Ron Paul 2012!!! Your thoughts on who we should pick for our "Cause"?

[itisme]

Guys I am an accountant and I am telling you to look up Accelerated Deprectiation and Net Operation Loss. The Corps. have so many ways to hide the money and most Americans have no damn clue. They hide billions before they even have to pay the taxes. Take a Corpoarte tax class or take my word for it. The IRS set up these loopholes most people don't even know about. Ron Paul would end all that bullcrap! Did you know the IRS as they are the ones the are to apply punishment on those that don't pay for their Gov't MANDATED HEALTHCARE?

A lot of good points. Here's the problem with education. Without federal aid

What is Federal aid for education really about? If you havn't read the book or think the Federal Gov't should run America's education, watch this video, PLEASE.

"The dumbing down of America"

[FONT=Arial,Arial,Helvetica]Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt[/FONT]​

Charlotte Iserbyt: The Miseducation of America Part 1-Full
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezTIYd5UFRY​

 

[Cojito]

A. Despite evidence for evolution, there is no evidence there is no god, and there never will be. You can't prove a negative.

i don't have to prove anything. i make no claims about sky gods. i just ask for the evidence, the proof. so far, it remains elusive.

B. Sliding ron paul into a run on sentence mentioning people who shoot obstetricians was slick. Wrong but slick.

slick? i never mentioned Ron Paul. you did. you either can't understand what you read, or you're being dishonest - again.

C. Since ron paul is the only one not trying to block homosexuals rights, while others like rick scrotum wants a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to ban same sex marriage, youre off base there.

actually, if we accept what you say as fact, that would only prove the trust of my argument; that not all believers are the same. and that many are dangerous.

D. Since mitt gave 4 million dollars to the church of mormon, id bet he takes it pretty seriously. Including the garden of eden and the place where jesus will return is in missouri(yeah, fucking st louis). And that alcohol, caffeine, tea and tobacco are immoral.

sure. weird shit. only proves my point. not all believers are alike.

maybe you should just keep waiting for a promiscuous atheist to run for prez.

i would. but i believe that its my duty to keep informed and vote. so until a promiscuous atheist runs i'll cast my vote for the least irrational candidate.

 

[JJScorpio]

I take it you failed to read my earlier post......

So Ron Paul would let them bring their money back? I thought he was all for leaving peoples personal issues alone? Why should he tell people where they can keep their money?

I'm sure Ron Paul has jobs figured for the 10 or so million jobs his cuts would create. Now, don't get me wrong. I think the DEA needs to go. But at the same time I don't want cartells unloading tons of cocaine and heroine across our borders either. With all those unemployed, homeless people his cuts created it would be to easy for these people to drown their sorrows in cocaine and heroine.....

And do you think releasing the non violent offenders, which I'm all for, would send guards packing, you're dreaming. There's enough felony offenders being released early because there's a lack of room to fill these spots.

Are you saying Ron Paul is going to "lay off" two thirds of the military? I imagine he has job plans for all these people to. I'm all for scaling back our military and the budget. But we've pissed a lot of people off. I don't think I'm dumping two thirds of them. We might be learning a new language in ten years. And if we hadn't started a war we'd probably settled into a depression in 03 or so. That war machine keeps a lot of people working. The bad part is the debt and deaths it causes. Hell, that's got to be the only reason we invaded Iraq. Jeseus wandered that sand and he couldn't make peace with them people. What the hell's a pile of bombs and bullets over ten years going to solve?

All of these things appear good on paper. But you just can't lay off tens of millions of homeowners. If you do you better hire a lot more cops and start building prisons because people are going to be stealing and killing to eat. The economy will tank, banks could fail and the list goes on.

And we don't need any discussions on religion. We've been nice and let this political discussion go on. It's difficult enough controling a political discussion without adding religion to the equation....

First their would be a 15% corporate tax that we would collect on and end the loophoes. They would actually bring in 15% of net earnings. The lowest rate now is in Switzerland and it is 15%, most US Corps hide there money there. Ron Paul would allow them to move the money they are hiding over there, back here with no fines or taxes. Cisco had like 400-600 million they woul bring back, only one Corp big wig would speak on the matter. Billions would come back here.

Second he would end the DRUG WAR. If the states want to break themselves, let them. The drug war funding creates the insanity. More arrest, more problems, More FEDERAL MONEY. He would also free the 2 million non violent drug offerders and send the security gaurds home packing. Saving billions.

Then last but not least......Shut down the NEOCON WAR MACHINE!!! CNN, FOX, & all other MSM are nothing but liars. I posted a video from youtube under MEDIA WARMOGERS and they say, if Ron Paul gets president, 2/3 of them get fired. Good, I'll pink slips. Setember 10, 2001 Rumsfeld said they had stolent 25% of Nat'l Defense budget, 2.3 TRILLON. The next day 9/11. Since that date defense spending has increased 81%. YOU GOTTA CUT THIS STUFF OUT!!!


The question you need to ask is how can we run this country and drasitically cut spending...Increase the national debt another 1.3 trllion every other year. Let the FED keep that 14 trillion they stole. I say take al that back if if they go broke, serves them right.

RP would axe 155,000 Gov't workers. He woudl start the ending of the FED/IMF control over our money. He would end foreign aid. He would get us out of the UN and NATO. He would secure our borders. He would drastically reduce the UN Agenda elements of FDA, EPA, FAA (drones), and give us our LIBERTY BACK!!!

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/ron-paul-plan-to-restore-america/

9/10/2001: Rumsfeld says $2.3 TRILLION Missing from Pentagon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU

November 16, 2011

Partial Audit of the Federal Reserve Reveals $16 Trillion in Secret Bailouts — $16,000,000,000,000.00 had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and FOREIGN banks everywhere from France to Scotland. The entire national debt of the United States government spanning its 200+ year history is “only” $14.5 trillion.

http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/partial-audit-of-the-federal-reserve-reveals-16-trillion-in-secret-bailouts-16000000000000-00-had-been-secretly-given-out-to-us-banks-and-corporations-and-foreign-banks-everywhere-from/

Why the Warmongering Media Fears a Ron Paul Presidency
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pxzdfv13tGo

RON PAUL THIS IS IT!!! BIGGEST AWAKENING IS HAPPENING!!! - Alex Jones Infowars 2012-01-11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkv221-KTXQ

 

[Cojito]

I've been trying to point out cojito's distorted logic and apparent confusion. He seems to just ignore reason, yet believes he is on the path to enlightenment.

if i'm wrong we'd best get to sacrificing a bull to Apollo. i mean, we all know how he gets; he might kill us all and give our babies to centaurs.

 

[whodare]

Plato's Arguments Against Democracy
Plato's main grievance with democratic culture is the notion that an ill-informed majority could outnumber one just, virtuous, and well-educated individual--- the philosopher--- and thus falsity would triumph over truth. For example, Plato spells out the predicament of the philosopher in a democratic culture through an analogy of an unruly crew. Imagine, Plato asks the reader, a crew on a ship. The owner of the ship, having gained a position of authority on the boat through size and strength, is ill-equipped in naval knowledge to steer the ship. Meanwhile, there are a multitude of sailors who all think they are fit to be the captain. They believe that they are fit to be the authority on the ship despite the fact that they had never learned anything about naval matters,--- because, as they say, captainship is not something that can be taught (Republic 488a). When the sailors fail in their quests, they seek to kill their competitors, and manipulate the owner into ceding control of the ship, and "... help themselves to its cargo, and have the kind of drunken and indulgent voyage you'd expect from people like that" (Republic 488d). On such a ship, the way to gain favor of the other sailors is to contribute to their quest to subdue the owner, and thus come to be recognized as a 'true captain" (Republic 488d). Therefore, any true naval expert, one who has studied the requisite naval matters in order to properly guide a ship, will fail when he tries to speak up. Because this expert is more concerned with actually guiding the ship, rather than contributing to the cause of the other sailors, he is viewed as useless by the rest of the sailors. He is thought of as "nothing but a windbag with his head in the clouds" (Republic 489a).
Speaking to the metaphor, the philosopher in a democratic culture is the true sea captain ignored by the majority, while the sophist is the pseudo-captain who gains favor through rhetoric and manipulation. The sophist is more interested in constructing arguments to help people manipulate others and win power, rather than seeking the nature of morality, justice, and truth (DB?). In Plato's ideal state, the class of Guardians (led by the Philosopher-King), is filtered out by birth and educated intensely, in order to produce the wisest, most just, and most morally upright possible ruler for society. Thus, Plato's ideal state goes against the democratic notion that political expertise is not something that can be taught, and reasserts that like other crafts, being a good ruler is something that must be learned, honed, and refined; ruling, like other crafts, is certainly not suitable for everyone. However, Plato says of democracy, "This political system, however, spurns all of that , and doesn't care what kind of provenance people had before coming to government; as long as someone claims to be sympathetic to the general populace, he is honored within this political system" (Republic 558b).
The true philosopher, according to Plato, will be more concerned with just rule than with political maneuvering. However, in the democratic society, which results from insatiable greed for wealth, political maneuvering is the foremost priority (Republic 555b). Democracy results from oligarchy when the poor members of the community emerge victorious, and they kill the rich, and give to their brethren equal political rights (Republic 557a). However, the poor still covet the riches that they had previously resented, and thus, political authority will rest with the people that possess the most wealth. Thus, the desire for self-discipline is at odds with the desire for wealth, and in a democratic society, one is always neglected (Republic 555d). More often than not, the desire for self-discipline loses out.
The reluctance of the democratic culture to take the true philosopher seriously is further illustrated in the allegory of the cave. In this picture, Plato asks the reader to imagine prisoners immobilized, with their attention fixated on a wall right in front of them, where shadows of objects pass by (Republic 514a). These shadows are constructed by people carrying puppets passing along a walkway behind a fire which remains unseen by the prisoners (Republic 514b-c). Thus, in this allegory, the prisoners have a very primitive understanding of reality. The only "truth" they can claim to know are the shadows passing in front of them, and thus they judge the worthiness and skill of each other based on the skill of naming the shadows passing them by, Yet, as Plato describes, one who suddenly feels compelled to break out of the chains and turns around will see that the puppets projecting the shadows on the wall seem to be less real than the shadows themselves (Republic 515c-d) The now-freed prisoner will eventually come to see the sun outside of the cave, and become "enlightened". He will come to know that the sun is the true source of knowledge, and the ultimate cause of everything that he had previously come to consider as real.
However, with this enlightenment comes the desire for solitude. He doesn't want to go free his fellow prisoners, but something inside him tells him that he must. However, once he travels back into the dark depths of the cave, he is blinded by the darkness, and thus is unable to recognize shapes like all of the others, who refuse to be freed by him. Thus, the enlightened one, the philosopher, becomes an outcast who is rejected by the masses.
Plato, therefore, sees democracy as detrimental and perhaps even outright vigilant against the philosopher. Plato, in his allegory, is making an allusion to the masses of democracy as prisoners who refuse to pursue real knowledge. This is not to say that they are aware of a higher knowledge and refuse to pursue it, but rather because there are "puppet-masters" (in a democracy, the political power structure) that construct perceptions and bind the masses in such a way that the source of true knowledge is obscured. The philosopher (for one reason or another) is suddenly compelled by an outside force to break free from this bondage, and thus becomes a potential medium through which all prisoners can be freed. The tragedy of the story, as one may interpret it, is that the prisoners don't recognize themselves as prisoners and don't want to be freed. Of course, not all are even capable of breaking free from bondage, and Plato recognizes that a true philosopher is rare indeed. Due to the rarity of a true aptitude for philosophical life, the philosopher is always at a numerical disadvantage, and his "genius" goes unrecognized precisely because there are very few others who even have the capability to recognize this aptitude.

Intresting take on democracy from Plato

 

[whodare]

So Ron Paul would let them bring their money back? I thought he was all for leaving peoples personal issues alone? Why should he tell people where they can keep their money?

Has nothing to do with telling people where to keep their money. He want to allow companies and individuals to repatriate their overseas money with amnesty. It'll bring billions in cash back to the US.

I'm sure Ron Paul has jobs figured for the 10 or so million jobs his cuts would create. Now, don't get me wrong. I think the DEA needs to go. But at the same time I don't want cartells unloading tons of cocaine and heroine across our borders either. With all those unemployed, homeless people his cuts created it would be to easy for these people to drown their sorrows in cocaine and heroine.....


And do you think releasing the non violent offenders, which I'm all for, would send guards packing, you're dreaming. There's enough felony offenders being released early because there's a lack of room to fill these spots.

He wants t use the military to protect our borders so I don't see an increase in drug trafficking happening.

Ten million jobs lost? Where did you get this number, and do you bother to consider the jobs that would be created by his other policies to stimulate entrepreneurs and businesses to invest and expand.

Are you saying Ron Paul is going to "lay off" two thirds of the military? I imagine he has job plans for all these people to. I'm all for scaling back our military and the budget. But we've pissed a lot of people off. I don't think I'm dumping two thirds of them. We might be learning a new language in ten years. And if we hadn't started a war we'd probably settled into a depression in 03 or so. That war machine keeps a lot of people working. The bad part is the debt and deaths it causes. Hell, that's got to be the only reason we invaded Iraq. Jeseus wandered that sand and he couldn't make peace with them people. What the hell's a pile of bombs and bullets over ten years going to solve?

You. Don't lay off military personnel they become reserves and still get paid. He wants to use many of them to secure our borders especially Mexico.

Yes we invaded Iraq because we knew death and destruction stimulates the economy /sarcasm off.

"them people" ?

All of these things appear good on paper. But you just can't lay off tens of millions of homeowners. If you do you better hire a lot more cops and start building prisons because people are going to be stealing and killing to eat. The economy will tank, banks could fail and the list goes on.

Fearmongering crap

And we don't need any discussions on religion. We've been nice and let this political discussion go on. It's difficult enough controling a political discussion without adding religion to the equation....

Agreed thanks for letting it continue

 

[MadBuddhaAbuser]

i don't have to prove anything. i make no claims about sky gods. i just ask for the evidence, the proof. so far, it remains elusive.

slick? i never mentioned Ron Paul. you did. you either can't understand what you read, or you're being dishonest - again

*edit- you really dont think is distorted/ironic to not have to prove anything, yet require proof in the next sentence?cmon man.

It doesn't take a genius to realize where you said "calls healthy sexually active adults immoral" would likely refer to the same guy you had been going on for the last four pages with the same wording.

My comprehension is still fine, and I have yet to be dishonest in this whole thread, but I'll assume you are still going on about 100 pages ago where I posted am article "healthcare providers justify raising rates" where the industry themselves said "we are raising rates because we think people might think they can afford healthcare one day" and you said it was because of fat people. Then I said blaming it on the poor(who can't afford to eat as healthy as the rich) was silly when the people who set the rates publicly stated it was the belief people could one day afford it...........oh yeah, I musta been dishonest. Fail.

actually, if we accept what you say as fact,

For someones who likes to be informed, I guess looking at the first goolge result must be too much work
" Rick Santorum, who late polls say may be leading today in the Iowa caucus, is standing by his position that traditional marriage between a man and a women should be protected by a constitutional amendment – even if that invalidates same-sex marriages that have already occurred. "

i would. but i believe that its my duty to keep informed and vote. so until a promiscuous atheist runs i'll cast my vote for the least irrational candidate.

Which is whom? The guy who lies about everything but sings a mean al green, or the other three who lie, but don't sing?

 

[MadBuddhaAbuser]

And doubly agreed thanks for letting this continue.

While it may get a little heated sometimes, it is generally informational, instead off the soundbite shit we are fed by major news.

And I have managed to agree with everyone in this thread at some point and have given and received rep from even those who I generally disagree with.

It stays more civil than the actual debates for the most part, and I think that says a lot about all of us.

 

[JJScorpio]

Now I'm confused, lol..... He's going to legalize drugs but not legalize them at the borders? How's that going to work? And he's going to "lay off, but Reserve" 2/3rds of the military and them put them on the borders? Do you know how many people that is? They'd be elbow to ass, lol.......

Now lets discuss his "policies to stimulate entrepreneurs and businesses to invest and expand." I think Obama GAVE away trillions for people to start business and hire new workers. How'd that work out? And yes, his lay off plans could trickle down to many million jobs.... Do you know how many people in the armed forces? He doesn't need 66 percent of that number on the borders, replacing the people that now do that for a living. That I might add will become unemployed....

So anyways, don't mind me. I just like to argue. But I figured out a long time ago that when something appears to good to be true, it usually is. I'll admit some of Pauls ideas are good. But he know's that a lot of what he says is unattainable. You know, the snow job all politicians give to make things sound good while all along they know it's not happening..... And to be honest, I'm not sure he hasn't caved in and is working to get his kid on the VP train. I hope not. But even if he did I'm sure the Paul supporters will justify it......

Has nothing to do with telling people where to keep their money. He want to allow companies and individuals to repatriate their overseas money with amnesty. It'll bring billions in cash back to the US.



He wants t use the military to protect our borders so I don't see an increase in drug trafficking happening.

Ten million jobs lost? Where did you get this number, and do you bother to consider the jobs that would be created by his other policies to stimulate entrepreneurs and businesses to invest and expand.



You. Don't lay off military personnel they become reserves and still get paid. He wants to use many of them to secure our borders especially Mexico.

Yes we invaded Iraq because we knew death and destruction stimulates the economy /sarcasm off.

"them people" ?



Fearmongering crap


Agreed thanks for letting it continue

 

[MadBuddhaAbuser]

Santorum brought up another interesting fact i would LOVE a (blind) Paul supporter to explain. Why is Dr Paul running attack ads against Santorum in MI when Dr Paul is not campaigning there?

As an informed dr paul supporter ill field this one, and ask you why the fuck would you EVER listen to santorum?

direct from ronpaul2012.com

" CHI G AN

MA KES TH REE- DAY VISIT T O T H E G REA T L A K ES S TAT E

ANN ARBOR, Michigan– The Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign has announced the full schedule for Congressman Ron Paul’s three-day visit to the Great Lakes state. Paul will make five appearances ahead of the state’s primary on February 28th.On Saturday, Paul will address a “Soldiers, Airmen, and Sailors for Ron Paul” Rally at Central Michigan University, highlighting his strong support from members of the military.

On Sunday, Dr. Paul will address small business owners at an event in Hudsonville.

On Monday, Paul will speak in Detroit at 11:00 a.m. at a town hall entitled, “Solving Detroit’s Crises.” Additionally, a 4:00 p.m. rally will take place at Michigan State University and at 7:00 p.m. Paul will be at a rally in Dearborn sponsored by the “Doctors for Ron Paul Coalition.”

So there is the romney myth debunked. Whats next? Unless of course they moved detroit, and michigan state university out of michigan sometime in the last week.

Details of the events are as follows. All times Eastern.

 

[MadBuddhaAbuser]

One more quick clarification. He is going to decriminalize federally all drugs. Its up to states to
Do what they want.

I don't see texas legalizing anything this millennium.

 

[draztik]

Ron Paul Addresses Small Business Owners in Hudsonville, Michigan - February 26 2012
[YOUTUBEIF]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFJ_jHZpui0[/YOUTUBEIF]

 

[whodare]

Now I'm confused, lol..... He's going to legalize drugs but not legalize them at the borders? How's that going to work? And he's going to "lay off, but Reserve" 2/3rds of the military and them put them on the borders? Do you know how many people that is? They'd be elbow to ass, lol.......

????

Nowhere did I mention him legalizing drugs I said he would secure the border from illegals with SOME of the military he brings home.

Do you know what reserve status is?

Now lets discuss his "policies to stimulate entrepreneurs and businesses to invest and expand." I think Obama GAVE away trillions for people to start business and hire new workers. How'd that work out? And yes, his lay off plans could trickle down to many million jobs.... Do you know how many people in the armed forces? He doesn't need 66 percent of that number on the borders, replacing the people that now do that for a living. That I might add will become unemployed...

Dr Paul isn't going to inflate our currency by printing and giving away trillions, and little to none of what obama gave away ended up in the hands of startups.

Trickle down job loss, lol

Again you can't "fire" military personnel. They may not be working but they are getting a check.

And we don't need as large of a standing army as we have currently but we could solve that by accepting less people who enlist, and putting extras on reserve until retirement.

So anyways, don't mind me. I just like to argue. But I figured out a long time ago that when something appears to good to be true, it usually is. I'll admit some of Pauls ideas are good. But he know's that a lot of what he says is unattainable. You know, the snow job all politicians give to make things sound good while all along they know it's not happening..... And to be honest, I'm not sure he hasn't caved in and is working to get his kid on the VP train. I hope not. But even if he did I'm sure the Paul supporters will justify it......

Dr Paul certainly isn't perfect but his ideas are based on sound reasoning.

I have no illusions he ca. Do all he says but he would be able to end the unconstitutional wars and the drug war( also unconstitutional)

Dr Paul is not a sell out

 

[draztik]

I hope he wins the Michigan Primary. It's an open primary, anyone that is registered to vote in Michigan can vote in the primary on tuesday.

 

[SpasticGramps]

And there's another thing most people fail to grasp regarding the good Doctors cuts in all these programs. Unemployment. Mass unemployment.

All these programs and social spending and warfare that is keeping everyone employed works great in the "good years" of the debt super cycle, but what the good Doctor is pointing out is that we're insolvent. We can either cut back voluntarily, which will bring mass unemployment, or we can keep pretending like we are solvent until the market makes the cuts for us. Which will bring much more mas unemployment and disorderly destruction than willful acceptance of our predicament.

There are no good answers. We lived it up for a long time, but now it's time to pay the piper. And it's not like we are the only ones. The entire western world built on the Keynesian foundation of sand has to pay the piper and no amount of printed money can stop the collection from coming due. It will and has for a while, but nothing lasts forever.

Like I said. It's not just us. Everyone has decades of hard decisions to make, but I reckon the market is going to make them for us.

Osborne: UK has run out of money

In a stark warning ahead of next month’s Budget, the Chancellor said there was little the Coalition could do to stimulate the economy.

Mr Osborne made it clear that due to the parlous state of the public finances the best hope for economic growth was to encourage businesses to flourish and hire more workers.

“The British Government has run out of money because all the money was spent in the good years,” the Chancellor said. “The money and the investment and the jobs need to come from the private sector.”

Mr Osborne’s bleak assessment echoes that of Liam Byrne, the former chief secretary to the Treasury, who bluntly joked that Labour had left Britain broke when he exited the Government in 2010.

He left David Laws, his successor, a one-line note saying: “Dear Chief Secretary, I’m afraid to tell you there’s no money left”.

 

[ShroomDr]

So there is the romney myth debunked. Whats next?

Where are the TV ads against Romney?

Why would a canidate focus solely on Santorum (or the other Anti-Romney's) with there TV ads?

Why not focus on all of them, Romneycare too small a target for TV ads?

You havent answered anything, because there is no real defense.

 

[whodare]

Where are the TV ads against Romney?

Why would a canidate focus solely on Santorum (or the other Anti-Romney's) with there TV ads?

Why not focus on all of them, Romneycare too small a target for TV ads?

You havent answered anything, because there is no real defense.

Well he knows Romney has big money to sling mud and Romney has the steadiest support.

It's easier to capture the anti-Romney vote then actual Romney supporters, not to mention there's a whole lot more anti rom votes out there to influence.

He also isn't focusing too much on popular vote so I think it a strategy to get the most bang for his advertising buck.



http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57385332-503544/ron-paul-santorum-is-desperate/

MT. PLEASANT, Mich. - Ron Paul on Saturday laughed off remarks made by fellow GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum earlier in the day speculating that Paul and Mitt Romney have a backroom running mate deal going.
"I don't know what all that meant," Paul chuckled backstage of a rally he held here at Central Michigan University. "No, we've never had a conversation, anything like that ... but he's a family person, I've known him for five years, so it is a little bit different. But I don't agree with [him on] hardly anything, probably."
Santorum has openly speculated that Paul and Romney are working together. He vented his frustration at multiple events on Saturday that "in 20 debates, Ron Paul never attacked Mitt Romney." During last week's debate in Arizona, Santorum said, "I felt like messages were being slipped behind my chair."
Paul admitted to reporters that he's never "volunteered" an attack on Romney during a debate, but said he "answered the questions when they asked me." He said Santorum's sudden gripe about the issue shows that he's "desperate."
As for the Texas Congressman's attack ads, which have been harsh on Santorum but absent on Romney, particularly in Michigan, Paul said that "right now the anti-Romney candidate is Santorum, so I have to get his votes, as I did at one time with Gingrich."
Though Saturday marked Paul's first day campaigning in Michigan, more than 2,000 students and other supporters greeted him with signs and chants at what was billed as a "Soldier, Airmen, and Sailors for Ron Paul" rally. Paul has been polling third in the state, behind Santorum and Romney.
Asked about his expectations, Paul said his campaign isn't shooting for a specific percentage threshold, but bragged that he holds the second-highest number of "firm delegates" so far of any of the candidates.
"I feel good, but I'm realistic," he said. "And this is our first trip up where, so we expect to do well but I don't have any precise predictions. But we have a lot of enthusiasm, a lot of supporters, and I'm encouraged when I come to a meeting like we had here tonight."

 

[Cojito]

*edit- you really dont think is distorted/ironic to not have to prove anything, yet require proof in the next sentence?cmon man.

no. how could i prove claims i am not making?

It doesn't take a genius to realize where you said "calls healthy sexually active adults immoral" would likely refer to the same guy you had been going on for the last four pages with the same wording.

ah, now i see why you took that so personal. no, i didn't have Ron Paul in mind, nor did i intend to link him to abortion bombers. that would be cheap. but i do think he's on a continuum with other believers. i just don't know where along the continuum he falls.

My comprehension is still fine, and I have yet to be dishonest in this whole thread, but I'll assume you are still going on about 100 pages ago where I posted am article "healthcare providers justify raising rates" where the industry themselves said "we are raising rates because we think people might think they can afford healthcare one day" and you said it was because of fat people. Then I said blaming it on the poor(who can't afford to eat as healthy as the rich) was silly when the people who set the rates publicly stated it was the belief people could one day afford it...........oh yeah, I musta been dishonest. Fail.

can't recall exactly. am too high, and don't care enough to search it out. i just remember you misrepresenting the facts in a chat with Disco i think. i gave you a chance to claim you were high and didn't understand, and you said your comprehension was just fine.

For someones who likes to be informed, I guess looking at the first goolge result must be too much work" Rick Santorum, who late polls say may be leading today in the Iowa caucus, is standing by his position that traditional marriage between a man and a women should be protected by a constitutional amendment – even if that invalidates same-sex marriages that have already occurred. "

not at all. i gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you were correct. even though you'd been dishonest in the past. did you miss that?

Which is whom? The guy who lies about everything but sings a mean al green, or the other three who lie, but don't sing?

i'm keeping an open mind.

 

[SacredBreh]

Uh...... I believe we were talking about Presidential Candidates????

Uh...... I believe we were talking about Presidential Candidates????

they're all wrong to believe in a sky god given the paucity of evidence. so are some more wrong? sure. believers in sky gods are not all the same. there's a kind of a continuum. the more educated (re: less wrong) tend to move away from fundamentalism.

there are believers that wage jihad, fly planes into buildings, throw acid in the faces of young school girls. and then there are believers who shoot abortion doctors, want fake science (creationism) taught in schools, seek to deny homosexuals their civil rights, derail life saving stem cell research, stop condoms being handed out to AIDs torn Africa, and call healthy sexually active adults "immoral."

and some feign belief, or refuse to take religion all that seriously. they may identify with it to get elected, they just don't follow it because it's silly and impractical. i really can't know how seriously the republican candidates are about their religion. or if they really believe the same things. does Mitt believe in magic underwear? does he think blacks can get to heaven? given how often Gingrich lies and cheats on his women, is it likely he takes his faith all that seriously? and what about that douche Santorum? he seems unusually pious.

so, in answer to your question, yes, i'd say some are less wrong about the big sky guy.

So we are not talking Taliban. Agreed, hypocrites but again.... since all profess their beliefs.... are you going to pick one because he is a hypocrite and doesn't "really believe" or one who believes but will not force that belief or his own practices on you? (hint: Ron Paul)

Not being a smart ass. I may not agree with a person's beliefs and still respect them as a person. More likely to not respect a out right hypocrite.

Peace

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

So we are not talking Taliban. Agreed, hypocrites but again.... since all profess their beliefs.... are you going to pick one because he is a hypocrite and doesn't "really believe" or one who believes but will not force that belief or his own practices on you? (hint: Ron Paul)

hint: I'd say that people who profess to qualify others' faith are blaspheming their own. At least Christians, who's good book teaches leaving judgement up to God.

Not being a smart ass. I may not agree with a person's beliefs and still respect them as a person. More likely to not respect a out right hypocrite.

Peace

I'm reminded of Franklin Graham, saying he took Obama at his word that Obama's a Christian yet couldn't manage "believe" because (presumably, as a human) he can't do that. Turns right around and says he "believes" Santorum's a Christian. I hope his daddy saw him and pointed out not to politicize his faith rhetoric.