quote:

ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome

You asked "what did Clinton do?" that was wrong during the Waco event.  Clinton was the only person who could approve deploying Delta Force on taxpayers.  Delta Force was in the tanks, and that is strictly forbidden in that outdated document called the Constitution. 
It is also known that the ATF fired the first shots.  That is documented. 
Another instance of Clinton's treason, is sending an envoy to China with a deal for them to consider- allow US corporations to screw the unions by using Chinese labor, and the US government will in turn give the Chinese government ICBM technology.  We knew that the Chinese had the bomb, they just weren't able to launch one all the way here, until Clinton fixed that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

quote:

ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

quote:

ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

Why does the left wing like this guy so much? Because he's anti-war? The guy is the most right-wing candidate in both fields. Sure he is anti-war, but he is also in favor of completely sealing the borders and pulling out of our trade agreements. He also wants to dramatically cut social programs in the government.

He is an isolationist. He represents what the GOP was back in the 1920s and 1930s. And it is a philosophy that just didn't work....and some argue it made World War II worse.

Yanno.....

Nearly every time I read one of your posts, I feel like I'm reading something mouthed from Hannity's pet parrot. Any time it deals with foreign policy, your rhetoric is derived solely from neocon-status-quo cable television programming.

How in the fuck do you equate a non-boogeyman, normalized relations, non-interventionist, non-aggressive, non-militaristic way of thinking, to isolationism and how the republicans were back in the 30's?

The only folks making that kind of comparison are your friends from the Fox news channel.

No. It is just what is obvious. Ron Paul does not want the US to help Israel. He doesn't want the US to be involved in anything in the mid-east. And it seems he really doesn't care if Al-Queda or Iran or Syria or any other hostile regime completely takes over the mid-east. It's the same BS policy we had towards Nazi Germany.... "leave them alone and maybe they will leave us alone" mentality.

That kind of policy I believe would be enormously dangerous to the security and the economy of the United States as well as the westurn bloc.

Yeah bra......

Keeping drawing comparisons between Al-Queda, Israel and the former Nazi state -- It's like that old fairy tale about the emperors new clothes....there's no truth behind the facade.

Its rhetoric parroted from cable news but never thought-through to its logical conclusion.

There's nothing that irritates me more than folks who are easily manipulated by corporate-owned cable news networks - Think for yourself.





- R

Like it or not, dude. We are addicted to oil. Our economy runs on oil. And it will take decades for us to get off that tit. We cannot allow the world's largest oil reserves to fall into the hands of governments that are hostile to us and our allies. Doing so will put our economy at the mercy of our enemies.

Jimmy Carter made a speech when he was president that the US must find alternative sources of energy. For 30 years the federal government (both Republican and Democrat) has done absolutely nothing. Yes, the US needs to get off that mid-east dependance. But that can't happen overnight. It took the nation of Brazil over 3 decades to become energy independant. It'll take us even longer because our economy is much more complicated and strongly rooted into global politics.

We cannot do as Ron Paul suggests and pull out of the mid-east completely. Every American knows this. And this is why Ron Paul doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the election.

Cyberdude, are you saying you're in favor of having Troops in over 130 countries, giving foreign aid handouts to more than 130 countries to the tune of over $80B per year not including Iraq, remaining in things like "NAFTA", CAFTA, the "U.N.", and a one way "trade deal" with China?
Man, PLEASE give me a little ISOLATIONISM if that's what you want to call it!

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611
I didnt say I was in favor of it. But you can't just back off it like Paul wants to do. It will crash our economy. There needs to be reform in the government and the economy, but you can't do it overnight. Our economy does not like change. When the price of oil shoots up $10...everyone panics. The price of gas soars and everyone starts selling their stocks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveluci

quote:

ORIGINAL: selfbnd411
I didn't say you, I said Left-minded people I know!

Yup, you're right.  I got excited and generalized...my bad.  Just that I've heard this from others.  Guess it struck a nerve...lol....sorry........

But....is that all you got from my post.....just that?  Geesh........luci

quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveluci

Structured King,
Anytime you're not feeling as enraged and homicidal as you might like to be, take a look at the documentary entitled "Waco: Rules of Engagement."  If you think you can't get any more disgusted by our wonderful Congress full of idiots, this video may prove you wrong.  They never let the facts get in the way of their uninformed opinions.......slave luci

quote:

ORIGINAL: StructuredKing

Or maybe it's just an indicator that the Republic is dead, and it's time to try something else. ;-)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveluci

Anyone see him on there last night?  Wasn't it refreshing to see a politician actually saying something sensible for a change?  He probably doesn't stand a snowball's chance of getting anywhere but he's sensible, honest, and not afraid to throw partisan nonsense out the window.  Oh, if only............luci

P.S.  Was it just me or did that segment about Hannity and Colmes and their differing responses to the old Reagan speech crack you up too?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Griswold

quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveluci

Anyone see him on there last night?  Wasn't it refreshing to see a politician actually saying something sensible for a change?  He probably doesn't stand a snowball's chance of getting anywhere but he's sensible, honest, and not afraid to throw partisan nonsense out the window.  Oh, if only............luci

P.S.  Was it just me or did that segment about Hannity and Colmes and their differing responses to the old Reagan speech crack you up too?

Ron Paul is a sensible messenger who's been bastardized by the press, who have been paid for by the leading above the fold holders of  the latest polls.

He was criticized by someone, in a (two back) Presidential debate, said something that was inherently accurate, but who(m) a New York hopeful, who has only garnered his status by virtue of the fact that a) he was there on the day that some sick fucks decided to abscond with our freedom...did so...and b) he was able to stand at the fulcrum when someone (R.P.) said something that could be twisted by not only someone with a better vernacular, but moreover, able to say it in a sound bite that allowed the general public to see his words in such a fashion as to cause unending derision (think "The Dean Scream")...AND....in a fashion wherein which, thanks to the debate rules...no one (let alone Paul) could respond to....

Lemme tell you something folks....

Paul may not be the guy for our time...(he also may be)...but the public's derision of him...(for telling the truth)...ain't for the Daily Times.

He told the truth.

And he was kicked in the ass for it.

(I hope someone's listening).

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

It's about politics. We have two very polarized sides in the American electorate. And Ron Paul doesn't fit in either of them. Only a little over 100 million people vote in the US. About 45% will always vote for the GOP... 45% will vote for the Democrats. 5% will split to one side or the other depending on which way the wind is blowing. That leaves only 5% of the electorate for people like Ron Paul.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611
Right or not...Ron Paul made a critical error in the first debate by claiming America shared responsibility for 9/11.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Griswold

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611
Right or not...Ron Paul made a critical error in the first debate by claiming America shared responsibility for 9/11.

He didn't say that.  He never said that.

I don't speak for Ron Paul.  Frankly, until these comments arose a few weeks back...I didn't even fucking know who Ron Paul was.

My (previous) post (you can look it up if you like) was something along the lines of "pay attention people...don't be swayed by press...or headlines"...

He didn't say that.

What's more important is that you believe he said that. 

Read the motherfucking paper...but more importantly...watch the debates...see for yourself.  Do you're fucking own homework.

(There's an election coming...they expect you to be prepared).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

Sometimes not owning a TV causes me to miss things that I wish I had caught.
I'd like to see more of Ron Paul in action as it were...(and yeah, one of the most unfortunate name associations ever).

quote:

...Ron Paul is a Libertarian and he's diametrically opposed to everything to the left of moderate Republicanism!  This guy wants to get rid of every federal agency except the Army--that includes Social Security, Medicare, student aid...you name it.

quote:

Right or not...Ron Paul made a critical error in the first debate by claiming America shared responsibility for 9/11. That is just not a Republican belief. Not only that, but that idea is very, very unpopular in the GOP... It is so unpopular that if you suggest it, you risk being viewed as un-American. 
And analysts on both sides of the political spectrum has said Ron Paul's campaign ended with that one sentence.