely favours economic isolation policies.

 

but i mean economic isolation how? that would seem retarded for anyone to suggest that.

 

wouldn't economic isolationism imply tons of protective tariffs? isn't ron paul against that?

 

He wants to pull out of the WTO and NAFTA.

[delet...]

I've got his signs in my yard.

 

I've never understood this. Why would you advertise who your political preference is? Let alone outside your house. Doesn't that invite hostility (in the US)?

 

People don't tend to wear their politics on their sleeve over here. It's largely considered a personal and private matter.

 

Maybe amongst your namby pamby group of apolitical waiflols. hah.

[lumpenprol]

i'm pretty sure Cohen targeted Paul because he (or his handlers) were the only ones dumb enough to fall for his shtick...

[eh Speedy]

I've got his signs in my yard.

 

I've never understood this. Why would you advertise who your political preference is? Let alone outside your house. Doesn't that invite hostility (in the US)?

 

People don't tend to wear their politics on their sleeve over here. It's largely considered a personal and private matter.

 

Well you put a sign in your yard for all of the people that live around you who are maybe sitting on the fence about who to vote for, and the sign plants that little seed about who they may want to look into or read more about.

 

No there is zero hostility over it. Few people here would bother to get heated over a candidate ad. I don't quite understand why people would not want to have an open dialog about it unless getting beaten by someone w/ a different opinion is the result, in which case your neck of the woods has far bigger problems than figuring out who to vote for.

 

Voting privacy, that's white people shit (I'm white btw). Reminds me of that Dave Chappelle stand up bit. Watch like the first 2 min.:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q-cKpxY67Q

[sup]

but a ron paul sign proabbly means there a dangerous wack job imo

[sup]

the person whose just WAITING with there guns/knife in hand for a chance to kill a poor person / not white person if u get my drift

[joseph]

the person whose just WAITING with there guns/knife in hand for a chance to kill a poor person / not white person if u get my drift

 

Where's the off button?

[sup]

hint theres a reson ron pauls popular in the internet

[awepittance]

i'm pretty sure Cohen targeted Paul because he (or his handlers) were the only ones dumb enough to fall for his shtick...

 

it's possible, i just don't believe it considering how many dumb as dirt conservatives out there who would react even more poorly to the situation

[Guest rumbo]

I've got his signs in my yard.

 

I've never understood this. Why would you advertise who your political preference is? Let alone outside your house. Doesn't that invite hostility (in the US)?

 

People don't tend to wear their politics on their sleeve over here. It's largely considered a personal and private matter.

 

Maybe amongst your namby pamby group of apolitical waiflols. hah.

 

I was actually going to mention "except perhaps up North". :)

 

 

 

I don't quite understand why people would not want to have an open dialog about it unless getting beaten by someone w/ a different opinion is the result, in which case your neck of the woods has far bigger problems than figuring out who to vote for.

 

From my experience there is plenty of discourse about politics here, but it's rarely a "mine vs yours" affair. Actually, the most rabid in that regard seem to be the far left greens folk here who tend to lecture you on why you should support their political stance. I'm of the opinion that if you are part of either side of the extreme political spectrum, you are part of the problem. Both want to dominate the other, when in reality it is about a nation of divided people coming to a compromise in order to live together.

 

While I'm left leaning, I find a lot of the far left views to be naive.

[Guest rumbo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4matEbGCBg

[goDel]

i'm pretty sure Cohen targeted Paul because he (or his handlers) were the only ones dumb enough to fall for his shtick...

 

it's possible, i just don't believe it considering how many dumb as dirt conservatives out there who would react even more poorly to the situation

 

These dumb as dirt conservatives probably have tons of people around them to do some kind of preventive damage control. Read: preventing the conservative to get into something which could lead into bad publicity. I imagine these poor people are working overtime.

 

Every time a conservative says anything in public, things can go from bad to worse.

 

Knowing Paul, he probably thinks he's his own kind of damage control.

[Guest couch]

I've got his signs in my yard.

 

I've never understood this. Why would you advertise who your political preference is? Let alone outside your house. Doesn't that invite hostility (in the US)?

 

People don't tend to wear their politics on their sleeve over here. It's largely considered a personal and private matter.

The advertising doesn't bug me too much. What I think is distasteful is how people treat politics like some professional sporting event. Taking sides and acting elitist about it towards the other "teams". And then when their team doesn't win they treat all the others like shit for the next 4 years rather than try to compromise. "It's your fault I lost my job, you voted for him. Fuck you. I cant wait for my guy to get in office so he can fuck you [political party]s over." I've heard things like that once in a while, it's rare but noticeable.

 

That is why I like to keep politics private. People tend to be snobby about it around the south east where the majority are conservative extremists.

 

And although it's hypocritical I hate that some people are allowed to vote. Mostly ones that vote straight red or blue without finding out what the candidate is about. Just because it's their "team".

[SR4]

i'm pretty sure Cohen targeted Paul because he (or his handlers) were the only ones dumb enough to fall for his shtick...

 

it's possible, i just don't believe it considering how many dumb as dirt conservatives out there who would react even more poorly to the situation

 

These dumb as dirt conservatives probably have tons of people around them to do some kind of preventive damage control. Read: preventing the conservative to get into something which could lead into bad publicity. I imagine these poor people are working overtime.

 

Every time a conservative says anything in public, things can go from bad to worse.

 

Knowing Paul, he probably thinks he's his own kind of damage control.

 

i still wonder this, is Paul a bigot because he called Bruno a "queer"? Its not as if Paul was being interviewed by a normal gay guy on the street.

 

Don't get me started on people using "queer theory" as a legitimate term for gay history.

[SR4]

everyone knows here that I was at least for a while on the Paul bandwagon, and I still consider his platform leagues better than Obama or any other Repub. candidate, but the problem that a lot of Paul supporters don't consider is this

 

Paul will only be the executive head, with a Republican AND Democratic Congress that will almost certainly oppose him on ending the FED, ending the wars, restructuring the mil-ind complex, and retracting stimulus and healthcare policies.

 

Ok, but that's not too bad because Paul is still for no gov't. in business affairs...ok cool...if we say we are capitalist lets fucking be capitalist.

 

Well, that is the most dangerous part. By ending any means for small or mid size businesses to gain a toehold against the gigantic zaibatsu corporate monstrosities like Walmart or Time-Warner, these corporations are essentially guaranteed continued and completely unopposed dominance. Add to the fact that these companies have already prided themselves on openly engaging in corrupt and ethically debatable activities to corner their respective markets. How do you stop this without regulations?

 

The problem is exactly that gov't needs to get out of corporate business, but not in the way Paul thinks. The government pretty much IS a corporate symbiote. There needs to be a massive restructuring and rehaul of the U.S. gov't on all levels before businesses could actually compete on a level playing field.....and Paul's minimalist gov't plan would more than likely inflame existing problems than ameliorate them.

 

This is just my opinion though.

[goDel]

i still wonder this, is Paul a bigot because he called Bruno a "queer"? Its not as if Paul was being interviewed by a normal gay guy on the street. Don't get me started on people using "queer theory" as a legitimate term for gay history.

 

I can't speak for others, but Paul looks a bit like a bigot when he remains in his serious mode when Bruno is clearly taking all kinds of piss. Shouldn't the joke be obvious when Bruno starts to dry hump walls? Paul tightened up and got mad. Understandably perhaps. But not the sign of having some sense of humor about the situation.

 

if we say we are capitalist lets fucking be capitalist

 

Are you serious? Capitalism typically responds reactionary. First wreck the housing market ("because you can") then, after it collapsed, turn into some prudent saint ("no, we won't lend you any money! that's too risky"). Capitalism as a whole doesn't look towards the future and the possible long term consequences. It looks back to check it's profits. And as long as profits grow, that's a sign to do more of the same.

 

Paul's liberalism stopped working in 1979.

[goDel]

O wait. Nevermind. That response was typed before reading the last paragraph. But I still don't follow you on the Ron Paul subject, I guess.

You don't like his ideas on governing the economy, but would vote for him nevertheless?

[Guest JW Modestburns]

If he gets elected and we go back to the 19th century, do we get to wear the funny hats?

 

Sure, just don't expect the taxpayers to pay for them.

[Guest LucidVibes]

this is what happens when a man who seems highly principled gets closer to the prize

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkAsLPrnJGc

 

more http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb2zy7B-X-s

 

I don't really see your point because i listened to both of those and i happen to agree with him!!! aborting a baby one day before birth wow.. didn't know they left it that late... that is fucked up no??? Everything Ron Paul says seems to be bang on and it seems hes genuine.