Author Topic: Ron Paul  (Read 920 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

DrNewton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
  • Rep: -169
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Ron Paul
« on: May 15, 2007, 09:13:49 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

Pretty interesting stuff. Killed the major GOP contenders in last week's debate is now literally being censored by some news outlets. Discuss.
One of my favorite lines is the one of spiked meth drnewton does off of lou pearlmans viarga and toddler-blood induced erection that finally puts that bitch 6 feet deep.

Ronald Wilson Reagan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 24537
  • Rep: -936
  • I own Malibu? I am going to fuck you.
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2007, 12:59:44 AM »
"Major GOP contender" is an incorrect statement. He's [problaly just being "censored" because he has no chance of winning anyway so it would be a waste of airtime. Especially when a homophobic glutton just keeled of ver dead! :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P ??? >:( :) ;D >:( :o 8) :-\ :-* :'( :( ;D :-X 8) :o :(
Are you a kook? If you would say this, the answer is “YES”
I quit skating for a time due to piling out

DrNewton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
  • Rep: -169
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2007, 08:31:11 AM »
"Major GOP contender" is an incorrect statement. He's [problaly just being "censored" because he has no chance of winning anyway so it would be a waste of airtime. Especially when a homophobic glutton just keeled of ver dead! :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P ??? >:( :) ;D >:( :o 8) :-\ :-* :'( :( ;D :-X 8) :o :(

He beat Rudy Guiliani, John McCain, and Mitt Rommney; all major contenders. That's news.
One of my favorite lines is the one of spiked meth drnewton does off of lou pearlmans viarga and toddler-blood induced erection that finally puts that bitch 6 feet deep.

Stand and Deliver

  • Guest
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2007, 08:33:52 AM »
I heard on the radio this morning that they had him winning on the "Fake News" poll last night and that Hannity cunt about freaked out. 

grimcity

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • *****
  • Posts: 11122
  • Rep: 2214
  • computer says no
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2007, 08:47:46 AM »
Yeah, he won the Fox poll as well as the MSNBC poll that they had on the last debate. The funny thing is that he's more reflective of a traditional conservative philosophy than any of the other idiots they had up there. I don't think that real conservatives even have a party anymore... the GOP has become an unapologetic corporatist/semi authoritarian mess.

...not that I care. The worst Democratic candidate will beat the best Republican nominee at this point (since it's a given that Ron won't get the party's approval). 

Ronald Wilson Reagan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 24537
  • Rep: -936
  • I own Malibu? I am going to fuck you.
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2007, 12:19:38 PM »
Expand Quote
"Major GOP contender" is an incorrect statement. He's [problaly just being "censored" because he has no chance of winning anyway so it would be a waste of airtime. Especially when a homophobic glutton just keeled of ver dead! :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P ??? >:( :) ;D >:( :o 8) :-\ :-* :'( :( ;D :-X 8) :o :(
[close]

He beat Rudy Guiliani, John McCain, and Mitt Rommney; all major contenders. That's news.
HOw does one "beat" others definitively in a debate like that? Is there polls showing it?
Are you a kook? If you would say this, the answer is “YES”
I quit skating for a time due to piling out

k-nutz

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 880
  • Rep: 49
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #6 on: May 16, 2007, 12:34:36 PM »
The worst Democratic candidate will beat the best Republican nominee at this point (since it's a given that Ron won't get the party's approval). 

living in the south do you see this happening?

Ronald Wilson Reagan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 24537
  • Rep: -936
  • I own Malibu? I am going to fuck you.
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2007, 12:45:40 PM »
Expand Quote
The worst Democratic candidate will beat the best Republican nominee at this point (since it's a given that Ron won't get the party's approval). 
[close]

living in the south do you see this happening?
Its a national election dude, not only that, the republicans are steadily losing the west, meaning the only place where they have strength is the south. They have a lot of fence mending to do if they don't want to be blown out.
Are you a kook? If you would say this, the answer is “YES”
I quit skating for a time due to piling out

grimcity

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • *****
  • Posts: 11122
  • Rep: 2214
  • computer says no
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2007, 01:12:09 PM »
Yep. The Republican nominee may carry the south, but that's it. The east coast, west coast and midwest, not so much.

Ronald Wilson Reagan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 24537
  • Rep: -936
  • I own Malibu? I am going to fuck you.
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2007, 01:25:46 PM »
I could see a possible win with some evil Karl Rove tactics, but candidates seem to be avoiding that guys calls.
Are you a kook? If you would say this, the answer is “YES”
I quit skating for a time due to piling out

red curb

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
  • Rep: -5
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #10 on: May 16, 2007, 03:02:57 PM »
I caught most of this debate lastnight.  It's absurd to consider a text message poll as accurate, considering the cookie-cutter right-wing demographic most likely don't have a clue about text messaging.  People paying attention to the GOP debate don't REALLY believe in conservatism, do they?  Shit, I didn't even think people who listened to AM radio these days even had cell phones.

Anyway, I thought this debate was run much better than MSNBC's, and you actually got a feel of who had issues to cover and who came to pander sound bites like your stereotypical principle-free politician.  There was a definite rift separating the top-tier (IMO) candidates from the rest.  Romney and Giuliani can take a hike, as far as I'm concerned.  They're only concerned about their political image appealing to moderates, and they can't even get that right. 

Now, in light of Ron Paul's comments about foreign policy, I think he's absolutely right.  It was a cheap shot for Giuliani to turn the issue around and oversimplify what Paul had to say.  He grabbed a rousing applause from an interruption, which in turn led to a sound bite for all of Fox News' shows.  Ron Paul did NOT tip-toe about the issue nor retract his statement, something Giuliani would have loved to see because it would have meant the overshadowing of Giuliani's own tip-toeing on important issues like gun control, abortion, and marriage.  What I don't understand is when Sean Hannity tried to question Ron Paul's comments after the debate, Hannity became frustrated and impatient and they all of a sudden went to commercial break.  I really wanted more than a minute's worth of an answer from Ron Paul, but it's like Fox News has their own agenda as well.  Paul questioned where we are at and why the PROPER way, through historical analysis, but I guess that sounds too liberal for Fox News.  He wasn't attacking GWB like I'm sure many people thought, but simply stating for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  I guess it's just too much for the public to accept blame for a mistake like trying to butt in with Middle-Eastern politics thinking there would be no repercussions.  Understanding why it happened does NOT imply full justification, which is something I think the audience failed to notice.  They just want to see justice served for the 3000 who died on 9/11.

Nation-building in Iraq?  Please.  If the war was such a good idea, we should have a plan to win it quickly instead of bleeding slowly.  It's just become a nuisance and the Iraqis are not nearly as willing as we are to change things with this war.  It is THEIR nation, and we can only help to start guide things in the right direction, not hold their hands while we lose precious lives of soldiers who are fighting an uphill battle.  This echoes social reform programs over here, where we are pandering to those who just jump on welfare after being irresponsible dipshits and have two kids with two deadbeat fathers by the age of 18.  The losers become complacent with welfare, blame all sorts of shit on everything but themselves, and lose all will to make something for themselves because they're victimsFuck that.  If Iraq doesn't want to utilize their position to reform their government while time is wasting away, then so be it.   

Ron Paul and McCain are my only contenders, yet they don't have the made for TV image that Romney and Giuliani have.  It's quite sad to see the Republicans don't realize the conseratives are sick of seeing sell-outs and if they would just stick to their guns instead of pandering, the GOP candidate might actually stand a chance.  Like Bernard Goldberg said, Crazies to the Left of me, Wimps to the Right.

red curb

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
  • Rep: -5
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #11 on: May 16, 2007, 03:36:32 PM »
I could see a possible win with some evil Karl Rove tactics, but candidates seem to be avoiding that guys calls.
Is everything you base your judgment on just stemming from a deep hatred for the Bush administration or what?  You're the typical goon the liberals have become, probably the type who compares Bush to Hitler.  George Bush is out in 2008, so what do YOU believe should be the course of action for the nation in the wake of all this?  What are you looking for to be covered in the Democratic debates?  Are you going to be like the typical Bush-hater and stammer about on the issues or do you actually believe in something?

I have my reasons for disliking Bush, mainly because he's selling out on issues that conservatives sharply dismiss as nonsense.  His support for Affirmative Action, his immigration policy, for instance.  I also have issues with him concerning the libertarian in me who believes it doesn't matter if Adam and Steve tie the knot, nor do I want fundamentalists who think evolution is a fairy tale trying to teach creationism in science class.  I also think women should have the choice concerning abortion, but I view it as a cheap act of copping out if it is in the case of pure irresponsibility (not rape or incest).  His handling of the war in Iraq has turned butterfingers, although I do believe there were WMDs, just they were smuggled out of the country before we could discover them. 

Ronald Wilson Reagan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 24537
  • Rep: -936
  • I own Malibu? I am going to fuck you.
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2007, 01:30:17 AM »
Expand Quote
I could see a possible win with some evil Karl Rove tactics, but candidates seem to be avoiding that guys calls.
[close]
Is everything you base your judgment on just stemming from a deep hatred for the Bush administration or what?  You're the typical goon the liberals have become, probably the type who compares Bush to Hitler.  George Bush is out in 2008, so what do YOU believe should be the course of action for the nation in the wake of all this?  What are you looking for to be covered in the Democratic debates?  Are you going to be like the typical Bush-hater and stammer about on the issues or do you actually believe in something?

I have my reasons for disliking Bush, mainly because he's selling out on issues that conservatives sharply dismiss as nonsense.  His support for Affirmative Action, his immigration policy, for instance.  I also have issues with him concerning the libertarian in me who believes it doesn't matter if Adam and Steve tie the knot, nor do I want fundamentalists who think evolution is a fairy tale trying to teach creationism in science class.  I also think women should have the choice concerning abortion, but I view it as a cheap act of copping out if it is in the case of pure irresponsibility (not rape or incest).  His handling of the war in Iraq has turned butterfingers, although I do believe there were WMDs, just they were smuggled out of the country before we could discover them. 
You were holding that in for a while huh? All I said there was that Karl Rove IS a political genius- something both sides agree on. However, in the first republican debate when asked if the candidates would have a position for Rove if they became president, all the candidates became uncomfortable. I wouldn't compare him to Hitler, I would compare him to people like Warren G. Harding or Richard Nixon, but that is not the issue is it. I have made many of my concerns clear, but you, being a typical right wing appologist only hear me as hating Bush.
What do I want? I've said it time and time again. I am one of approximately 47 million Americans without healthcare coverage. Thats a little less than 1/6th of the country. The healthcare problem has become an epidemic, and nobody has done anything about it. There are countries all over the world that have proven systems to help assure anybody can get healthcare who needs it- we are not one of them, we are behind the curve. I would like a candidate who is willing to do something about it. Clinton, Obama, and Edwards all have made this issue a top priority in their campaigns, and I respect that. Both Obama and Edwards would like to have something passed within the first term, Hillary claims it might take two.
 I would also like to see a candidate with a sane and open minded approach to ending our involvement in Iraq. I protested it the day the war broke out, and I still think it is a foolish campaign that I (as well as the National Intelligence Estimate) believe has made us more inviting of a terrorist attack. This stubborn approach has done nothing, and I think we need to start using our minds to take on this problem instead of waving our fucking dicks in the air. Pretty much every candidate on the left, as well as Ron Paul (staying on topic here...) seem to be on the right path.
I also think that Bush's economic policies have created a gap between the rich and the poor that widens by the day, and that this is going to fuck us all. Edwards seems to be taking the most aggressive stand on this issue, but Obama is right up next to him.
Our infrastructure and ability to help our own people is falling apart. Look at Katrina and our failed response, or look at Kansas right now after the recent Tornadoes. Even after the failure of Katrina we still can't help our own people. The national Guard is in Iraq, and so is all the relief equipment. I'm not sure what all the candidates stances are on this major problem, but they should be thinking about it. These aren't the only two disasters that will ever occur. God forbid there should be a disaster of some sort where I, or anybody else here lives, we'd be fucked.
An end to torture, suspended habeas corpus, and other suspensions that have suspended any bragging rights this country has. Big brother closes in everyday upon us, and everyday we have to cross another reason we are better than those we are fighting off of the list. Remember when we used to talk about the horror of Iraqi torture chambers? We've stopped talking about them doing that, and they've started talking about us doing that. Its fucked. Its unamerican. Fuck, I mean, even Warhawk John McCain agrees with me on this.
So yeah, to break it down. Healthcare reform, Iraq war closure, work towards decreasing poverty, fix our ability to respond to domestic emergencies, reinstatement of the constitution. These are the issues I care about. These are pretty mainstream problems many Americans think about. This is where my hatred of the Bush administration stems from, not the other way around.
You really still believe the WMD shit? You are a fucking dunce. You just like to close your ears when people tell you the truth if it doesn't match what you believe, huh? Like you, thinking I just jumped on the hate Bush bandwagon for no fucking reason. 
Are you a kook? If you would say this, the answer is “YES”
I quit skating for a time due to piling out

Ronald Wilson Reagan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 24537
  • Rep: -936
  • I own Malibu? I am going to fuck you.
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2007, 01:31:38 AM »
Sorry, we don't have to turn this into a generic politics thread. Back to Ron Paul....

Oh, and you bring up a good point, I haven't seen or heard shit that he said in the debate last night.
Are you a kook? If you would say this, the answer is “YES”
I quit skating for a time due to piling out

grimcity

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • *****
  • Posts: 11122
  • Rep: 2214
  • computer says no
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2007, 06:38:31 AM »
His handling of the war in Iraq has turned butterfingers, although I do believe there were WMDs, just they were smuggled out of the country before we could discover them.
1. Saddam's secular regime didn't have any real allies in the region.He was tolerated, but he wasn't a part of the theocratic circle of nations around him. Polticially, Iraq was an island.
2. It would have been impossible for Saddam to move an entire weapon stockpile without us knowing about it.
3. We had inspectors looking for weapons, inspectors that we pulled out, so that we could initiate war based on the very weapons we were looking for.
4. Saddam turned over an arms declaration to the UN, as asked, one day before the deadline he was supposed to meet. In that declaration, it was stated that the weapons that weren't used up during (and immediately post) Gulf War eventually degraded into unusable/degraded/non weapons grade shells.

Regardless... we went to war while touting "UN Resolutions," but we did so without the support of the UN, so the point is moot. That in and of itself made our intervention/invasion unjustified... even if Saddam had the weapons that we sold him during Reagan's gravy days.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2007, 06:42:53 AM by grimcity »

Ronald Wilson Reagan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 24537
  • Rep: -936
  • I own Malibu? I am going to fuck you.
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #15 on: May 17, 2007, 11:42:17 AM »
Not only that, but Bush was claiming the so-called weapons could be launched within 45 minutes. If a country is attacking you to unseat and kill you- wouldn't you use them? I mean, at the very least your going to hold onto them, just in case. I mean, whats the point of having weapons like that if you aren't going to use them when the threat of being toppled and murdered come up? Its rediculous.
Are you a kook? If you would say this, the answer is “YES”
I quit skating for a time due to piling out

Ronald Wilson Reagan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 24537
  • Rep: -936
  • I own Malibu? I am going to fuck you.
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #16 on: May 17, 2007, 11:53:37 PM »
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xEZO7MPxJIs"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xEZO7MPxJIs" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Just saw this clip that was talked about during this thread... those 2 having it out, along with the instant poll results at the bottom are interesting. While I don't think it is a scientific poll that shows the overall audience's reaction, it does show that there is atleast a passionate base supporting him. This could be interesting. Anybody see any recent overall poll results?
Oh, and they bash Reagan a bit, which is always a plus for me,and yes, my hate of him is unhealthy and pointless
Are you a kook? If you would say this, the answer is “YES”
I quit skating for a time due to piling out

kevbo_3000

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 197
  • Rep: 2
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Ron Paul
« Reply #17 on: May 18, 2007, 12:18:50 AM »
bleh

meh

teh