Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
The surest way to totally corrupt dmcowen674 is to give him enough votes in 08 to receive matching funds. After that, he would become totally corrupt and insufferable. While I am sure some already consider him insufferable already, I still respect him too much to vote for him. Not when there are alternatives like Alfred E. Newman, Donald Duck, Goofey, and Mickie Mouse to register my protest vote with.
One thing for sure, by the time the summer of 08 rolls around, the issues will have totally evolved from what they are now. One thing for sure, I will still probably be disgusted with my set of choices. Pessimists can only be pleasantly surprised. And the list of people I won't vote for is already long and getting longer.
One thing for sure, by the time the summer of 08 rolls around, the issues will have totally evolved from what they are now. One thing for sure, I will still probably be disgusted with my set of choices. Pessimists can only be pleasantly surprised. And the list of people I won't vote for is already long and getting longer.
uh, did I say anything but a democrat? If thats what I mean thats what I would have said. I am seriously considering voting for Obama if I dont end up liking whoever ends up the front running republican, how partisan knee-jerkerish is that? And judging by how much you incorectly deduced from my sentence fragment of a post, perhaps you're the one wiping foam off your keyboard.
Originally posted by: Arkaign
Anything but Hillary
etc. Find me a politician that agrees with the bulk of these initiatives, and I will be shocked
Pro-gun ownership (with appropriate checks and balances)
Rep. Ron Paul is definitely in favor of the second amendment and gun rights.
Pro-abortion rights (in limited scope, Abortion should NOT be used for arbitrary birth control)
Paul doesn?t support the federal abortion law. He says the federal government ought to keep out of the abortion issue. Although he is pro-life himself, he supports states and individual?s right to choose.
Pro-campaign finance/PAC-money reform (money should basically be banished from politics with SEVERE criminal repercussions for offenders)
I?m not sure if you can take money away from elections but you can make them more equal by taking away restrictions.
Paul?s position can be found at these sites
http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/12866/facing-the-music-ron-paul/
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002/cr021302.htm
Anti-welfare statism (we need to be helping able-bodied and minded people find decent work, not endlessly supporting them doing nothing)
He?s definitely anti-welfare. In his district especially where there are a lot of farmers, he votes against farm subsides and tells his constituents why he does.
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst091806.htm
Pro-corporate law reform (we need to punish corporate crime and tax evasion with much more severity, and the Justice department needs to crack down on modern robber barons/monopolies .. there is NO credible reason CEOs now earn 400x+ the average workers income, and for so many American jobs being outsourced to China/India/etc)
Big corporations are usually working together with politicians and congress to pass laws that not only hurt them, but all the smaller businesses. They do this because they?re able to absorb all the costs involved with the regulations and laws, while the smaller guys can?t compete. And he wants to get rid of the IRS and income taxes. He has a record of saying NO to corporate interests.
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2002/tst012802.htm
http://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=164
Pro-legalization of drugs that haven't been proven to be a significant credible threat to our safety and stability (Marijuana, MDMA, etc), If anything, the extreme expense in pursuing, prosecuting, and jailing these offenders is SEVERELY counterproductive to our entire society EXCEPT to the economic/power vampires who profit from the status quo.
Again, Ron doesn?t do drugs or gamble, but he doesn?t want the government to tell us what we or what we don?t want to do with our bodies and money.
Pro-military (Expansion of training/equipment/education programs and initiatives) Keep a large, high-morale domestic military presence, and use this force to accomplish major domestic projects as well as stand guard in the event that warfare calls them to arms.
Ron is definitely for bringing our troops home and guarding our borders. Not going throughout the world in search of monsters to slay, but to defend our borders and enforcing immigration laws.
Anti-redundant government agencies (we need to streamline, combine, and make accountable our various agencies. There is no reason to create a farce like the Homeland security agency when other agencies fail miserably in their assigned duties. Fix what is broken, don't create MORE agencies that suck up money and resources. Not to mention, to take a perfectly decent agency, FEMA, and force it under Homeland Security and it's idiot Crony director, was probably one of the dumbest political moves of the past 20 years).
Ron said this in the debate, he would get rid of Dept. of Homeland Securirty, the DOE, and a bunch of other needles government agencies.
Pro-border defense. Most of the major powers on earth have appropriately controlled borders, and I think we should as well. Combine this with immigration reform, maybe a fast-track program for individuals who speak english and have no criminal record.
Yes, Ron wants that border defense!
Arkaign
Lifer
- Oct 27, 2006
- 20,736
- 1,379
- 126
Originally posted by: dyn2nvu
Originally posted by: Arkaign
Anything but Hillary
etc. Find me a politician that agrees with the bulk of these initiatives, and I will be shocked
Pro-gun ownership (with appropriate checks and balances)
Rep. Ron Paul is definitely in favor of the second amendment and gun rights.
Pro-abortion rights (in limited scope, Abortion should NOT be used for arbitrary birth control)
Paul doesn?t support the federal abortion law. He says the federal government ought to keep out of the abortion issue. Although he is pro-life himself, he supports states and individual?s right to choose.
Pro-campaign finance/PAC-money reform (money should basically be banished from politics with SEVERE criminal repercussions for offenders)
I?m not sure if you can take money away from elections but you can make them more equal by taking away restrictions.
Paul?s position can be found at these sites
http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/12866/facing-the-music-ron-paul/
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002/cr021302.htm
Anti-welfare statism (we need to be helping able-bodied and minded people find decent work, not endlessly supporting them doing nothing)
He?s definitely anti-welfare. In his district especially where there are a lot of farmers, he votes against farm subsides and tells his constituents why he does.
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst091806.htm
Pro-corporate law reform (we need to punish corporate crime and tax evasion with much more severity, and the Justice department needs to crack down on modern robber barons/monopolies .. there is NO credible reason CEOs now earn 400x+ the average workers income, and for so many American jobs being outsourced to China/India/etc)
Big corporations are usually working together with politicians and congress to pass laws that not only hurt them, but all the smaller businesses. They do this because they?re able to absorb all the costs involved with the regulations and laws, while the smaller guys can?t compete. And he wants to get rid of the IRS and income taxes.
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2002/tst012802.htm
http://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=164
Pro-legalization of drugs that haven't been proven to be a significant credible threat to our safety and stability (Marijuana, MDMA, etc), If anything, the extreme expense in pursuing, prosecuting, and jailing these offenders is SEVERELY counterproductive to our entire society EXCEPT to the economic/power vampires who profit from the status quo.
Again, Ron doesn?t do drugs or gamble, but he doesn?t want the government to tell us what we or what we don?t want to do with our bodies and money.
Pro-military (Expansion of training/equipment/education programs and initiatives) Keep a large, high-morale domestic military presence, and use this force to accomplish major domestic projects as well as stand guard in the event that warfare calls them to arms.
Ron is definitely for bringing our troops home and guarding our borders. Not going throughout the world in search of monsters to slay, but to defend our borders and enforcing immigration laws.
Anti-redundant government agencies (we need to streamline, combine, and make accountable our various agencies. There is no reason to create a farce like the Homeland security agency when other agencies fail miserably in their assigned duties. Fix what is broken, don't create MORE agencies that suck up money and resources. Not to mention, to take a perfectly decent agency, FEMA, and force it under Homeland Security and it's idiot Crony director, was probably one of the dumbest political moves of the past 20 years).
Ron said this in the debate, he would get rid of Dept. of Homeland Securirty, the DOE, and a bunch of other needles government agencies.
Pro-border defense. Most of the major powers on earth have appropriately controlled borders, and I think we should as well. Combine this with immigration reform, maybe a fast-track program for individuals who speak english and have no criminal record.
Yes, Ron wants that border defense!
Sounds great overall, I'll do my best to spread the word locally. He sounds MUCH better than the mainstream Republican/Democrat jerkoffs.
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
When did he become Irish?
I have no idea. Personally I'd love to see Bloomberg throw his Billion into the ring just to watch the circus that ensues. Other than that, not Hillary. I have a feeling that I'll be holding my nose come 11/08.
Im 100% behind Ron Paul, but seeing as the republicans are scared of what he has to say and are trying to ban him from the debates I doubt he will get very far in the primaries. Once he is out Im probably going to vote for the libertarian candidate.
On the affordable health care side topic the simple solution would be to ban health insurance all together since the real problem is that we are over-insured. Insurance tends to restrict the free market mechanics from kicking in because it eliminates the consumers awareness of the real costs of the services they receive.
On the affordable health care side topic the simple solution would be to ban health insurance all together since the real problem is that we are over-insured. Insurance tends to restrict the free market mechanics from kicking in because it eliminates the consumers awareness of the real costs of the services they receive.
Yet Obama is like the rest, votes against decreasing government spending. Wants to expand education bureaucracy with more programs. He's also for gun-control. Wants to extend welfare nd medicad to immigrants(not sure if it's legal or illegal). Voted no to repeal the death tax. Man...
If Ron Paul became president, yet strayed away from his integrity and principles of smaller government and individual liberty he's shown over the years. I would be calling for his impeachment.
If Ron Paul became president, yet strayed away from his integrity and principles of smaller government and individual liberty he's shown over the years. I would be calling for his impeachment.
I will absolutely not vote for:
Clinton - fake fake fake
McCain - Bush version 2.0
Edwards - terrible ideas masked by Bill Clinton-style speaking. Milks his wife's cancer for personal benefit.
Clinton - fake fake fake
McCain - Bush version 2.0
Edwards - terrible ideas masked by Bill Clinton-style speaking. Milks his wife's cancer for personal benefit.
People naturally hate Hillary without actual contact with her ideas because 1) The political crap Republicans always spew out, and 2) She's not a soft speaker.
But it's no mistake she has about a 60-70% approval rating as a New York senator.
But it's no mistake she has about a 60-70% approval rating as a New York senator.
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
Who? Bush or Gore? And I'm not being obtuse here... I really have no idea what you're talking about.Originally posted by: feralkid
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
About what?
Right for the job.
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Who? Bush or Gore? And I'm not being obtuse here... I really have no idea what you're talking about.Originally posted by: feralkid
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
About what?
Right for the job.
It's not string theory...eskimospy said he'll vote for Gore, feralkid said he [Gore] was right for the job in 2000 and is still right for the job this time around, thus agreeing with eskimospy.
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Who? Bush or Gore? And I'm not being obtuse here... I really have no idea what you're talking about.Originally posted by: feralkid
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
About what?
Right for the job.
It's not string theory...eskimospy said he'll vote for Gore, feralkid said he [Gore] was right for the job in 2000 and is still right for the job this time around, thus agreeing with eskimospy.
Doh... I totally read that wrong. Guess it never registered that Gore could ever be right for the job. I read "right" like he was answering a question correctly. :laugh:
See what happens when you quit drinking?
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Who? Bush or Gore? And I'm not being obtuse here... I really have no idea what you're talking about.Originally posted by: feralkid
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
About what?
Right for the job.
It's not string theory...eskimospy said he'll vote for Gore, feralkid said he [Gore] was right for the job in 2000 and is still right for the job this time around, thus agreeing with eskimospy.
Doh... I totally read that wrong. Guess it never registered that Gore could ever be right for the job. I read "right" like he was answering a question correctly. :laugh:
See what happens when you quit drinking?
Heh, it is a pretty big problem. Which reminds me...
NOT the Queen! NOT the Climate Warming monger! Nor the internet inventor! And most absolutely NOT the "O"!
First time, today, I ever gave a candidate money. =)
I remember when I was with the lp, they would call me for contributions like 2x a month and send a ton of letters. I hope the republican party isn't like that.
I remember when I was with the lp, they would call me for contributions like 2x a month and send a ton of letters. I hope the republican party isn't like that.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter