I can't help but find it curious that when Dr. Paul wins a straw poll, the mass media and major networks all but ignore it, or write it off as being nothing important. But if Herman Caine or Mitt Romney wins, it's a major news event. I find it completely predictable that Ron wins in a major swing state like Ohio, and not a single major news outlet has anything about it online. The source cited is a local news outlet.
So seriously, no one but me sees the media trying to manipulate our choices?
IP: Logged
10:03 AM
PFF
System Bot
ryan.hess Member
Posts: 20784 From: Orlando, FL Registered: Dec 2002
Originally posted by Taijiguy: So seriously, no one but me sees the media trying to manipulate our choices?
I was watching the local news about a week ago, and they mentioned the republican candidates releasing their financial information. Their report on how much the candidates raised went something like this:
Romney: $14 million Perry: $17 million Bachman: $3.9 million Cain: $2.8 million Gingrich: $800 thousand . . . .
They completely ignored or skipped over Ron Paul, who raised $8.2 million. I was completely flabbergasted. (I still am)
I was watching the local news about a week ago, and they mentioned the republican candidates releasing their financial information. Their report on how much the candidates raised went something like this:
Romney: $14 million Perry: $17 million Bachman: $3.9 million Cain: $2.8 million Gingrich: $800 thousand . . . .
They completely ignored or skipped over Ron Paul, who raised $8.2 million. I was completely flabbergasted. (I still am)
Ron raised close to 3 million last week in 72 hours, he held what they called a "Black This Out" money bomb, referencing the way the media ignores him.
So the media is trying to manipulate your vote. Who controls the media?
I agree that Ron Paul is being blacked out by the media. It is outright as well. The fact that people are to freeking blind to see this, as it happens right in front of thier fat,dumb and happy faces ,is a total shame. It makes me look back at my time in the Marine corps and wonder if it was worth it. Serving and protecting a country full of sheep. A country full of spineless zombies that will do whatever thier idiot box tells them.
Ron Paul wins polls because his Paulbots jam the phones you moron idiots need to attend a Ron Paul caucus,, you will be amazed at the total number of racist ,jew hating Paulbots Ron paul goes WAY back as a Racist he has cleaned up his act ,but his relationship with David Duke & the KKK goes back to the 80,s ..Ron Pauls views On Foreign policy would destroy America,,The growing Chinese navy loves Ron Pauls policies,, they especially favor his policy to make our Navy Smaller so the Chinese can controll our Sea passage ,, ..Ron Pauls Goldpolicies are not practical, sound good,, they would make Paul wealthier than he is ,,He is fabulously wealthy and hides it to avoid taxes Ron Paul is a champion pork master ,he is the master of hiding his policies ,,Ron Paul is a hard core democrat possing as a Rhino Republican ..No other candidate can guarantee an Obama landslide like Paul,,it would be the most lop sided victory In U.S.A. History I understand many sympatheze with Deceptive Liar Paul,,he is right up thier with OBUMBLES..No other comes close to typical deceptive 2 face congressman as RON PAUL,, the equal to Barrack OBUMBLER,, I could go on for hours about the duplicity of Paul.. research this creep,,pay attention to his vieled hate of Jews.listen to all he says not just what you like.. ..PAUL IS FAMOUS IN CONGRESS FOR HELPING TO MOVE BILLS THRU CONGRESS THAT FLAT RIP OFF THE TAX PAYERS ,,WHEN IT LOOKS LIKE THE BILL WILL EASILY PASS,, RON PAUL VOTES NO TO LOOK GOOD & THE TAXPAYERS PAY & PAY BUT RON SAY,S TWERNT ME, I,M THRIFTY,,NO MAN DEFRAUDS THE TAX PAYER LIKE ROB PAUL,,NO OTHER CONGRESSMAN IS CAPABLE OF LYING LIKE PAUL,,HE IS A BILLIONAIR FRAUD WITH OUT A CONSCIENCE RESEARCH THIS FRAUD ,, RACIST NAZI KKK, DAVID DUKE IS HONEST,,HIS GOOD FRIEND RON PAUL IS NOT HONEST!! THEY ARE FELLOW TRAVELERS IN HATE. I ACTUALLY LIKE RON PAUL..I USE TO BE A PAULISTINIAN. HAVE YOU EVER SEENTHE PHOTOS OF PAUL IN THE CONFEDERATE TIE AND HAT ??A REAL HOOT!! HE IS GOING ALL OUT ,THIS IS HIS LAST CHANCE,,HE MAY SPEND A FEW $$$$$ OF HIS OWN,,HE PREFERS THE SUCKERS MONEY,,BUT HE CAN NOT TAKE HIS MILLIONS IN OFFSHORE MONEY & SWISS GOLD TO THE GRAVE WITH HIM ,,
[This message has been edited by uhlanstan (edited 10-23-2011).]
Ron Paul will not be president. He wants to end the Fed. The last president to go against the Fed was JFK. Do the math.
That said, if he wins the nomination, he has my vote. If the primary were today, I'd likely vote for him. No one else stands out as someone I can believe in. The down side is others may have a better chance of beating Obama and honestly, getting Obama out of office is more important than getting Ron Paul into office.
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 10-23-2011).]
IP: Logged
06:45 PM
blackrams Member
Posts: 33233 From: Covington, TN, USA Registered: Feb 2003
The down side is others may have a better chance of beating Obama and honestly, getting Obama out of office is more important than getting Ron Paul into office.
Correct on both counts.
------------------ Ron "While you cannot control the length of your life, you can control the width and depth." Live life to it's fullest, you may not see tomorrow.
Ron Paul wins polls because his Paulbots jam the phones you moron idiots need to attend a Ron Paul caucus,, you will be amazed at the total number of racist ,jew hating Paulbots Ron paul goes WAY back as a Racist he has cleaned up his act ,but his relationship with David Duke & the KKK goes back to the 80,s ..Ron Pauls views On Foreign policy would destroy America,,The growing Chinese navy loves Ron Pauls policies,, they especially favor his policy to make our Navy Smaller so the Chinese can controll our Sea passage ,, ..Ron Pauls Goldpolicies are not practical, sound good,, they would make Paul wealthier than he is ,,He is fabulously wealthy and hides it to avoid taxes Ron Paul is a champion pork master ,he is the master of hiding his policies ,,Ron Paul is a hard core democrat possing as a Rhino Republican ..No other candidate can guarantee an Obama landslide like Paul,,it would be the most lop sided victory In U.S.A. History I understand many sympatheze with Deceptive Liar Paul,,he is right up thier with OBUMBLES..No other comes close to typical deceptive 2 face congressman as RON PAUL,, the equal to Barrack OBUMBLER,, I could go on for hours about the duplicity of Paul.. research this creep,,pay attention to his vieled hate of Jews.listen to all he says not just what you like.. ..PAUL IS FAMOUS IN CONGRESS FOR HELPING TO MOVE BILLS THRU CONGRESS THAT FLAT RIP OFF THE TAX PAYERS ,,WHEN IT LOOKS LIKE THE BILL WILL EASILY PASS,, RON PAUL VOTES NO TO LOOK GOOD & THE TAXPAYERS PAY & PAY BUT RON SAY,S TWERNT ME, I,M THRIFTY,,NO MAN DEFRAUDS THE TAX PAYER LIKE ROB PAUL,,NO OTHER CONGRESSMAN IS CAPABLE OF LYING LIKE PAUL,,HE IS A BILLIONAIR FRAUD WITH OUT A CONSCIENCE RESEARCH THIS FRAUD ,, RACIST NAZI KKK, DAVID DUKE IS HONEST,,HIS GOOD FRIEND RON PAUL IS NOT HONEST!! THEY ARE FELLOW TRAVELERS IN HATE. I ACTUALLY LIKE RON PAUL..I USE TO BE A PAULISTINIAN. HAVE YOU EVER SEENTHE PHOTOS OF PAUL IN THE CONFEDERATE TIE AND HAT ??A REAL HOOT!! HE IS GOING ALL OUT ,THIS IS HIS LAST CHANCE,,HE MAY SPEND A FEW $$$$$ OF HIS OWN,,HE PREFERS THE SUCKERS MONEY,,BUT HE CAN NOT TAKE HIS MILLIONS IN OFFSHORE MONEY & SWISS GOLD TO THE GRAVE WITH HIM ,,
So by your logic we should judge a candidate by the people who vote for him? and you call us the moron idiots?
So by your logic we should judge a candidate by the people who vote for him? and you call us the moron idiots?
Trying to rationalize with stan is like...well, trying to rationalize with rayb. I've disproved his accusations a couple of times but instead of posting lucid conversation he just keeps throwing out the same disproved hyperbole.
IP: Logged
10:47 PM
OKflyboy Member
Posts: 6607 From: Not too far from Mexico Registered: Nov 2004
Trying to rationalize with stan is like...well, trying to rationalize with rayb. I've disproved his accusations a couple of times but instead of posting lucid conversation he just keeps throwing out the same disproved hyperbole.
Ah but Taij, stan cannot substantiate any of his claims because the "paulbots" erase everything bad about Ron Paul from the internet. Yes, the paulbots have that kind of power, apparently, to erase anything they want from the entire internet...
IP: Logged
10:50 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
i hope ron paul doesnt win cus i shur am not gonna vote for him if what i read is true about his stance on federal student loans.
So let me see if I have this straight. You would choose to vote or not to vote for a guy based on one relatively minor issue?
And there we have the very reason we're in the boat we're in now. People vote on single issues, and not the big picture. Everyone has their priorities all f'd up.
"Hey, I don't' care if the rest of the country goes broke as long as I get my student loan!" Except, when you get out of college, there aren't any jobs because the government has bankrupted the country, so then you're indebted to the government for a loan you can't repay. Great plan!
Ah but Taij, stan cannot substantiate any of his claims because the "paulbots" erase everything bad about Ron Paul from the internet. Yes, the paulbots have that kind of power, apparently, to erase anything they want from the entire internet...
man I swear I have heard that before....and for some reason I keep hearing a voice that's yelling a the top of its lungs saying, "DOGMA, DOGMA DOGMA!"
i hope ron paul doesnt win cus i shur am not gonna vote for him if what i read is true about his stance on federal student loans.
Seriously? Man, you really need to check your priorities as a voter. Start looking at a bigger picture. I have federal student loans too, but this election is more important than that.
Seriously? Man, you really need to check your priorities as a voter. Start looking at a bigger picture. I have federal student loans too, but this election is more important than that.
Why would someone not want to be selfish or take the easy way out? I listen all the time on Dave Ramsey people working and paying their way through school and graduating with $0 of student loan debt.
I think the most comical part of his post was how poorly written it was, not everyone is college material, no need for the government to be involved in this at all. In fact, the government doesn't need to loaning anyone ANY money. If we had invested the SSI funds, there would likely be less problems in that area.
[This message has been edited by ls3mach (edited 10-24-2011).]
IP: Logged
10:35 AM
TommyRocker Member
Posts: 2808 From: Woodstock, IL Registered: Dec 2009
Based on how his response was written, I would say he was joking and you guys missed the humor.
I hope.
It would have been subtly brilliant. Sadly, I don't think that was the case. I just want everyone to be responsible and accountable for themselves. I am tired of having to take care of others carelessness, laziness and lack of planning.
It would have been subtly brilliant. Sadly, I don't think that was the case. I just want everyone to be responsible and accountable for themselves. I am tired of having to take care of others carelessness, laziness and lack of planning.
Heh, yeah it would have.
Unfortunately, even if he was joking, there are millions of voting idiots who DO simply vote on one issue. I know easily a couple dozen people who vote on just one issue, (my sister included) most of them on same-sex marriage or abortion. And I get it, I really do, those are big things to them. But the other issues are so much BIGGER in the grand scheme. And they just simply can not look past their one pet issue if a candidate doesn't think they way they do.
IP: Logged
11:47 AM
OKflyboy Member
Posts: 6607 From: Not too far from Mexico Registered: Nov 2004
Unfortunately, even if he was joking, there are millions of voting idiots who DO simply vote on one issue. I know easily a couple dozen people who vote on just one issue, (my sister included) most of them on same-sex marriage or abortion. And I get it, I really do, those are big things to them. But the other issues are so much BIGGER in the grand scheme. And they just simply can not look past their one pet issue if a candidate doesn't think they way they do.
yeah that is a bad way to judge who to vote for. I mean if an independent got in the race right now that said, "hey I'm against the senseless killing of crickets," but he thinks that killing Innocent people would be a good thing that would make the SMALL amount of people who likes crickets happy but not the people who want to remain ALIVE.
IP: Logged
12:28 PM
OKflyboy Member
Posts: 6607 From: Not too far from Mexico Registered: Nov 2004
As to Ron Paul, I like his stance on birthright citizenship. Anyone who comes here to have an anchor baby should be deported. To me, the only people who should have birthright citizenship in this country are those who were born of parents here legally. Having babies just to decrease your chances of being deported because you're here illegally is a perversion of the whole concept of family, IMHO.
Also, though I don't know what his exact philosophy is on drug use, it's become plain in the 40 years since Nixon first coined the phrase "War on Drugs" that it has been an abysmal failure whose only apparent result is the largest prison system in the world with the highest percentage of its citizens in prison (743 per 100,000). The next nearest competitors are Russia (577) and Rwanda (561). In 2000 almost 1 of four incarcerations were related to drugs. It's been proven over and over again that if end user drug addiction is treated as a disease instead of a crime, something that I think Dr. Paul appreciates, then the tide begins to turn in the so-called War on Drugs. At least the current administration is backing away from the "War on Drugs" label as being non-productive. Though a small start, it is a start.
Outside of that, he's an extremist whose policies, if enacted, would very likely result in the end of this country's existence in any meaningful terms.
Over the centuries many citizens of many civilizations have felt that theirs was the one that was inherently successful and could not fail, despite history showing that all fail eventually. I'm sure there are folks here today reading my very words who feel the same way as the Romans felt, the Easter Islanders felt, the Anasazi, the Mayans, the Greenland Norse, the long, long list of failed civilizations that preceded the birth of ours a mere 235 years ago.
IP: Logged
09:28 AM
masospaghetti Member
Posts: 2477 From: Charlotte, NC USA Registered: Dec 2009
Originally posted by JazzMan: As to Ron Paul, I like his stance on birthright citizenship. Anyone who comes here to have an anchor baby should be deported. To me, the only people who should have birthright citizenship in this country are those who were born of parents here legally. Having babies just to decrease your chances of being deported because you're here illegally is a perversion of the whole concept of family, IMHO.
I agree, although the legal immigration process needs to be improved, everyone I know who's had to experience it says its slow and cumbersome. A streamlined process would be less of an encouragement to be here illegally, and this means more taxpayers.
quote
Also, though I don't know what his exact philosophy is on drug use, it's become plain in the 40 years since Nixon first coined the phrase "War on Drugs" that it has been an abysmal failure whose only apparent result is the largest prison system in the world with the highest percentage of its citizens in prison (743 per 100,000). The next nearest competitors are Russia (577) and Rwanda (561). In 2000 almost 1 of four incarcerations were related to drugs. It's been proven over and over again that if end user drug addiction is treated as a disease instead of a crime, something that I think Dr. Paul appreciates, then the tide begins to turn in the so-called War on Drugs. At least the current administration is backing away from the "War on Drugs" label as being non-productive. Though a small start, it is a start.
You have to be careful with this. If its a disease, than is it not their fault? Are drug users just victims? People have to be held accountable for their actions, and most people have the choice to start using drugs or to keep clean. It would be foolish to bail these people out because of poor choices they've made.
quote
Outside of that, he's an extremist whose policies, if enacted, would very likely result in the end of this country's existence in any meaningful terms.
Agreed...abolishing ALL foreign aid and the federal reserve (for starters) would be a disaster.
IP: Logged
10:16 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27111 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Originally posted by JazzMan: At least the current administration is backing away from the "War on Drugs" label as being non-productive. Though a small start, it is a start.
Uh...really? How so?
quote
Outside of that, he's an extremist whose policies, if enacted, would very likely result in the end of this country's existence in any meaningful terms..
Absolute, utterly UNREAL. You COMPLETELY look past all the shortcomings, lies, corruption and FAR LEFT RADICAL policies of Obama, and make that statement? Holy flying crap. You've really outdone yourself.
Originally posted by masospaghetti: You have to be careful with this. If its a disease, than is it not their fault? Are drug users just victims? People have to be held accountable for their actions, and most people have the choice to start using drugs or to keep clean. It would be foolish to bail these people out because of poor choices they've made.
Most if not all drug addicts didn't start out that way, and most would choose not to be if it were an easy choice. If you adopt the perfectionist philosophy it's easy to just say "Well, you made your choice, live and die with it." This is basically what we've been doing for the last four decades. It has had zero effect on the problem. Several countries are or have tried a more pragmatic approach. Realizing that the cost of treatment is outside of the financial resources of most addicts (wealth movie stars and celebrities excepted, see Betty Ford) and realizing that many people who are addicts don't want to be, these governments set about to treat addiction as an illness, and at a fundamental level it is. Generally speaking, narcotic addiction is a brain chemical malfunction (brought on by a bad choice, sure, but a health problem nonetheless) that often is severe enough that just stopping taking whatever drug is the root of the problem can result in death and most assuredly will result in severe agony and extreme physical symptoms beyond most people's ability to endure.
If you approach the problem with the intent of reducing the number of addicts and the resulting costs to society, rather than from the approach of proving one's moral superiority, then the results are strikingly real and effective. Personally, I'm results-driven. If an approach is failing, then it's failing and one needs to move on, trying something different. If one is unable to abandon a failed approach then to me the problem is with the attempts, rather than the results. Sitting on a high horse fiddling while Rome burns isn't the way to go.
Also, though I don't know what his exact philosophy is on drug use <snip>
Outside of that, he's an extremist whose policies, if enacted, would very likely result in the end of this country's existence in any meaningful terms.
Over the centuries many citizens of many civilizations have felt that theirs was the one that was inherently successful and could not fail, despite history showing that all fail eventually. I'm sure there are folks here today reading my very words who feel the same way as the Romans felt, the Easter Islanders felt, the Anasazi, the Mayans, the Greenland Norse, the long, long list of failed civilizations that preceded the birth of ours a mere 235 years ago.
His policy on drug use is, it shouldn't be controlled by the federal government at all. Same for marriage and abortion. Those things have no business being controlled by the federal government. He would also blanket pardon everybody convicted of a non-violent drug charge. His position on those three things make him unpopular with the religious right. He is personally pro-life, and believes in traditional man/woman marriage, but he doesn't allow his personal beliefs to sway his commitment to the constitution. And believe that marriage in fact should be decided by churches, not governments, since it is a religious ceremony.
As for the rest, I always laugh out loud at people like you who say that a man who believes firmly in a government that adheres to the letter of the constitution as "extremist". Particularly when we have a person in office now who basically uses the constitution for toilet paper. So, in that regard, yeah, you make me laugh.
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration's new drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting "a war on drugs," a move that would underscore a shift favoring treatment over incarceration in trying to reduce illicit drug use.
I guess that wasn't reported on FOX, which is why you had no idea about the story.
Google is your friend; you look funny with that foot in your mouth. <--- Creepy smiley face
