The problem of "they all suck, but Ron Paul sucks the least"?

[airdata]

Craig : are you a die hard Obama supporter?

Don, you ?

Just trying to figure some of you out. That guy ' First ' caught me off guard by behaving like an extreme right wing asshole and then it turns out he's an obama supporter lol.

 

[DAGTA]

Newsletters:Ron Paul ::Birth Certificate:Barack Obama

I disagree.

The birth certificate is part of proof of eligibility to hold the office of President.

The newsletters are potential evidence of negative behavior.

If the newsletters are true and written by Ron Paul, that doesn't make him ineligible for the office of President.

 

[DAGTA]

You really don't understand what it's about. It's about power over the economy affecting trillions, not about the salary.

Which is why every President left the office only making his salary and nothing more...

 

[lopri]

Scalia, but, "The Fourteenth Amendment expressly allows States to deprive their citizens of 'liberty,' so long as 'due process of law' is provided. . . ."

That doesn't contradict "shall no be deprived" ... "without due process of law".

Wow. You actually surprised me with the correct answer. There are only 2 out of 9 who would say such but still.. Impressive!

Anyhow, on the subject of liberty. I am not sure what you're trying to say..? Of course there is no conflict between two identical clauses. Obviously Scalia does a better job at explaining it to us, though. "Liberty" can be deprived so long as "due process of law" is provided, according to Scalia.

Problem arises, however, once we take Scalia's position, that the 14th amendment suddenly sounds like an empty promise. Government can deprive your liberty, property, and even life as long as it passes appropriate laws. (Think Obamacare ^^ ) Why even bother mentioning liberty, property, and life when all it takes is legislation to take them away?

Thus the doctrine of "Substantive Due Process" was born, as well as incorporation of the Bill of rights. Scalia hates the substantive due process doctrine (Think abortion) but he uses it when he feels like it (Think gun rights.. for duck hunting).

I will refrain from further commenting because I frankly am not sure what this debate is about. (kind of regret getting into it, but I had to give you the credit for the right answer) Is it about whether the constitution guarantees certain rights?

 

[airdata]

I disagree.

The birth certificate is part of proof of eligibility to hold the office of President.

The newsletters are potential evidence of negative behavior.

If the newsletters are true and written by Ron Paul, that doesn't make him ineligible for the office of President.

I meant in the sense that one issue. There's no other negative press to run.

What is anybody gonna do if Obama pulls the bin laden card? You can't trump supposedly killing Bin Laden.

 

[DAGTA]

I meant in the sense that one issue. There's no other negative press to run.

What is anybody gonna do if Obama pulls the bin laden card? You can't trump supposedly killing Bin Laden.

No doubt it will come up in the campaign and people will eat it up.

Obama also killed all of the alien enemies of scientologists. He then dumped the bodies in volcanoes out of respect to the alien culture. Oh, and he didn't take any pictures or save any other proof as that also would have been disrespectful. But really, he did it.

 

[RabidMongoose]

The problem with "The problem of "they all suck, but Ron Paul sucks the least" is that it's a ridiculously incorrect statement. Ron Paul sucks the most, he's a crazy old racist bigot who hates individual rights and liberties.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Craig : are you a die hard Obama supporter?

Don, you ?

Just trying to figure some of you out. That guy ' First ' caught me off guard by behaving like an extreme right wing asshole and then it turns out he's an obama supporter lol.

I wouldn't say I am a diehard Obama supporter, but I will certainly support him over any of the evident challengers. Romney would be my second choice, followed by Huntsman, and none of the other candidates would be remotely palatable to me.

 

[DrPizza]

bringing up 20-30 year old newsletters because of lack of any other dirt shows a very low charactor of people doing it or getting behind it.

Can't argue w\ him winning debates or his solid voting record, this is all people have got against paul. Some newsletters in which people who don't understand the word racist assert that they're racist because of a few select excerpts.

Newsletters:Ron Paul ::Birth Certificate:Barack Obama

Proving he's racist based on those newsletters is the low hanging fruit. Why bother to be more elaborate about it. It's like you're saying "Well, yeah, Jimmy killed a guy 20 years ago, but what about now, huh? Why do you have to bring up what he did 20 years ago to show he's not a nice guy?" If you really think someone changes their behavior or opinion of racism after the age of 40, then you must be young and naive.

 

[Steeplerot]

I call him Dr. Paul because, well, he's a doctor. I call President Obama that because he's President, and I extended the same courtesy to President Bush. That doesn't affect my opinion that Dr. Paul is a dishonest bigot - it's just being accurate. Dr. Mengele was also called that title despite his own misdeeds (and no, I am not implying that Dr. Paul is in any way comparable to Mengele, other than being doctors with some negative attributes), as is Dr. Conrad Murray.

I was always confused, but Congressman Ron Paul should be his formal title should it not?

Being in such a high office should overtake your former title. Or so I thought.

The Dr. thing always seemed like a ploy to give him credibility.

(I know all of this is old-school semantics but whatever, I understand that Attorneys have a formal system to their names also in legal title that supersedes previous titles -Such as a Attorney becomes "Honorable XXXX" when they achieve a judge position.)

 

[Craig234]

Craig : are you a die hard Obama supporter?

Don, you ?

Just trying to figure some of you out. That guy ' First ' caught me off guard by behaving like an extreme right wing asshole and then it turns out he's an obama supporter lol.

I am not a big Obama supporter in terms of his basically being a Republican. There's quite a bit I disagree with him on.

But I am a strong Obama supporter in terms of his winning over any of the other viable candidates. We need real fixes and a good progressive viable. That's not possible now.

 

[Steeplerot]

I am not a big Obama supporter in terms of his basically being a Republican. There's quite a bit I disagree with him on.

But I am a strong Obama supporter in terms of his winning over any of the other viable candidates. We need real fixes and a good progressive viable. That's not possible now.

A calculated half measure a bit too late, but then what choice does one have. Quite a corner to paint yourself into, for what it is worth I appreciate the vast majority of what you write but I am afraid you are pissing in the wind to use a colorful analogy.

I may not have voted for him but I really wanted to see at least a little more core issues handled in more reasonable focused direction. A damn shame and a wasted opportunity big O had here.

Oh well, in the second term he can get stuff done I guess, he really had enough clout early on though, but then who knows how deep the rights corrupting monied influence is within the system, I guess Obama knows well enough and this is what we get.

Politics suck.

 

[Onceler]

Anyone is better than Obama.
Idiot or crazy.

 

[Steeplerot]

Anyone is better than Obama.
Idiot or crazy.

And with these silly statements I would say guess what? We survived a idiot drunk moron like Bush, we will survive Big O. Who is really not that much different really.

(I did not vote for Obama by the way)

 

[Onceler]

must be a Ralph Nader voter

 

[RabidMongoose]

Anyone is better than Obama.
Idiot or crazy.

Hardly. Ron Paul is probably worse than almost anyone imaginable. The guy is a troll.