Ron Paul 2008
Created on: December 22nd, 2007
ron paul 2008 vote in primary elections
Sponsorships:
| user | amount | user | amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| Macai | $14.26 | amped | $10.38 |
| anonymous | $10.08 | elwackyone | $9.41 |
| Rudehealth | $0.18 | Ralynxi | $0.00 |
| Sponsor this site! | Total: $44.31 | Active: $0.00 | |
Vote metrics:
| rating | total votes | favorites | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| (2.92) | 275 | 13 | 478 |
View metrics:
| today | yesterday | this week | this month | all time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 20,640 |
Inbound links:
| views | url |
|---|---|
| 50 | https://www.bing.com |
| 8 | http://216.18.188.175:80 |
| 5 | https://google.com |
| 4 | http://www.google.com.hk |
| 4 | https://www.google.com/ |
Well... Here is the deal. If Clinton, Obama, or Edwards get elected we won't be in bad shape, but if Mitt, Huck, or Guliani get elected then were up sh*t creek! Thats why I'm voting for RP in the primaries. Mostly because he's the only republican thats not if a douche. If he wins the primaries but doesn't win the main election. No big whoop, but if Mitt, Huck, or Guli win then you know what they are going to do. Pretty much what GWB did.
Secondly, don't you realize that Ron Paul is the only cannidate that voted against the war in Iraq and the PATRIOT Act? Have you been flying lately? I'm sure the Patriot act is the biggest impact on all our lives. I don't give a sh*t who you are, but that bill was pure evil in its intentions and applications. So get a bit pragmatic and realize what is going on.
Let me put this straight: Social issues > Economics. Always more important. And by social issues I mean liberal social issues, for me at least. Ron Paul is pretty much neutral on all social issues, so hes kinda stagnant to me. Hillary and Obama, and well any of the other Democrats I can think of, will make us look better to the rest of the world. Ron Paul will make us look better foreign policy-wise, but his economics will send us back to the 19th-century.
"European Liberals complain more about Israel than they do about Saudi Arabia!"
There's nothing actually liberal about those people. They are a bunch of vicious political hacks who make every effort to silence the opposition, and arrogantly look down on those who differ. Thanks to those people, the word 'liberal' has come to mean the exact opposite of what it actually meant.
It seems like all the reasons I used to support democrats erode more and more. I at one time thought they were cool, because I thought they were the party of Cheech and Chong, Timothy Leary and Hunter S. Thompson. Now, it becomes more evident that they are really the party of the crabby old lady who always shows up at town hall to scream obscenities.
How about habeus corpus for activists? Habeus corpus for environmentalists? Or habeus corpus for civil libertarians? Another thing is that Ron Paul is most offended by third trimester abortion. If you think that it is okay to have a baby for 6 months, but then decide to have an abortion, there is something wrong with you. Third, Ron Paul proposes to only prosecute the doctor, not the mother. Fourth, he is a federalist, meaning that he would only remove Roe Vs. Wade, but not directly outlaw abortion.
And you think those other issues are nebulous? Well then you are simply uneducated. The Federal Reserve bails out the banks, at everyone else's expense. This hurts the economy. The average Joe's money is worth less. The price of gasoline goes up. You don't think this affects everybody? How about the fact that so much of our economy changes when the price of oil goes up? Have you not noticed that the price of EVERYTHING goes up when the price of oil goes up? And I'm just getting started here.
maddogsol, do you know what happened when the Fed didn’t bail out failing banks? It has nothing to do with what money is “worth”. Gas…are you f*cking kidding me. Repeat after me, the Fed has nothing to do with the cost of a barrel of oil. There is no man behind the curtain arbitrarily raising prices on poor stupid joe. You got a major gripe about gas, call the Chinese and Indian embassies and explain to them how they shouldn’t industrialize anymore because it inconveniences joe.
Wrong civiliansam. If the Feds did not bail out banks, the banks would make more careful decisions, rather than be careless with credit, which is what gets them into trouble in the first place. If banks go under, it is their stupid faults. Bailing the banks out increases the money supply, which is the cause of inflation. Any financial publication could tell you this.
"Dr. Paul doesn't advocate isolationism"
"Libertarians do. Is he a libertarian or not?"
You're wrong. Isolationism is when you prevent foreigners from coming to your nation, prevent trade, cut the nation off economically from other nations. Ron Paul and the Libertarians advocate the exact opposite. Wikipedia is your friend.
What I'm saying is that your point of view is very simple and narrow-minded if you put so much faith in stupid internet articles like the one you just posted. Anything with a sub-topic, "according to a study" should NOT be taken to heart. According to a study, intelligence is directly related to shoe size.
to all the people above... our situation surrounding inflation is the best it has ever been. The Fed is doing great keeping the inflation rate at a managable level so that there is less unanticipated inflation and investors can feel safe putting their money into stocks and bank accounts. What we need to worry about now is the budget deficit... the US is going bankrupt.
You are correct about government spending. 100%. But I don't think I can really agree with you about inflation. You ought to take into consideration that there is the officially reported number, and that there is something more important, namely, the relative prices of commodities, imported goods and foreign currencies in relation to the dollar. You should also remember that the government has a vested interest in presenting the inflation rate as favorable, because they are held accountable.
"he has more money donors than anyone else" (and more money for that matter) - that sure says a lot about whose interests hes taking into account. and i dont even disagree with a lot of what he says. reducing taxes is great and his foreign policy is too. but i cant back someone whose trying to overturn roe v. wade, because that just sends me the message that his social views are pretty backwards. ok fatty?
Finally, I don't entirely agree with him about Roe V. Wade either. In every other possible way, though he is one of the most civil libertarian politicians in our nation's history. Outside of abortion, only the ACLU can hope to compare to Ron Paul's civil libertarian track record. So no, he is most certainly NOT Pat Robertson.
Bold
Italic
Underline
Code
User Link
Site Link