Official Ron Paul 2012 Thread

ocean_jet said:
I didn't know I was arguing...

and that wasn't really meant to be name calling.


When someone tells me I need to "get with the program", and vote for either "the Blue sneetc or the red sneetch" (love that line) that screams of pro-establishment drone. Not meant to be name calling... just calling it like I see it.


And, are you suggesting that it was military isolationism that lead to the great depression of the 1930's?? If not, I am not quite sure what you are saying here.
Click to expand...
I laugh at you. Hahaha! I'm not calling him names, I'm just see him as so and so, so I'm calling him one. Have you considered politics? You have an almost Clinton-esque way of dancing around the meaning of words.
n1ywb said:
Actually it was the economic terms of the treaty of Versailles which destroyed the German economy and let to mass unrest, and the French and allied failure to enforce the disarmament portions of the treaty which allowed Germany to rebuild it's military.
Click to expand...
As far as WWI and WWII and our isolationism...we were isolationist before WWI. Germany still sank the Lusitania. We went back to isolationism afterwards. As Boatwrench has already pointed out, we could have had a shot at stopping Hitler in his tracks if we were willing to get involved before he started snatching up territory, before he killed some 6 million Jews, gypsies, Christians, and gays. We might have seen far less death and damage done. Japan might not have been so bold without Germany on her side. Yes, this is all speculation, but so is looking at Ron Paul's isolationist ideas and saying they'd be beneficial, so bear with me.

Regarding your basic history regurgitation of why WWII happened, what if we had been overseas and meddling in Germany's economy, helping them to get back on their feet, like Wilson wanted to? Would Hitler have had the means of motivating the Germans to get behind him?
 
Ron paul....ralph nader with slightly more common sense

Ability to swallow well-meaning votes and have em come out as farts on the opposite side?

Tie game
 
I am glad so many people think like you do, because it means instead of effecting change and getting a good cleanup in Washington, we keep wading back and forth between two cesspits.
 
kastein said:
I am glad so many people think like you do, because it means instead of effecting change and getting a good cleanup in Washington, we keep wading back and forth between two cesspits.
Click to expand...

Face it

Ron paul is not going to get elected

He has as much chance at this point as palin.

No, wait i take that back. Palin is more electable.

Scary, huh?
 
kastein said:
I am glad so many people think like you do, because it means instead of effecting change and getting a good cleanup in Washington, we keep wading back and forth between two cesspits.
Click to expand...



x1,000




Where does this mentality come from that if your guy doesn't win, you've effectively thrown your vote away??? It's insane.





Throwing your vote away is casting it for the two headed red-blue monster because you're too paralyzed with fear to actually vote for the best candidate... just like the two party system DESIGNED itself.


That's throwing your vote away...
 
Darky said:
I laugh at you. Hahaha! I'm not calling him names, I'm just see him as so and so, so I'm calling him one. Have you considered politics? You have an almost Clinton-esque way of dancing around the meaning of words.
Click to expand...



Fair enough, but I disagree.

In my opinion name calling is saying things that are irrelevant (you're fat) or not true (you're a cretin) in order to stray away from the topic at hand.

IMO, calling it like you see it when it's relevant to the topic is not name calling.


How is me saying he sounds like a "pro-establishment drone" anymore name calling than the implication of him telling me to "get with the program"? Is it just that my message is more direct?

His message to me is that I am outside the mainstream and need to get in line. My message back is that he is too entrenched in the establishment and appears to be droning their self-preserving message of fear.


Would it have been less of a "name calling" if I spelled it out that way?




Oh, and I am glad I could make you laugh. Hahaha. It is just the internet after-all.... we all should be laughing.
 
ocean_jet said:
Fair enough, but I disagree.

In my opinion name calling is saying things that are irrelevant (you're fat) or not true (you're a cretin) in order to stray away from the topic at hand.

IMO, calling it like you see it when it's relevant to the topic is not name calling.


How is me saying he sounds like a "pro-establishment drone" anymore name calling than the implication of him telling me to "get with the program"? Is it just that my message is more direct?

His message to me is that I am outside the mainstream and need to get in line. My message back is that he is too entrenched in the establishment and appears to be droning their self-preserving message of fear.


Would it have been less of a "name calling" if I spelled it out that way?




Oh, and I am glad I could make you laugh. Hahaha. It is just the internet after-all.... we all should be laughing.
Click to expand...
He never denied name-calling. That's the difference. :)
 
Ron Paul has laid out his specific plan to cut the budget, and balance it within three years.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66114.html

The gist

  • Eliminate dept of education
  • Eliminate dept of energy
  • Eliminate 3 more depts
  • Freeze spending at 2006 levels
  • 30% cut to EPA
  • 40% cut to FDA
  • 100% cut to foreign aid
  • Welfare programs become block grants to states
  • SS opt out
  • 10% cut to federal workforce
  • 90% cut to presidential salary
  • 15% top corp tax rate
  • Eliminate cap gains & dividends taxes
  • Repeal obama care & dodd frank
 
ocean_jet said:
Not sure how these items help balance the budget.
Click to expand...

Having the highest corporate tax rate in the world causes a lot of companies, both domestic and foreign, to conduct business elsewhere. Lowering the rate makes it very attractive to bring (back) business to the U.S.
 
Obviously lowering corp taxes won't balance the budget. But slashing spending enables corp taxes to be lowered which helps the economy which creates JOBS.
 
Tom R. said:
Having the highest corporate tax rate in the world causes a lot of companies, both domestic and foreign, to conduct business elsewhere. Lowering the rate makes it very attractive to bring (back) business to the U.S.
Click to expand...

I've heard that. I also heard that extending the Bush Administration tax cuts that have been in place for the last eight years would help create jobs.
Where are those jobs? Just show me the jobs created.

The businesses are not overseas because of the tax rates, it's the cheap labor and the lack of environmental regulations.
 
Last edited:
Boatwrench said:
I've heard that. I also heard that extending the Bush Administration tax cuts that have been in place for the last eight years would help create jobs.
Where are those jobs? Just show me the jobs created.

The businesses are not overseas because of the tax rates, it's the cheap labor and the lack of environmental regulations.
Click to expand...

Which Ron Paul wants to take away the minimum wage and slash the EPA... Sounds like you are a closet Ron Paul supporter :eeks1:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Goose_XJ88
Official 2024 NAXJA Toys For Tots
Replies
4
Views
224
Goose_XJ88
Goose_XJ88
EricsXJ
  • Locked
  • Sticky
2025 Official Trail Runs and Events
Replies
1
Views
162
EricsXJ
EricsXJ
T
Another Cooling Issue Thread - 99 Cherokee 4.0
Replies
18
Views
488
Black1990jeep
B
EricsXJ
2025 Reno Fest - Memorial Weekend - High Rock Canyon (preparation thread)
Replies
15
Views
372
blondejoncherokee
blondejoncherokee
SAMSET
  • Sticky
MWC Official Online Store
Replies
0
Views
521
SAMSET
SAMSET
Back
Top