DEBATE

jpete wrote:

plumb-r wrote:Hello, is anyone home . Ron paul is not in this election. Like someone said in a earlier post ,you have to go to war with the army you have. There are two possiable out comes to this election. I know the path we have gone down the past 4 years, and I don't like it. What you have to ask yourself is if you like it. If not than there is only one other selection. Stupid is as stupid does!

Really? We only have one more option than Mother Russia? Guess I'm sitting this one out.

Or maybe I could stop listening to the MSM and vote Gary Johnson.

Better than Gary, lets stay home and not vote, lets send the country into a constitutional crises , because that's what we need.. what would they do if no one voted..

jpete wrote:

Dann757 wrote:Did you watch the debate? He'll explain it two more times.

That was last night. His history says he will change his tune at least half a dozen more times before the election. How do you know which Mitt you are voting for?

Jeff, tell us all why RP wouldn't be any different? He's a career DC insider just like the rest except he's got a different ideology. I must say Ron ( and alot of Libertarians) mirror the majority of members on this forum except for his foriegn policy which pretty much negates him to the rubber room. Personally I'd want him in Mittens cabinet as Financal Guru but that's prolly a pipe dream too.

Here's the issue, politics are not linear, they are circlular. As you keep going around towards Libertarian you bypass it and meet Leftist /Communism...Jeff you have to draw a line across that path and decide, what's best for our country, your ideology or handing it off to destruction. I really believe you have the best intentions at heart but you realize we've alot more in common than you give us credit for.

Or I could be completely off the mark and you're so far past the Political curve that you've more in common with leftist Che' Guevara types like... Sam.

Most everyone has some good ideas & both Ventura & Paul are included & then some of their other ideas throw them out. If every POTUS since 57 has been invited why in the world would Ron Paul have been?
Everybody has some kind words for me but no one has answered my questions, talk about blind faith. Here's what all I'm gonna do for you but I'm ma not going to tell you how but believe me you'll know when it happens.
Ah more kind words, thanks Ed when you have nothing else what else can you say.

some of the things I read today certainly do give credence to Grumpy's theory on the world and who is in control etc... Bilderburg and so forth...

You have to certainly at least question at times what is going on...

it is terribly sad that there isn't some terrible outcry from the public about these kinds of things (story below)... and yet we try to condem other contries and what they do to their citizens? what are we doing to our citizens?

http://news.yahoo.com/st-louis-cold-war ... 00039.html

samhill wrote:Ah more kind words, thanks Ed when you have nothing else what else can you say.

I know it sucks when I have to keep pointing out that your Che' /Socialist worship is...well,... just sad.

Wait...

You do realize he was a mass murdering despot right?

My job here is done. Why not give an answer to a question instead of calling names?

Mark (PA) wrote:it is terribly sad that there isn't some terrible outcry from the public about these kinds of things (story below)... and yet we try to condem other contries and what they do to their citizens? what are we doing to our citizens?

http://news.yahoo.com/st-louis-cold-war ... 00039.html

Mark, I find the moral eqvilency argument pretty sad. Do me a favor, checkout Live Leak.com and peruse their videos of what "other" countries do to their citizens...stoning people to death for getting married without blessings? are you kidding me? Getting shot in the head for listening to music and or dancing?

Was 9-11 a inside job too?


Wow.....just, wow.

Answer a simple question ?

Why???? You never do.

Kevin

samhill wrote:My job here is done. Why not give an answer to a question instead of calling names?

Huh? name calling...where? C'mon Sam, you're bigger than that.

Kidding!

Ed.

I don't think 9/11 was an inside job... Never said anything about that.

Anyway.

I can tell you are fired up and I was just trying to make a point that it is terrible that the US goverment/Military (or whomever) has a belief that it is OK to perform tests on citzens of this nation (in any type neighborhood)

this story is credable. Has nothing to do with the 9/11 theories.

As Jesus said, You without sin cast the first stone.

Whether you are proliferating the air with powders to test cold war tactics on cities/people or killing your own people by stoning.

it is Wrong. In both cases... We can argue to the degree of the atrocity and such but the bottom line is.

IT IS WRONG

**** I suppose that I am getting this string way off topic now... I guess Grumpy just had me thinking******

Aborting Thread Hi-Jack

Mark (PA) wrote:Ed.
.

Whether you are proliferating the air with powders to test cold war tactics on cities/people or killing your own people by stoning.

it is Wrong. In both cases... We can argue to the degree of the atrocity and such but the bottom line is.

IT IS WRONG

Got it, and I will agree...to a point. Drawing moral equvilence just gets my goat, the things I've seen that get equated with florinated water and the Taliban just makes me sick.

Ed.A wrote:

jpete wrote:

Dann757 wrote:Did you watch the debate? He'll explain it two more times.

That was last night. His history says he will change his tune at least half a dozen more times before the election. How do you know which Mitt you are voting for?

Jeff, tell us all why RP wouldn't be any different? He's a career DC insider just like the rest except he's got a different ideology. I must say Ron ( and alot of Libertarians) mirror the majority of members on this forum except for his foriegn policy which pretty much negates him to the rubber room. Personally I'd want him in Mittens cabinet as Financal Guru but that's prolly a pipe dream too.

Here's the issue, politics are not linear, they are circlular. As you keep going around towards Libertarian you bypass it and meet Leftist /Communism...Jeff you have to draw a line across that path and decide, what's best for our country, your ideology or handing it off to destruction. I really believe you have the best intentions at heart but you realize we've alot more in common than you give us credit for.

Or I could be completely off the mark and you're so far past the Political curve that you've more in common with leftist Che' Guevara types like... Sam.

Because RP has a 30 year history of being consistent and Mitt has a history of saying whatever is politically expedient?

Maybe you'd prefer I was like Paul Ryan who was at least honest when he begged Congress to pass TARP by saying he was putting his principles aside.

Isn't that what the world needs more of? People who wear their ideals like a spring jacket that can be easily slipped off the moment things heat up?

If peaceful coexistence, non aggression and the "Just War Theory" qualify you for the rubber room, why do we demonize guys like Hitler? He was just doing what he thought was best for his country. Right? We admire guys like that, right?

And while it would be nice to see RP in Mitt's cabinet I can't see a die hard Austrian living in a Keynesian administration.

And that's really the point here. Mitt isn't going to move away from Keynesian economics which is the root of the problem.

He told you all straight out. His criteria is whether or not a program is worth borrowing money from China. If it is, then he'll keep it. How is that different than what we have now?

And will China loan us the money if Mitt actually keeps his promise and labels China a currency manipulator?

jpete wrote:He told you all straight out. His criteria is whether or not a program is worth borrowing money from China. If it is, then he'll keep it. How is that different than what we have now?

What we have now is programs that are not worth borrowing for. I hope Romney gets the chance to show the difference.

samhill wrote:Everybody has some kind words for me but no one has answered my questions, talk about blind faith.

Ed.A answered your question on the top of page 4, 2nd box down. Everyone answers your questions all the time. This is how you've established such sterling credibility here, by completely ignoring responses.
--------------------------------
Great discussion, I want to reply to about ten of the last posts. We all have a common bond, coal burners, but it's hard to understand each other's outlooks when they're so different than our own. My life experience has shaped my outlook, I know I survive better in a world of free enterprise. The thing that scares liberals to the point where they can't even see it, is that governments that are friendly to business garner more revenue. Hell, even Communist Red China turned around from rigid communism hostile to business to a model that looks more like capitalism.

I agree that pointing out obscure US atrocities on domestic soil is rather naive, and offensive, when compared to the injustice that occurs in the uncivilized world.

Anything I say at this point in the discussion will only repeat and commend what my conservative friends have put really well. Anything else will be a retaliation to some very contrasting and imaginative opinions.

franco b wrote:

jpete wrote:He told you all straight out. His criteria is whether or not a program is worth borrowing money from China. If it is, then he'll keep it. How is that different than what we have now?

What we have now is programs that are not worth borrowing for. I hope Romney gets the chance to show the difference.

Which programs?

Cutting PBS is less than the amount Obama pissed away on Solyndra.

Romney already said he won't cut a nickel from the Pentagon.

He's already said he'll keep the parts of Obamacare he likes and replace the rest.

He's not going to touch Medicare or Social Security.

Which programs reverse a trillion dollars a year operating deficit and upwards of $200 trillion of unfunded mandates?