Recovering Ronulans [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Recovering Ronulans


Restless28
03-09-2012, 11:02
I admit. I am a recovering Ronulan. I like most of Ron Paul's ideas, but he will never be elected President.

Flame suit on.

The Machinist
03-09-2012, 11:17
Are you saying the passion you once had for the Constitution and a fiscal policy that doesn't spell ruin for all of us, no longer floats your boat?

Slug71
03-09-2012, 11:21
Doesnt matter. Ill still write him in. I wont sell out to the rest and at least i can go sleep at night and say i did the right thing. My kids/grandkids will never be able to turn around and ask "why did you vote for" so and so.......

CAcop
03-09-2012, 11:21
Yeah, I was there with him an election or two ago but then I realized if he really beleived he would be a Libertarian.

G29Reload
03-09-2012, 11:22
It's ok.

I hope a candidate like him - thecrazy shows up to start getting some traction.

There's hope for Rand, who is a little more balanced. I like him in every interview to date. I could seriously get on the RandWagon.

He's young, there may be time before Obama destroys this country. If so much as Romney gets in, the destruction could be slowed significantly so Rand can take a better place on the stage.

Or, again…someone like him.

G29Reload
03-09-2012, 11:26
Ill still write him in.

Another Obama supporter. Picking the worst of two evils rather than the lesser.

Barack Obama HATES this country and is actively trying to destroy it.

Even if Mittens has issues, I'll take fumbling in the right direction over maliciously heading to destruction. We'll survive with Mitt, we will not with Obama.

Restless28
03-09-2012, 11:27
Are you saying the passion you once had for the Constitution and a fiscal policy that doesn't spell ruin for all of us, no longer floats your boat?

No. I'm saying that he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever being elected President, and that I will support and vote for the conservative candidate who might actually give Mitt a fight, Rick Santorum.

Restless28
03-09-2012, 11:30
Another Obama supporter. Picking the worst of two evils rather than the lesser.

Barack Obama HATES this country and is actively trying to destroy it.

Even if Mittens has issues, I'll take fumbling in the right direction over maliciously heading to destruction. We'll survive with Mitt, we will not with Obama.

Damn, now I agree with G29.

Slug71
03-09-2012, 11:41
Another Obama supporter. Picking the worst of two evils rather than the lesser.

Barack Obama HATES this country and is actively trying to destroy it.

Even if Mittens has issues, I'll take fumbling in the right direction over maliciously heading to destruction. We'll survive with Mitt, we will not with Obama.

Mittens WILL be WORSE than Obama!

Restless28
03-09-2012, 11:44
Mittens WILL be WORSE than Obama!

Proof?

JBnTX
03-09-2012, 11:45
I admit. I am a recovering Ronulan. I like most of Ron Paul's ideas, but he will never be elected President.

Flame suit on.


Walk toward the light! Just keep walking toward the light!:running:

Lethaltxn
03-09-2012, 11:48
Mittens WILL be WORSE than Obama!

How do you figure?

JBnTX
03-09-2012, 11:53
Mittens WILL be WORSE than Obama!

NOBODY will be worse than Obama.
Job #1 is defeating Obama and sending him packing.

Cream Soda Kid
03-09-2012, 12:03
Another Obama supporter. Picking the worst of two evils rather than the lesser.

Barack Obama HATES this country and is actively trying to destroy it.

Even if Mittens has issues, I'll take fumbling in the right direction over maliciously heading to destruction. We'll survive with Mitt, we will not with Obama.

I feel the same way, but you’ve said it much better than I could have.

Gundude
03-09-2012, 12:05
NOBODY will be worse than Obama.
Job #1 is defeating Obama and sending him packing.Saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

Obama will bring about change, although it won't be the change he's hoping for.

Mittens will not. Mittens is politics as usual, and for those who are repulsed by the trend we're on, electing somebody who will maintain that trend is unacceptable.

Conservatives, by definition, fear change. That is why conservatives are on board with Mittens despite his unconservative credentials. They know he's "safe". They know he won't change anything.

The time for "safe" is gone. Let Obama bring the pot to a full boil quickly, and let's see what America is made of.

FL Airedale
03-09-2012, 12:06
I don't agree with ANY candidate on all of their ideas. I'm closest to Ron Paul.

When it comes to the general election, I will vote for whoever the GOP candidate is. It won't be Ron Paul, although I'm sorry about it.

All of them are better than the alternative.

Sam Spade
03-09-2012, 12:18
Mittens WILL be WORSE than Obama!

Really? He'll move the G8 to a fortified camp? He'll personally lobby to kill a pipeline and the private jobs that go with it? He'll declare Congress to be inconsequential to deploying the military?

Cuz Obama did all that stuff just this week.

Glock30Eric
03-09-2012, 12:20
I agree with the OP.

I hope Obama will win the 2nd term so he could shake us up. If Romney is TPOTUS and then he will send us back to our beds, while the America is decaying.

Obama is the only best shot we have at this time for 2nd term (I wish we could elect Ron Paul, but America doesn't want him at this time.) It is America's fault. If we elect Ron Paul but it might won't change anything because of the gridlock on the senator/house floor.

Obama = Romney, no question.

RCP
03-09-2012, 12:28
I simply don't buy that we wouldn't "survive" another 4 years of Obama. I can't stand the guy but if it takes him getting re-elected to wake up the GOP and it's party fan boys to give us a candidate worth a crap then so be it. Calling me an Obama supporter because I won't vote for Romney is ridiculous, I'm the guy voting for the candidate who is the furthest thing from Obama there is. If you insist on pulling the lever for whomever the GOP puts up there no matter how bad they are (yes I know he's supposedly a "little" better than Obama, that's a matter of opinion as his track record certainly doesn't seem to indicate that) then YOU are the problem not me. So go ahead and blame Ron Paul supporters all you want I really don't care the way I see it you have had every opportunity to do the same you keep insisting we do which is to join your side. If Obama is re-elected then you are just as much to blame if not more so for being so easily convinced to accept a candidate that doesn't stand for anything conservative other than not being Obama. I've gone along and voted straight Republican ever since I could vote and it has gotten us to where we are today. Not anymore and until the GOP gives us someone worth a damn, not ever again!

Restless28
03-09-2012, 12:34
I agree with the OP.

I hope Obama will win the 2nd term so he could shake us up. If Romney is TPOTUS and then he will send us back to our beds, while the America is decaying.

Obama is the only best shot we have at this time for 2nd term (I wish we could elect Ron Paul, but America doesn't want him at this time.) It is America's fault. If we elect Ron Paul but it might won't change anything because of the gridlock on the senator/house floor.

Obama = Romney, no question.

Obama thanks you.

Restless28
03-09-2012, 12:36
Saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

Obama will bring about change, although it won't be the change he's hoping for.

Mittens will not. Mittens is politics as usual, and for those who are repulsed by the trend we're on, electing somebody who will maintain that trend is unacceptable.

Conservatives, by definition, fear change. That is why conservatives are on board with Mittens despite his unconservative credentials. They know he's "safe". They know he won't change anything.

The time for "safe" is gone. Let Obama bring the pot to a full boil quickly, and let's see what America is made of.

Dangerous thinking

Gundude
03-09-2012, 12:38
Dangerous thinking
Let me reiterate: The time for "safe" is gone.

RCP
03-09-2012, 12:39
Actually Obama should be thanking the GOP for handing him a 2nd term on a silver platter by giving us someone as horrible as Mitt Romney as a candidate. Pathetic.

Gundude
03-09-2012, 12:47
Obama thanks you.
What about me?? :crying: I'm the guy warning everybody away from Republicans in thread after thread. Since you appear to be Obama's messenger, can you get him to drop me a thank-you card at least?

Snowman92D
03-09-2012, 13:16
It is America's fault.

I'm trying to think of who else says that all the time. Oh, yeah....Obama and Ron Paul.

eracer
03-09-2012, 13:55
Another Obama supporter. Picking the worst of two evils rather than the lesser.

Barack Obama HATES this country and is actively trying to destroy it.

Even if Mittens has issues, I'll take fumbling in the right direction over maliciously heading to destruction. We'll survive with Mitt, we will not with Obama.This is a tired and completely erroneous argument. Blame yourself for voting for Mitt all you want. Don't blame me for voting for liberty.

CAcop
03-09-2012, 14:05
Couple of things:

Remember what Wm. Buckley used to say. Vote for the most conservative candidate in any election. Romney is the most conservative candidate when compared to Obama. Hell, either Clinton is conservative compared to Obama.

Another thing to remember just because Obama is under 50% approval rating right now it does not mean his defeat is assured no matter which candidate is running against him. As of right now realclearpolitics.com average oft he polls puts Obama at 49.2% approval. The way the country is divided up that would probably be just enough to get him reelected. It is not certain but it is better than it was a few months ago.

For those who think this country is going to fall apart if Romney gets elected you better flee for some other country if Obama gets reelected. If Obama gets reelected that means that the majority of people in this country like the things he has done in office. More will come.

Gundude
03-09-2012, 15:12
Remember what Wm. Buckley used to say. Vote for the most conservative candidate in any election. Romney is the most conservative candidate when compared to Obama. Hell, either Clinton is conservative compared to Obama.How has that worked out so far?

For those who think this country is going to fall apart if Romney gets elected you better flee for some other country if Obama gets reelected. If Obama gets reelected that means that the majority of people in this country like the things he has done in office. More will come.This country won't fall apart during the next four years no matter who is elected. I want the guy who will interrupt the trend of the last 100 years. If that means shifting it into overdrive and scaring the crap out of everybody, then so be it. If the majority of Americans are actually in love with his ideas and don't get scared, then that's what America is. I'd like to know that about America now though, instead of wondering if things are happening just too gradually for people to notice.

CAcop
03-09-2012, 15:47
How has that worked out so far?It doesn't matter because not enough people are voting for your savior and they will not vote for him. How many times has he run for president? You can't say people don't know who he is. They just choose to ignore them once they are in the voting booth.

This country won't fall apart during the next four years no matter who is elected. I want the guy who will interrupt the trend of the last 100 years. If that means shifting it into overdrive and scaring the crap out of everybody, then so be it. If the majority of Americans are actually in love with his ideas and don't get scared, then that's what America is. I'd like to know that about America now though, instead of wondering if things are happening just too gradually for people to notice.

Like I said before if people like Obama's policies they will reelect them. "Shifting into overdrive" isn't going to bother them. They want it that way.

Gundude
03-09-2012, 16:15
Like I said before if people like Obama's policies they will reelect them. "Shifting into overdrive" isn't going to bother them. They want it that way.If the majority of Americans want it, then America will get it. That's the nature of democracy. Who are you to tell the majority that your way is better, just because it coincides more with the ideas of some men who wrote some stuff on paper a couple hundred years ago?

And before you say "Constitutional Republic," how on Earth do you expect a Constitution to override the will of the majority of Americans? The majority of those who've sworn to defend it are the exact same people who don't want it, as are the people electing and paying them. I'm talking about reality here, not theory.

What I want to know is if Americans really want what Obama's selling, once they get it shoved in their faces. If they do, then that's who America is. If they don't, then coming to that realization sooner rather than later is better for the America we want. And Obama's the man who's going to bring them to that realization, not Romney. Why put it off even longer?

F350
03-09-2012, 16:39
I really like 95% of what Ron Paul says....BUT that other 5% is foreign policy (I'll talk nice to the Iranians) and that is a NO GO for me.

G19G20
03-09-2012, 16:45
No. I'm saying that he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever being elected President, and that I will support and vote for the conservative candidate who might actually give Mitt a fight, Rick Santorum.

Amazing. You drop support of Paul in favor of a guy that wants to attack Iran yesterday, legislate his religious morality, and polls worse against Obama than Paul does?

:faint:

I wonder when people will realize that you can't have a warfare state and small government at the same time.

eta: Im pretty sure the OP never was a Paul supporter in the first place.

Gundude
03-09-2012, 16:48
I really like 95% of what Ron Paul says....BUT that other 5% is foreign policy (I'll talk nice to the Iranians) and that is a NO GO for me.It's time to forget about Ron Paul the person and to start talking about his ideas, which aren't even "his" ideas. He's just the vessel which carried these ideas back into the mainstream (to some extent).

Some of the ideas are good and some are bad, but once you forget about Ron Paul, you don't need to take them as a whole or dismiss them as a whole. You can take the ones you like and do what you can to help those ideas make their way into political discourse.

Gunnut 45/454
03-09-2012, 17:17
I'll take the Independants montra- why don't the Liberterians go more moderate and drop all there radical ideas. Then maybe they could get the votes needed to win? Like forget -the gold standard, cutting the military to the bone, never defending our country, having an open border, drop there very atheists veiws etc. Then maybe just maybe you'd get more then 8% of the vote.:whistling:

Flying-Dutchman
03-09-2012, 17:30
I really like 95% of what Ron Paul says....BUT that other 5% is foreign policy (I'll talk nice to the Iranians) and that is a NO GO for me.
On the outside chance Paul wins, as soon as the CIA briefs him just how bad things are, he will age 5 years and lose his peacenik stand.

All Paul asks for is that Congress declares war before we go to war; nothing wrong about that.

Vote for Paul in the primary if you must, but vote for the Republican nominee in the general.

Paul will not run 3rd party as he wants to be on good terms with the Republicans when his son Rand runs for the Presidency.

Ruble Noon
03-09-2012, 18:01
I'll take the Independants montra- why don't the Liberterians go more moderate and drop all there radical ideas. Then maybe they could get the votes needed to win? Like forget -the gold standard, cutting the military to the bone, never defending our country, having an open border, drop there very atheists veiws etc. Then maybe just maybe you'd get more then 8% of the vote.:whistling:

When did following the Constitution become a radical idea?

Gundude
03-09-2012, 18:20
I'll take the Independants montra- why don't the Liberterians go more moderate and drop all there radical ideas. Then maybe they could get the votes needed to win? Like forget -the gold standard, cutting the military to the bone, never defending our country, having an open border, drop there very atheists veiws etc. Then maybe just maybe you'd get more then 8% of the vote.:whistling:I agree with this.

Too many Libertarians are high on ideals but low on strategy and terrible at marketing.

JBnTX
03-09-2012, 18:55
Too many Libertarians are high on ideals but low on strategy and terrible at marketing.

That's the most accurate statement I've read here about libertarians.:thumbsup:

G19G20
03-09-2012, 20:20
I'll take the Independants montra- why don't the Liberterians go more moderate and drop all there radical ideas. Then maybe they could get the votes needed to win? Like forget -the gold standard, cutting the military to the bone, never defending our country, having an open border, drop there very atheists veiws etc. Then maybe just maybe you'd get more then 8% of the vote.:whistling:

Ignoring that much of what you claim as "Libertarian" is flat out baloney, you're just suggesting that we become part of the status quo that's gotten us to this point as a country?

Legislate based on religious fairy tales, invade countries that never attacked us, spend trillions a year on foreign policy that doesn't do anything but make more people hate us, stick with paper money backed by nothing that loses value every day, etc. Sounds like you're saying that libertarians should just become part of the problem too. No thanks. I sleep better at night knowing I don't advocate the deaths of civilians and the theft of the elderly's savings.

When did America become full of bloodthirsty chicken hawks anyway???

kirgi08
03-09-2012, 20:31
:animlol:

G29Reload
03-09-2012, 21:07
This is a tired and completely erroneous argument. Blame yourself for voting for Mitt all you want. Don't blame me for voting for liberty.

Delusional if you think getting Obama re-elected is liberty. Failure to see the difference is cognitive dissonance.

aspartz
03-09-2012, 21:32
Even if Mittens has issues, I'll take fumbling in the rightwrong direction economically and leaping to the right on authoritative moral issues
Fixed it for you -- I will never hold my nose and vote for another compassionate conservative RINO again. If the GOP refuses to field a socially moderate and economically conservative candidate instead of the reverse, they apparently do not want my vote. So be it.

ARS

Jeff S.
03-09-2012, 21:56
If you think you're a pragmatist because of your ability to vote for whom you think will win, or to vote against somebody rather than for, then I think your ability to discern is lacking.

The mere act of voting requires, fundamentally, the ability to be pragmatic. The person who represents me and my thinking best is none other than me, myself. Therefore, by placing my franchise in another, I have demonstrated the ability to compromise. I find it so humerous that people on GlockTalk who claim to understand the "real world" are so willing to wield wishingfull thinking over thoughtful analysis.

Vote for whom you wish, but no matter who you vote for, you cannot change the meaning of the sovereign franchise. Yes, vote against Obama by voting for somebody who you do not really wish to win, and thus you are still placing potential authority in the hands of your selection.

I am willing to compromise. My primary vote for Ron Paul will be just that. My vote in the election will be that too, but I will never punch a name for somebody who I do not wish to place executive powers and/or make decisions on my behalf.

kirgi08
03-09-2012, 22:22
What folk are missing is the fact that we have no real candidates,RP included.We need ta remove Obama,IMHO Mitt or Rick can do no worse,at least there citizens.The next cycle of true conservatives are maturing in the nest West/Jindal/Rubio/Rand.We need the Rhino we elect ta realize that.

The problem I see is the fact the current folk will not,due ta ego recognize this.They will be warders until the next election cycle.Remember the pres can only do what the houses allow.The MOST game changing thing a pres can do is appoint a SCOTUS judge.It's the be all end all control of this nations future.'08.

ChuteTheMall
03-09-2012, 22:36
Let Obama bring the pot to a full boil quickly, and let's see what America is made of.

I hope Obama will win the 2nd term so he could shake us up.

I simply don't buy that we wouldn't "survive" another 4 years of Obama. I can't stand the guy but if it takes him getting re-elected to wake up the GOP and it's party fan boys to give us a candidate worth a crap then so be it.

Now we know who our enemies are.

These guys would cut off their noses to spite their faces.

Thank God they can never elect anyone, and they can never obtain any power, and their little anti-reality tantrums will do little more than entertain us.

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3331/papoon2.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/9/papoon2.jpg/)

Join the National Surrealist Light Peoples' Party!

You have nothing to lose but your minds!

http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/5145/bumper.gif (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/849/bumper.gif/)

RCP
03-09-2012, 22:41
Right. Mittens will save us, and you think were delusional. LOL

RCP
03-09-2012, 22:47
Vote for the white Obama or your the enemy! LOL

Sorry but that is just so ridiculous it's funny.

ChuteTheMall
03-09-2012, 23:14
When a Ron Paul supporter supports Obama, he doesn't do it for ideological reasons, but out of hatred for the America that disagreed with his choice.

kirgi08
03-09-2012, 23:19
:popcorn:

aspartz
03-09-2012, 23:42
When a Ron Paul supporter supports Obama, he doesn't do it for ideological reasons, but out of hatred for the America that disagreed with his choice.
Not hatred for America, displeasure at the GOP for fielding yet another candidate that it expects me to hold my nose and vote for. The GOP really does need to lose the mentality of "at least we're better than the other guy!"

ARS

RCP
03-09-2012, 23:44
Not hatred for America, displeasure at the GOP for fielding yet another candidate that it expects me to hold my nose and vote for. The GOP really does need to lose the mentality of "at least we're better than the other guy!"

ARS

Well said

ChuteTheMall
05-29-2012, 21:43
:popcorn:

Any other ex-Ronulans ready to come out of the closet for Obama?

Or, ready to support the one and only man who can possibly defeat Obama?

Pick a side, there are only two actual choices in the real world.

Step up here, one way or the other. Choose.

:soap:

Snowman92D
05-30-2012, 00:12
When a Ron Paul supporter supports Obama, he doesn't do it for ideological reasons, but out of hatred for the America that disagreed with his choice.

Couldn't put it in any clearer words. Superb post. :thumbsup:

G19G20
05-30-2012, 00:53
That may be true to an extent. The thing is, we have the motivation and knowledge to make it happen. Sorry you're so limpdick about your candidate. I have no allegiance to Romney nor the GOP elite that want to present me with their chosen corporatist corrupted candidate.

Chronos
05-30-2012, 01:31
Any other ex-Ronulans ready to come out of the closet for Obama?

Or, ready to support the one and only man who can possibly defeat Obama?

Pick a side, there are only two actual choices in the real world.

Step up here, one way or the other. Choose.

:soap:

And those two "actual" choices are:

1) Lend legitimacy to Obamney with your vote

or

2) Withdraw your consent

You can't do both.

English
05-30-2012, 01:35
Not many people know this so keep it to yourselves. Obama plans to instigate a Bill to provide counselling support to recovering Ronnulans funded by public money. He is just waiting to get the timing right so that they will vote for him in November.

English

beforeobamabans
05-30-2012, 02:52
As a Ron Paul supporter, here's where I'm at and here's the challenge for the GOP.

I just voted in my primary earlier this month, so I really haven't spent a lot of energy making a decision for the fall yet. Besides, the choices were just finalized yesterday: Obama, Romney or Johnson. Right now, I know this...I will not automatically vote for whomever the GOP establishment throws out there. I've done that for 40 years now, and look where that's gotten us-One presidential candidate I'd vote for again, ever larger government and a crippling national debt. I've joined "undecided" for the first time in my life and I'm going to enjoy you and the candidates tieing yourselves in knots trying to earn my vote.

I am within five years of retirement and my priorities are changing. I've tried to reform the misdirection of this country from within the Republican Party without effect. As I look to my future now, I am abandoning that effort. It's my job no longer. Now, it's all about MY future. You younger folks will have to worry about the country as a whole. I've more than done my part and this is the last election I'm going to try to fix anything. From here on out, it's about protecting what's owed me.

So, I'm going to sit back and listen to what the candidates (and you) have to say about the issues with a particularly keen interest in Social Security and Medicare. Those who have ignored my willingness to sacrifice for the greater good in the past have lost my cooperation. Now, it's about ME, not you. Good luck.

barbedwiresmile
05-30-2012, 04:04
No serious observer of modern American politics could think Ron Paul could attain the presidency. And no serious observer of modern American politics could think Mitt Romney (the architect of socialized healthcare in America, anti-second amendment advocate, crony, and liar) will change the character of 'government' in any meaningful way.

G29Reload
05-30-2012, 04:48
I've joined "undecided" for the first time in my life and I'm going to enjoy you and the candidates tieing yourselves in knots trying to earn my vote.


If you've left Obama on the table, you're not worth the discussion.

As the saying goes, you can't fix…


You can't be fixed.

G29Reload
05-30-2012, 04:50
And those two "actual" choices are:

1) Lend legitimacy to Obamney with your vote

or

2) Withdraw your consent

You can't do both.

You still get one or the other. One of them's worse.

eracer
05-30-2012, 05:32
If you've left Obama on the table, you're not worth the discussion.

As the saying goes, you can't fix…


You can't be fixed.Seig Heil.

Cavalry Doc
05-30-2012, 05:35
That may be true to an extent. The thing is, we have the motivation and knowledge to make it happen. Sorry you're so limpdick about your candidate. I have no allegiance to Romney nor the GOP elite that want to present me with their chosen corporatist corrupted candidate.

:shocked: Wait, does that mean you get a... how do I put this delicately.......

Does this mean you get physically aroused when you think of your candidate.


Creepy. :shocked:

beforeobamabans
05-30-2012, 07:09
If you've left Obama on the table, you're not worth the discussion.

As the saying goes, you can't fix…


You can't be fixed.

Another example of your shallowness. Thanks for playing.

ChuteTheMall
05-30-2012, 07:37
The thing is, we have the motivation and knowledge to make it happen. .

It's not happening.

This is common knowledge now.

:tongueout:

ChuteTheMall
05-30-2012, 07:46
As a Ron Paul supporter, here's where I'm at .... I've joined "undecided" for the first time in my life and I'm going to enjoy you and the candidates tieing yourselves in knots trying to earn my vote.

I am within five years of retirement and my priorities are changing. I am abandoning that effort. It's my job no longer. Now, it's all about MY future. You younger folks will have to worry about the country as a whole. From here on out, it's about protecting what's owed me.

....Now, it's about ME, not you. Good luck.

I understand your post and your frustation, and your fear.

You no longer care about right or wrong, and just support whoever promises you the most free government cheese.

People like you built this welfare state.

ChuteTheMall
05-30-2012, 07:57
No serious observer of modern American politics could think Ron Paul could attain the presidency.

Some of us have been saying this for years, right here in Political Issues. It's obviously a fact.

And no serious observer of modern American politics could think Mitt Romney ... will change the character of 'government' in any meaningful way.

That's true of every politician who ever ran for office, depending upon the meaning of 'meaningful' of course.
:whistling:

No serious observer would doubt that the changes caused by Obamaism are in the worst possible direction, and that the choice in every election is imperfect.

Given only two choices, one is better than the other.
Or if you prefer, one is worse than the other.
:tempted:


Let's see which Ronulans admit to deliberately supporting the greater of two evils, cutting off the nose to spite the face.

Let's see who prefers to destroy America in order to save it.
:tinfoil:

RC-RAMIE
05-30-2012, 08:12
I understand your post and your frustation, and your fear.

You no longer care about right or wrong, and just support whoever promises you the most free government cheese.

People like you built this welfare state.

Welfare state? He is about to retire he is talking about Social Security benefits which Mitt and the big government Republicans like yourself support.

beforeobamabans
05-30-2012, 09:18
I understand your post and your frustation, and your fear.

You no longer care about right or wrong, and just support whoever promises you the most free government cheese.

People like you built this welfare state.

People like me PAID for this welfare state. I built it to the extent that 40 years of straight ticket GOP votes did so.

Perhaps you can understand why I've been looking for something different this go-'round.

Snowman92D
05-30-2012, 09:34
That may be true to an extent. The thing is, we have the motivation and knowledge to make it happen. Sorry you're so limpdick about your candidate.

Judging from the election results in RP's home state last night, it looks like your boy is the one who's the limpdick. Politically speaking, of course. :rofl:

The Machinist
05-30-2012, 10:07
Judging from the election results in RP's home state last night, it looks like your boy is the one who's the limpdick. Politically speaking, of course. :rofl:
You forgot to mention drugs in your post.

Snowman92D
05-30-2012, 10:12
You forgot to mention drugs in your post.

Sorry to disappoint you. Drugs aren't on my mind all the time. If they were, I'd be an RP supporter. :rofl:

G29Reload
05-30-2012, 11:53
Another example of your shallowness. Thanks for playing.

Shallowness would not be doing everything in your power to unseat Obama.

G29Reload
05-30-2012, 11:54
:shocked: Wait, does that mean you get a... how do I put this delicately.......

Does this mean you get physically aroused when you think of your candidate.


Creepy. :shocked:

Dems seem to be like that. You know, like the Chris Matthews thing about a thrill running up his leg?

That's how they roll I guess. :shocked::upeyes:

G29Reload
05-30-2012, 11:55
Seig Heil.

Says the Obama supporter.

G19G20
05-30-2012, 12:53
:shocked: Wait, does that mean you get a... how do I put this delicately.......

Does this mean you get physically aroused when you think of your candidate.


Creepy. :shocked:

Freedom gets me hard.

Grow up.

G29Reload
05-30-2012, 14:20
OP title fail. They can't recover. Brainwashed as N. Koreans.

aspartz
05-30-2012, 16:43
OP title fail. They can't recover. Brainwashed as N. Koreans.
So, in other words, you wants us to vote for your guy, but our ideas are not welcome in your tent.

Thank you, no.

ARS

G29Reload
05-30-2012, 16:46
So, in other words, you wants us to vote for your guy, but our ideas are not welcome in your tent.

Thank you, no.

ARS

No. I'm saying the contest is over, the outcome obvious and you should decide whether you want to remove Obama from office.

Or not.

Cavalry Doc
05-30-2012, 16:48
Freedom gets me hard.

Grow up.

You started using terms like "limpdick", and it's me that needs to grow up????


See Post 54. http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/104/1/4/14950e2aee771ae232a126c4e1369b4c-d3dzf86.gif






Riiiiiiight. :tongueout:

aspartz
05-30-2012, 16:51
No. I'm saying the contest is over, the outcome obvious and you should decide whether you want to remove Obama from office.

Or not.
Of course removing Obama is a goal. Replacing him with another big government guy makes that task moot.

In my outlook, I disagree with both on about 60-70% of the issues.

Perhaps we need a "none of the above" box on the ballot.

ARS

G29Reload
05-30-2012, 16:53
Perhaps we need a "none of the above" box on the ballot.

ARS

Not an option.

Now, draw!

Cavalry Doc
05-30-2012, 16:55
So, in other words, you wants us to vote for your guy, but our ideas are not welcome in your tent.

Thank you, no.

ARS



Personally, I think you are right. Everyone should get over the fact that people are going to vote how they want to, why they want to. I think it is an individual choice, and you only need to justify it to yourself.

What will be will be. Get ready for it though.

countrygun
05-30-2012, 17:06
Ron Paul and his supporters waged a valiant effort with many very good ideas as part of the platform but they got so wrapped up in it all they ignored those who weren't riding on the bandwagon. Like it or not Foriegn Policy was a big downside and a lot of people were just "turned off" by Paul's demeanor. The policy could have been changed and that would have helped. He could have done more to position himself to have an effect on the Country as a whole not just create a pool of followers who now want to say "Go away, he isn't in the race anymore so I don't care. I'm taking my ball and go home."

Just the fact that his followers are so willing to do nothing or still vote for him, knowing it is really a vote for Obama, out of spite shows exactly what, about him and his followers, that turned so many away from his "movement" in the first place.

That they are willing to waste their votes, or bash on the only person that can unseat Obama, and try to claim some higher moral ground, is a perfect example. Wake up folks you scared America off and throwing a hissy fit isn't going to do the Country any good. If Obama wins because of the votes thrown away, Ron Paul will get more blame than Obama when the Country crashes.

jcbarlow
05-30-2012, 17:07
Maybe some of the ardent Ron Paul fans will climb back under their rock for another 4 years after the National Convention. All of this Ron Paul talk it's just getting old at this point.

G29Reload
05-30-2012, 17:12
Ron Paul and his supporters waged a valiant effort with many very good ideas as part of the platform but they got so wrapped up in it all they ignored those who weren't riding on the bandwagon. Like it or not Foriegn Policy was a big downside and a lot of people were just "turned off" by Paul's demeanor. The policy could have been changed and that would have helped. He could have done more to position himself to have an effect on the Country as a whole not just create a pool of followers who now want to say "Go away, he isn't in the race anymore so I don't care. I'm taking my ball and go home."

Just the fact that his followers are so willing to do nothing or still vote for him, knowing it is really a vote for Obama, out of spite shows exactly what, about him and his followers, that turned so many away from his "movement" in the first place.

That they are willing to waste their votes, or bash on the only person that can unseat Obama, and try to claim some higher moral ground, is a perfect example. Wake up folks you scared America off and throwing a hissy fit isn't going to do the Country any good. If Obama wins because of the votes thrown away, Ron Paul will get more blame than Obama when the Country crashes.

Well put! YOU for president! :supergrin:

RC-RAMIE
05-30-2012, 17:16
Ron Paul and his supporters waged a valiant effort with many very good ideas as part of the platform but they got so wrapped up in it all they ignored those who weren't riding on the bandwagon. Like it or not Foriegn Policy was a big downside and a lot of people were just "turned off" by Paul's demeanor. The policy could have been changed and that would have helped. He could have done more to position himself to have an effect on the Country as a whole not just create a pool of followers who now want to say "Go away, he isn't in the race anymore so I don't care. I'm taking my ball and go home."

Just the fact that his followers are so willing to do nothing or still vote for him, knowing it is really a vote for Obama, out of spite shows exactly what, about him and his followers, that turned so many away from his "movement" in the first place.

That they are willing to waste their votes, or bash on the only person that can unseat Obama, and try to claim some higher moral ground, is a perfect example. Wake up folks you scared America off and throwing a hissy fit isn't going to do the Country any good. If Obama wins because of the votes thrown away, Ron Paul will get more blame than Obama when the Country crashes.

If he did change his position on foreign policy he would lose a lot of his support, flip flopping might pick up some Mitt supporters. His foreign policy is central to his conservative platform.




....

aspartz
05-30-2012, 17:17
Maybe some of the ardent Ron Paul fans will climb back under their rock for another 4 years after the National Convention. All of this Ron Paul talk it's just getting old at this point.
I agree, I get tired of hearing from people wanting freedom.:upeyes:

ARS

jcbarlow
05-30-2012, 17:22
I agree, I get tired of hearing from people wanting freedom.:upeyes:

ARS

:rofl: It's not what they say, it's how they say it. Ron Paul supporters = little man syndrome. I, like most people here, agree with a good amount of what Ron Paul stands for. However, he has shown us he can't get it done. Time to move on.

G-19
05-30-2012, 17:24
Posted this else where, but thought it fit here also.

Crying Ron Paul Supporter - YouTube

Remind you of anyone here?

G29Reload
05-30-2012, 17:24
I agree, I get tired of hearing from people wanting freedom.:upeyes:

ARS

Not people wanting freedom, but people pursuing the wrong way to get it by chasing a kooky unelectable candidate.

G-19
05-30-2012, 17:25
If he did change his position on foreign policy he would lose a lot of his support, flip flopping might pick up some Mitt supporters. His foreign policy is central to his conservative platform.




....

And probably one of the main reasons he lost.

countrygun
05-30-2012, 17:27
If he did change his position on foreign policy he would lose a lot of his support, flip flopping might pick up some Mitt supporters. His foreign policy is central to his conservative platform.




....


And it was an untenable position for most of the people who otherwise agreed with him. the proof is in the vote count. In the middle of an unemployment crisis you don't say you are going to close almost all of our overseas military bases and bring those soldiers home to no jobs. That is just one of the complaints I heard that was never dealt with other than to say "his domestic policies will create the jobs". Prove the domestic policy will work and THEN say "we need more workers here and less soldiers overseas"

It was like saying, "Throw the baby out of the window of the burning building, our plans say the airbag will be inflated by the time it gets here".

RC-RAMIE
05-30-2012, 17:29
And probably one of the main reasons he lost.

Well character matters to some still.

Movements don't happen overnight our foreign policy will change one day unfortunately with the D/R party it will be because we can no longer afford it.


....

RC-RAMIE
05-30-2012, 17:32
And it was an untenable position for most of the people who otherwise agreed with him. the proof is in the vote count. In the middle of an unemployment crisis you don't say you are going to close almost all of our overseas military bases and bring those soldiers home to no jobs. That is just one of the complaints I heard that was never dealt with other than to say "his domestic policies will create the jobs". Prove the domestic policy will work and THEN say "we need more workers here and less soldiers overseas"

It was like saying, "Throw the baby out of the window of the burning building, our plans say the airbag will be inflated by the time it gets here".

It was addressed numerous times he never planned on cutting their jobs we can pay them while they are here. Change in foreign policy does not mean cutting a bunch of soldiers jobs it means changing the way we treat other countries.


....

countrygun
05-30-2012, 17:55
It was addressed numerous times he never planned on cutting their jobs we can pay them while they are here. Change in foreign policy does not mean cutting a bunch of soldiers jobs it means changing the way we treat other countries.


....


You must have listened to different Ron Paul speeches and read different sources than I did. BTW how many more bases would we have to open for them here and what would that cost? Before you do something like that show you have an "exit strategy".


Face it Ron Paul BLEW IT.

He had THE BEST chance of any "dark horse" candidate in a long time to affect national politics. He could have shown his ability to draw votes early, piled up some Electoral votes and then approached Romney, Santorum and others and said, "OK here is what I can bring to your campaign IF you include some of my platform in yours and stick to it. If you back out I'll "unsupport you" before the election."

But NOOOOOO, Paul and his, pendantic, binary thinking followers played it like it was a Zero-Sum game.

The absolute naivete of his camp and the manner in which they are behaving now will haunt their "movement" for years.

G19G20
05-30-2012, 18:02
Not an option.

Now, draw!

Staying home is always an option. Most voters do it.

Cavalry Doc
05-30-2012, 18:04
Posted this else where, but thought it fit here also.

Crying Ron Paul Supporter - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXNy0laGePg&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

Remind you of anyone here?

Kids, listen, this is important, just say no. OK?

G29Reload
05-30-2012, 18:04
Staying home is always an option. Most voters do it.

One good way to support Obama, for sure. But that's how you roll.

Ruble Noon
05-30-2012, 18:07
Ron Paul and his supporters waged a valiant effort with many very good ideas as part of the platform but they got so wrapped up in it all they ignored those who weren't riding on the bandwagon. Like it or not Foriegn Policy was a big downside and a lot of people were just "turned off" by Paul's demeanor. The policy could have been changed and that would have helped. He could have done more to position himself to have an effect on the Country as a whole not just create a pool of followers who now want to say "Go away, he isn't in the race anymore so I don't care. I'm taking my ball and go home."

Just the fact that his followers are so willing to do nothing or still vote for him, knowing it is really a vote for Obama, out of spite shows exactly what, about him and his followers, that turned so many away from his "movement" in the first place.

That they are willing to waste their votes, or bash on the only person that can unseat Obama, and try to claim some higher moral ground, is a perfect example. Wake up folks you scared America off and throwing a hissy fit isn't going to do the Country any good. If Obama wins because of the votes thrown away, Ron Paul will get more blame than Obama when the Country crashes.

It is much better to vote for someone that tells you what you want to hear or changes their position based on current polling data. Hey, I know of a guy like that, Obama....Or was that Romney.....maybe it was Obomney.

G19G20
05-30-2012, 18:09
I guess Obama will just have to imagine I voted for him, like you do. Whatever helps you sleep at night for supporting an anti-gun pro-choice Mormon liberal.

Cavalry Doc
05-30-2012, 18:09
Well character matters to some still.

Movements don't happen overnight our foreign policy will change one day unfortunately with the D/R party it will be because we can no longer afford it.


....

Now, do we really need to go there? For earmarks before he was against them, the myth about his military support drawn from very shaky evidence, open borders etc.

They were all career politicians, every single one of them. They lie, it's in their nature.

Cavalry Doc
05-30-2012, 18:11
I guess Obama will just have to imagine I voted for him, like you do. Whatever helps you sleep at night for supporting an anti-gun pro-choice Mormon liberal.

You're a RNC delegate right? Are you bound to vote for the anti-gun pro-choice Mormon liberal?

Inquiring minds want to know.

G19G20
05-30-2012, 18:11
Already answered your question.

countrygun
05-30-2012, 18:18
It is much better to vote for someone that tells you what you want to hear or changes their position based on current polling data. Hey, I know of a guy like that, Obama....Or was that Romney.....maybe it was Obomney.


Well I suppose it is more self gratifying to vote for someone who has no chance, and accomplish absolutely nothing, so you can sit in a dark room "amusing" yourself and muttering "I was right, I know I was right".

But some how that just seems a little narcissitic to me.

Ruble Noon
05-30-2012, 18:25
Well I suppose it is more self gratifying to vote for someone who has no chance, and accomplish absolutely nothing, so you can sit in a dark room "amusing" yourself and muttering "I was right, I know I was right".

But some how that just seems a little narcissitic to me.


What are you going to accomplish by voting for Romney?

jcbarlow
05-30-2012, 18:29
I guess Obama will just have to imagine I voted for him, like you do. Whatever helps you sleep at night for supporting an anti-gun pro-choice Mormon liberal.

I'm confused. You put "Mormon" in there with a bunch of unflattering traits. Are you saying that's a bad thing? :tongueout: (rhetorical question - just messing around)

countrygun
05-30-2012, 18:34
What are you going to accomplish by voting for Romney?


You are asking ME what I am going to accomplish? Really?

You are obviously going to do something that aids and abets Obama, and you are questioning me.

Hahahahaha

Yes. i fear you are one of those people i described earlier, you refuse to face it, and you keep proving it.

Ruble Noon
05-30-2012, 18:41
You are asking ME what I am going to accomplish? Really?

You are obviously going to do something that aids and abets Obama, and you are questioning me.

Hahahahaha

Yes. i fear you are one of those people i described earlier, you refuse to face it, and you keep proving it.

I'll take that for a nothing then.

Cavalry Doc
05-30-2012, 18:53
Already answered your question.

You claimed to be unbound, but coyly avoided telling me which state you are from to avoid me looking to see if you are right.

I smell a stinker.

Sam Spade
05-30-2012, 18:54
What are you going to accomplish by voting for Romney?

For one thing, it eliminates nominations of future Sotomayors and her ilk. One vote: that's how close we came to losing Heller. Ditto McDonald, even with Heller already in place.

Five is more than four. That's the only reason you should need to vote against Obama.

Cavalry Doc
05-30-2012, 18:54
What are you going to accomplish by voting for Romney?


http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://conservativepapers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Obama-Uhaul.jpg&sa=X&ei=P8HGT9fVEIGo8gTr5ci2Cw&ved=0CAkQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNFnTSt_poaepfrKaxcCDfTj59vOmg

countrygun
05-30-2012, 19:06
I'll take that for a nothing then.


Other people already answered.

I am not going to bother to ask why you are going to support Obama.

Ruble Noon
05-30-2012, 19:07
For one thing, it eliminates nominations of future Sotomayors and her ilk. One vote: that's how close we came to losing Heller. Ditto McDonald, even with Heller already in place.

Five is more than four. That's the only reason you should need to vote against Obama.

Do you think a known gun banner will seat pro gun SC justices? Or that a liberal will seat conservative justices?

Ruble Noon
05-30-2012, 19:08
Other people already answered.

I am not going to bother to ask why you are going to support Obama.

If Romney loses have you supported obama?

countrygun
05-30-2012, 19:09
For one thing, it eliminates nominations of future Sotomayors and her ilk. One vote: that's how close we came to losing Heller. Ditto McDonald, even with Heller already in place.

Five is more than four. That's the only reason you should need to vote against Obama.


The fact that the Paul fans don't realize this shows the mindset that alienated conservatives.

Cavalry Doc
05-30-2012, 19:09
Do you think a known gun banner will seat pro gun SC justices? Or that a liberal will seat conservative justices?

http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://www.edsopinion.com/uploaded_images/harriet_miers_060109_ssh-746474.jpg&sa=X&ei=s8TGT92dE4iK8QTote3cCw&ved=0CAkQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNEhQ_DWq1Vu9PJm0Pvfe0w9EIAGNQ


How soon they forget.

Sam Spade
05-30-2012, 19:11
Do you think a known gun banner will seat pro gun SC justices? Or that a liberal will seat conservative justices?

I think Romney will be responsive to the people who put him in office, just as he was responsive to the people in MA. Especially since those are the people who can give him a second term.

countrygun
05-30-2012, 19:15
If Romney loses have you supported obama?


Cut the dancing around. You are just looking like a child on the playground. You are coming off like a teenage twerp.

Why don't you explain YOUR position for a change?

You are just grasping at straws and playing around trying to make others justify themselves so they don't ask you to justify helping Obama get reelected.

Ruble Noon
05-30-2012, 19:24
Cut the dancing around. You are just looking like a child on the playground. You are coming off like a teenage twerp.

Why don't you explain YOUR position for a change?

You are just grasping at straws and playing around trying to make others justify themselves so they don't ask you to justify helping Obama get reelected.

Still haven't answered my question.

kirgi08
05-30-2012, 19:52
Do you think a known gun banner will seat pro gun SC justices? Or that a liberal will seat conservative justices?

He can get away with a lot more in a state than he can a nation.Obama out is #1,the houses will reign him in if'n he gets uppity.'08.

aspartz
05-30-2012, 20:00
The fact that the Paul fans don't realize this shows the mindset that alienated conservatives.
We do realize 5>4. We also don't want the majority to swing to overturn Roe v Wade or many other pro-freedom decisions that a right wing court would overturn.

ARS

countrygun
05-30-2012, 20:12
We do realize 5>4. We also don't want the majority to swing to overturn Roe v Wade or many other pro-freedom decisions that a right wing court would overturn.

ARS

So you think more Judges that would vote for something like Obama-care would be "pro-freedom" ? Really?

aspartz
05-30-2012, 20:44
So you think more Judges that would vote for something like Obama-care would be "pro-freedom" ? Really?
Nope. Neither would one who supports 10 commandments in the public square. Neither would one who opposes Newdow...

ARS

countrygun
05-30-2012, 20:50
Nope. Neither would one who supports 10 commandments in the public square. Neither would one who opposes Newdow...

ARS

So the "we" you speak for are as afraid of the 10 Commandments as they are of socialism. Good grief, you scare me MORE than the outright socialists, and I'm an atheist.

RC-RAMIE
05-30-2012, 22:09
You must have listened to different Ron Paul speeches and read different sources than I did. BTW how many more bases would we have to open for them here and what would that cost? Before you do something like that show you have an "exit strategy".


Face it Ron Paul BLEW IT.

He had THE BEST chance of any "dark horse" candidate in a long time to affect national politics. He could have shown his ability to draw votes early, piled up some Electoral votes and then approached Romney, Santorum and others and said, "OK here is what I can bring to your campaign IF you include some of my platform in yours and stick to it. If you back out I'll "unsupport you" before the election."

But NOOOOOO, Paul and his, pendantic, binary thinking followers played it like it was a Zero-Sum game.

The absolute naivete of his camp and the manner in which they are behaving now will haunt their "movement" for years.

Probably I've watched his speeches and read his books I'm unsure of your source of information. If we are paying them there and move them here continue their salary but save operations funds of those bases overseas. Why do we have to build new bases here for we have some already.


....

RC-RAMIE
05-30-2012, 22:14
Now, do we really need to go there? For earmarks before he was against them, the myth about his military support drawn from very shaky evidence, open borders etc.

They were all career politicians, every single one of them. They lie, it's in their nature.

He is still for earmarks and believe the congress should earmark every spending it does. The myth is only in your side the facts are he receives donations from active military more than other candidates.

BTW running from office soon , Atheism is a religion, libertarians are the neoconservatism


....

Snowman92D
05-30-2012, 23:46
Well character matters to some still.

Indeed. It matters a lot to a lot of people. That's why RP had such a hard time selling his pro-dope, pro-Arab, "Blame America First" campaign message.

Cavalry Doc
05-31-2012, 04:46
He is still for earmarks and believe the congress should earmark every spending it does. The myth is only in your side the facts are he receives donations from active military more than other candidates.

BTW running from office soon , Atheism is a religion, libertarians are the neoconservatism


....


Actually, Ron was real big on criticizing non constitutionally mandated spending, but supported nonconstitutional spending on earmarks he placed in spending bills, then voted against them knowing they would pass anyway, while claiming to be fiscally holy and pure.

Ron used a factoid about getting more money from a very small number of people that claimed to work for the military, without being able to verify that, or if they were civilian, then claimed the troops have chosen who they want as their next CINC from that insufficient data. Haven't you seen the commercial? First page of the folliwing thead.
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1424012

That claim was pushed hard by his campaign.

All I'm saying, is they are all liars, every stinking one of them, Paul included.

RC-RAMIE
05-31-2012, 07:17
Actually, Ron was real big on criticizing non constitutionally mandated spending, but supported nonconstitutional spending on earmarks he placed in spending bills, then voted against them knowing they would pass anyway, while claiming to be fiscally holy and pure.

Ron used a factoid about getting more money from a very small number of people that claimed to work for the military, without being able to verify that, or if they were civilian, then claimed the troops have chosen who they want as their next CINC from that insufficient data. Haven't you seen the commercial? First page of the folliwing thead.
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1424012

That claim was pushed hard by his campaign.

All I'm saying, is they are all liars, every stinking one of them, Paul included.

RP has said numerous times congress should earmark all spending then vote against any they find non constitutional, blame the ones that vote yes.

Yes I saw the commercials. I agree with your viewpoint on it as much as I do you for your ideas on atheists is a religion and libertarians are the new neocon arguments you make.


....

Cavalry Doc
05-31-2012, 07:46
RP has said numerous times congress should earmark all spending then vote against any they find non constitutional, blame the ones that vote yes.

Yes I saw the commercials. I agree with your viewpoint on it as much as I do you for your ideas on atheists is a religion and libertarians are the new neocon arguments you make.


....


Well, you can choose to ignore the truth if you want too and continue to defend your career politician as noble and pure if you want to, but enough people will see it to make the difference. In fact, looks like that has already happened. Did you see the primary results from his district?

You can lead a horse to water...

This is from a libertarian.

Overall, libertarians claim they want to find out the truth but when faced with the facts they cling to their philosophy or preconceived beliefs like a religion rather than accept reality. A mentality similar to what is seen among left wing academics. In many libertarian's minds they are never and can never be wrong no matter if the truth stares them in the face. They are in complete and utter denial not only about Ron Paul's character but also the lies and misrepresentations he spews despite evidence showing that he does. (http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Opinion/102180-2011-12-28-more-lies-from-ron-paul.htm)

RC-RAMIE
05-31-2012, 08:19
Well, you can choose to ignore the truth if you want too and continue to defend your career politician as noble and pure if you want to, but enough people will see it to make the difference. In fact, looks like that has already happened. Did you see the primary results from his district?

You can lead a horse to water...

“If a congressman does not submit funding requests for his district the money is simply spent elsewhere. To eliminate all earmarks would be to further consolidate power in the already dominant executive branch and not save a penny. Furthermore, designating how money is spent provides a level of transparency and accountability over taxpayer dollars that we don’t have with general funds. I argue that all spending should be decided by Congress so that we at least know where the money goes.” ~ Ron Paul; March 16, 2009

You may not agree with him but he is doing just as he says which is not hypocritical or lying when it comes to earmarks.

barbedwiresmile
05-31-2012, 08:45
Well, you can choose to ignore the truth if you want too and continue to defend your career politician as noble and pure if you want to, but enough people will see it to make the difference. In fact, looks like that has already happened. Did you see the primary results from his district?

You can lead a horse to water...

This is from a libertarian.

I agree that there are RP supporters & libertarians (as with any group of people) who can be annoying. They can also be wrong. And they can do damage to their cause in terms of how they present/debate their positions. Some may even be confused and hold a patchwork of views, claiming merely the libertarian label without a full understanding of what it means. As with any position, the thoughtful proponent would have read volumes and volumes of the applicable philosophy, writings, and premises. The average supporter of any position has not done sufficient homework. Nor may the average supporter of any position have the bandwidth to understand the limitations of any political philosophy.

That said, however, the article you posted is a collection of opinions, mistruths, and straw men. I find it hard to believe the author was ever a "libertarian" or, if he was, if he actually understood what that philosophy entails or if he was merely, like many, a frustrated conservative. I could have constructed a better critique of Ron Paul, or of libertarianism, from a 'conservative' point of view, that the quoted author.

Cavalry Doc
05-31-2012, 09:25
“If a congressman does not submit funding requests for his district the money is simply spent elsewhere. To eliminate all earmarks would be to further consolidate power in the already dominant executive branch and not save a penny. Furthermore, designating how money is spent provides a level of transparency and accountability over taxpayer dollars that we don’t have with general funds. I argue that all spending should be decided by Congress so that we at least know where the money goes.” ~ Ron Paul; March 16, 2009

You may not agree with him but he is doing just as he says which is not hypocritical or lying when it comes to earmarks.


The maximum effective range of an excuse is zero meters in all directions.

The guy's not pure as the wind driven snow, that's all. That's the only point I'm making. He's better than some in the integrity issues, but he has a couple that are indisputable from my perspective.

RC-RAMIE
05-31-2012, 09:35
The maximum effective range of an excuse is zero meters in all directions.

The guy's not pure as the wind driven snow, that's all. That's the only point I'm making. He's better than some in the integrity issues, but he has a couple that are indisputable from my perspective.

Actually, Ron was real big on criticizing non constitutionally mandated spending, but supported nonconstitutional spending on earmarks he placed in spending bills, then voted against them knowing they would pass anyway, while claiming to be fiscally holy and pure.


All I'm saying, is they are all liars, every stinking one of them, Paul included.

No you called him a liar based on his stance on earmarks. I think his stance and actions on earmarks are right in line with that quote I posted.

Cavalry Doc
05-31-2012, 09:49
No you called him a liar based on his stance on earmarks. I think his stance and actions on earmarks are right in line with that quote I posted.

Spending money that is not constitutionally mandated and/or wasteful is where he breaks from his stated position. The tool used to do that isn't that big of a deal to me. If he takes a positive action that results in that happening, and it is foreseeable that it will happen once he takes that action, that's the problem. Putting in earmarks for special interests within his district, on things that the federal government should not be involved in, then voting against them knowing they will pass anyway, and claiming moral superiority because he voted against it is a bit dishonest, isn't it?

Cavalry Doc
05-31-2012, 09:50
Spending money that is not constitutionally mandated and/or wasteful is where he breaks from his stated position. The tool used to do that isn't that big of a deal to me. If he takes a positive action that results in that happening, and it is foreseeable that it will happen once he takes that action, that's the problem. Putting in earmarks for special interests within his district, on things that the federal government should not be involved in, then voting against them knowing they will pass anyway, and claiming moral superiority because he voted against it is a bit dishonest, isn't it?

Admittedly, that makes him no worse than the rest.

RC-RAMIE
05-31-2012, 09:57
Spending money that is not constitutionally mandated and/or wasteful is where he breaks from his stated position. The tool used to do that isn't that big of a deal to me. If he takes a positive action that results in that happening, and it is foreseeable that it will happen once he takes that action, that's the problem. Putting in earmarks for special interests within his district, on things that the federal government should not be involved in, then voting against them knowing they will pass anyway, and claiming moral superiority because he voted against it is a bit dishonest, isn't it?

Like I said you may not agree with his reasons but in the quote I posted he was honest and upfront about why he does it.

Cavalry Doc
05-31-2012, 10:10
Like I said you may not agree with his reasons but in the quote I posted he was honest and upfront about why he does it.

His excuse may be well worded for you, but I find it contrary to his staunch fiscal conservative reputation.

G29Reload
05-31-2012, 10:36
Well, you can choose to ignore the truth if you want too and continue to defend your career politician as noble and pure if you want to, but enough people will see it to make the difference. In fact, looks like that has already happened. Did you see the primary results from his district?

You can lead a horse to water...

This is from a libertarian.

essentially, we've got a threadfail.

ronulans DON'T recover.

Or we might say recovering ronulans is an oxymoron.

ChuteTheMall
06-01-2012, 15:39
His excuse may be well worded for you, but I find it contrary to his staunch fiscal conservative reputation.

Hilarious Casablanca Clip - YouTube

I'm shocked, shocked.:whistling:

kirgi08
06-01-2012, 16:40
Kinda sorta doubt that Chute.'08. :whistling:

QNman
06-01-2012, 20:10
I agree with the OP.

I hope Obama will win the 2nd term so he could shake us up. If Romney is TPOTUS and then he will send us back to our beds, while the America is decaying.

Obama is the only best shot we have at this time for 2nd term (I wish we could elect Ron Paul, but America doesn't want him at this time.) It is America's fault. If we elect Ron Paul but it might won't change anything because of the gridlock on the senator/house floor.

Obama = Romney, no question.

I gotta ask... Why do you think the same electorate who remains centrist will suddenly "wake up" after another four abysmal years of a declining economy and further degradation of the COTUS? How much pain does it take? How much more "hope and change" can we tolerate?

Another four years, and the 7 trillion added to our debt will balloon further still - perhaps beyond all possibility of ever recovering.

QNman
06-01-2012, 20:22
Seig Heil.

... And Godwin lives...

QNman
06-01-2012, 20:31
It is much better to vote for someone that tells you what you want to hear or changes their position based on current polling data. Hey, I know of a guy like that, Obama....Or was that Romney.....maybe it was Obomney.

But Obama doesn't do that... He picks his polls to support his agenda.

There are worse qualities in a President than altering his thinking to match those of his constituents. This guy doesn't give a crap.

QNman
06-01-2012, 20:32
What are you going to accomplish by voting for Romney?

That's obvious - electing someone other than Obama.

QNman
06-01-2012, 20:34
You claimed to be unbound, but coyly avoided telling me which state you are from to avoid me looking to see if you are right.

I smell a stinker.

I think that's "Internet poser" you smell...

QNman
06-01-2012, 20:38
Nope. Neither would one who supports 10 commandments in the public square. Neither would one who opposes Newdow...

ARS

Of course, Romney has stated he does not wish to overturn RvW, and instead chooses to educate women in their choice... Right? Sorta like those who propose to "know" Paul supports legalizing drugs, when he purports to allow states to regulate.

Cavalry Doc
06-02-2012, 07:06
I gotta ask... Why do you think the same electorate who remains centrist will suddenly "wake up" after another four abysmal years of a declining economy and further degradation of the COTUS? How much pain does it take? How much more "hope and change" can we tolerate?

Another four years, and the 7 trillion added to our debt will balloon further still - perhaps beyond all possibility of ever recovering.

Ditto. These guys that think 4 more years of a bad thing will somehow lead to an improvement are deluded. Their crystal balls are broken.

We have a very far way to go to reach bottom. And when we do, you are forgetting half the people are going to be screaming for more government spending and less liberty. Look at Greece. Are the people rioting in the streets asking for more fiscal responsibility and austerity measures? Nope. How often have you heard the democrats wishing for a more conservative president to win so they can get an uber liberal in office.

4 more years for Barry is a 50/50 proposition at the moment. I've prepared either way. None of us can fix the whole country, but we may be able to mitigate the effects on ourselves and our families.

There is no pathway to success through a process of failure. On the Ronulans side, I see a bunch of kids kicking over the monopoly board and stomping off toward home because they are losing or because they didn't get their choice of game piece.

Oh well, they will do what they want, and no post on the Internet is likely to change their chosen course of action. But I'd hate to share a foxhole with someone with that attitude.

Paul7
06-02-2012, 07:20
Doesnt matter. Ill still write him in. I wont sell out to the rest and at least i can go sleep at night and say i did the right thing. My kids/grandkids will never be able to turn around and ask "why did you vote for" so and so.......

Obama will be thrilled to hear you say that.

Gary W Trott
06-02-2012, 07:36
What is misunderstood the most about Ron Paul supporters is that as a group it isn't about Ron Paul which they really support, it is the policies that he expouses as the proper role of government. It's all about protecting our freedom and liberty. That is why so many of them aren't going to support a candidate who's policies would work in further encroachment upon our rights and freedom. I realize that a lot of you don't understand that idealistic belief but that's the way it is. Ron Paul is just the messenger...the message is what's important.

QNman
06-02-2012, 08:00
Ditto. These guys that think 4 more years of a bad thing will somehow lead to an improvement are deluded. Their crystal balls are broken.

We have a very far way to go to reach bottom. And when we do, you are forgetting half the people are going to be screaming for more government spending and less liberty. Look at Greece. Are the people rioting in the streets asking for more fiscal responsibility and austerity measures? Nope. How often have you heard the democrats wishing for a more conservative president to win so they can get an uber liberal in office.

4 more years for Barry is a 50/50 proposition at the moment. I've prepared either way. None of us can fix the whole country, but we may be able to mitigate the effects on ourselves and our families.

There is no pathway to success through a process of failure. On the Ronulans side, I see a bunch of kids kicking over the monopoly board and stomping off toward home because they are losing or because they didn't get their choice of game piece.

Oh well, they will do what they want, and no post on the Internet is likely to change their chosen course of action. But I'd hate to share a foxhole with someone with that attitude.

Well stated, sir. :beer:

Sam Spade
06-02-2012, 09:23
What is misunderstood the most about Ron Paul supporters is that as a group it isn't about Ron Paul which they really support, it is the policies that he expouses as the proper role of government. It's all about protecting our freedom and liberty. That is why so many of them aren't going to support a candidate who's policies would work in further encroachment upon our rights and freedom. I realize that a lot of you don't understand that idealistic belief but that's the way it is. Ron Paul is just the messenger...the message is what's important.

I have to disagree. I'll allow that we don't have a representative sample of "most" supporters, and so I'm drawing from the self-selected representatives that post here, usually in great volume. Those posters wax poetic about the man, to the point where "Help us, Obi Wan. You're our only hope." becomes a fair characterization.

His failures are dismissed, his human shortcomings aren't on point, and the practical aspects of his policies are waved away. If we don't choose to follow their man, we hate the Constitution and our defeat in every future election is assured.

IOW, the very definition of a personality cult.

Cavalry Doc
06-02-2012, 09:40
I have to disagree. I'll allow that we don't have a representative sample of "most" supporters, and so I'm drawing from the self-selected representatives that post here, usually in great volume. Those posters wax poetic about the man, to the point where "Help us, Obi Wan. You're our only hope." becomes a fair characterization.

His failures are dismissed, his human shortcomings aren't on point, and the practical aspects of his policies are waved away. If we don't choose to follow their man, we hate the Constitution and our defeat in every future election is assured.

IOW, the very definition of a personality cult.


That's not true of all of them, but there are plenty of them that post here that "cultist" is a very accurate description. When the level of devotion impairs their ability to see plainly he is imperfect, and to react to any legitimate criticism as if it is blasphemy, it's obvious.