Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Bindare_Dundat on March 24, 2008, 02:34:13 AM
-
-
JOIN THE RON PAUL REVOLUTION!!!
Sport a "Jesus Freak" T-shirt, don't take a shower for umpteen days, surf the web for obscure "truth" websites, go to convents with a Jansport backpacker snug tight, stay on a steady diet of Peanut Butter Sammiches, and you could also become a RON PAUL believer!
j/k bro. ;)
Nice clip though.
I think it's nice to see a different voice, what I didn't like about the "Ron Paul Maniacs" was that they somehow made him out to be some kind of "pop" anti-government, pro-conspiracy theory-dude.
He's a guy with a different political agenda than many Republicans.
Political diversity is refreshing.
That's why I think a parliamentary system
is superior to a two-party system.
-
JOIN THE RON PAUL REVOLUTION!!!
Sport a "Jesus Freak" T-shirt, don't take a shower for umpteen days, surf the web for obscure "truth" websites, go to convents with a Jansport backpacker snug tight, stay on a steady diet of Peanut Butter Sammiches, and you could also become a RON PAUL believer!
j/k bro. ;)
Nice clip though.
I think it's nice to see a different voice, what I didn't like about the "Ron Paul Maniacs" was that they somehow made him out to be some kind of "pop" anti-government, pro-conspiracy theory-dude.
He's a guy with a different political agenda than many Republicans.
Political diversity is refreshing.
That's why I think a parliamentary system
is superior to a two-party system.
Agreed.
-
I also agree.
Some of the Ron Paul supporters are...interesting...but his message is clear enough and based on common sense + logic. hopefully, more people take note.
-
I also agree.
Some of the Ron Paul supporters are...interesting...but his message is clear enough and based on common sense + logic. hopefully, more people take note.
He should have distanced himself from the nut-bags... repudiated them very early in his campaign so people realize their nutty policies are not his. True libertarianism is not radical or earth-shaking... it's very much in line with the way our country was run in the first 150 years of its existance, and is the only current political philosophy that is true to the Constitution.
-
I have a doctor's appointment today. I'll be sure to ask him about what the Fed should do. ::)
-
I have doctor's appointment today. I'll be sure to ask him about what he thinks the Fed should do. ::)
At least Paul has a decent understanding of this stuff. Ask Bush about the Fed, and his response would be, "Fed? Yeah, I been fed... dinner was an hour ago."
-
At least Paul has a decent understanding of this stuff. Ask Bush about the Fed, and his response would be, "Fed? Yeah, I been fed... dinner was an hour ago."
You mean he knows enough to be dangerous.
-
You mean he knows enough to be dangerous.
Dangerous to the socialist state the current crop of politicians have been building, perhaps. ;)
-
What does that mean calmus? (Implying that Ron Paul was an OB/GYN doctor and therefore not educated enough on economics and politics?)
I just went back and listened to the whole clip. Its worth the 6 minutes. Really makes a lot of sense. Finally, someone who speaks straight without being blind faith in his political party.
-
No president understands enough about what kind of regulation/risk management is needed for all the derivatives floating around the markets today. These products were designed by people with advanced degrees in math/hard sciences, and even people like Chuck Prince could not understand them. ANd it was his job (post SOX) to make sure they didn't bite Citi in the ass.
Bush doesn't want to regulate, period, which is stupid. A good president is someone who will appoint the right investigators and facilitate Congress and the agency in passing the right statutes/promulgating required rules, and not treat this as a partisan question. He also won't go on tv and act like he knows something, which Bush did.
Both Bush and Ron Paul are basically doing the same thing. Talking about shit they don't have the slightest clue about. Spouting homespun wisdom might have worked before the 1980s. Now there's whole new beasts out there. And you just can't knock them out without knowing what you're doing.
Bottom line: someone like Bernanke knows a whole lot more about this than Ron Paul. Although I don't know if he's the man (or Christopher Cox) to usher in the required regulation. Maybe he can if God will tell Bush it's ok to regulate.
-
I disagree. Ron Paul is talking more about basic philosophies. Did you listen to the clip? Based on your post, I'm assuming you didn't...
-
Can't watch it. I'm at work. But I have watched enough of his "we need to get back to the basics" bs.
The horse has already bolted the barn. To get what he wants, the whole system would have to meltdown.... in which case we'll be living in caves and it won't matter anyway.
-
At least Paul has a decent understanding of this stuff. Ask Bush about the Fed, and his response would be, "Fed? Yeah, I been fed... dinner was an hour ago."
No, Bush's response when he was asked what he was gonna do if USA faced a financial crisis was:
"I would call the head of the Fed and see what they were gonna do"
Real smart guy, Bush. ::)
Brightest bulb in the lighthouse he is not.
-
No, Bush's response when he was asked what he was gonna do if USA faced a financial crisis was:
"I would call the head of the Fed and see what they were gonna do"
Real smart guy, Bush. ::)
Brightest bulb in the lighthouse he is not.
That's the appropriate response.
The inappropriate response was his comment that he was afraid there was going to be "too much regulation"
Anybody with half a brain knows that CDOs and derivatives are pretty much completely unregulated now, and are the major cause of all the hiccoughs in the securities and other markets. ::)
-
I have a doctor's appointment today. I'll be sure to ask him about what the Fed should do. ::)
You speak the language of a self righteous dictator. Instead of letting people ask legitimate questions (like Ron does) you bash the person and dismiss them as unqualified to question the powers that be.
I don't care if its a farmer or a garbage man asking questions, they deserve to be addressed by our government.
-
No president understands enough about what kind of regulation/risk management is needed for all the derivatives floating around the markets today. These products were designed by people with advanced degrees in math/hard sciences, and even people like Chuck Prince could not understand them. ANd it was his job (post SOX) to make sure they didn't bite Citi in the ass.
Bush doesn't want to regulate, period, which is stupid. A good president is someone who will appoint the right investigators and facilitate Congress and the agency in passing the right statutes/promulgating required rules, and not treat this as a partisan question. He also won't go on tv and act like he knows something, which Bush did.
Both Bush and Ron Paul are basically doing the same thing. Talking about shit they don't have the slightest clue about. Spouting homespun wisdom might have worked before the 1980s. Now there's whole new beasts out there. And you just can't knock them out without knowing what you're doing.
Bottom line: someone like Bernanke knows a whole lot more about this than Ron Paul. Although I don't know if he's the man (or Christopher Cox) to usher in the required regulation. Maybe he can if God will tell Bush it's ok to regulate.
But Obama knows it all huh? God, you're stupid.
-
calmus, listen to it later if you have a chance. Its more general philosophies and I don't think you would completely disagree. R.P. is very much against this war, our policies of policing the globe (which is not helping our internation reputation or our budget), our fiscal irresponsibility and borrowing $ from other countries to finance our imbalanced budgets. He's not the savior or some personal economic think tank. He is just applying some basic economic principles and shining light on the fact that both sides need to rethink our policies and spending.
-
calmus, listen to it later if you have a chance. Its more general philosophies and I don't think you would completely disagree. R.P. is very much against this war, our policies of policing the globe (which is not helping our internation reputation or our budget), our fiscal irresponsibility and borrowing $ from other countries to finance our imbalanced budgets. He's not the savior or some personal economic think tank. He is just applying some basic economic principles and shining light on the fact that both sides need to rethink our policies and spending.
then why didn't he run as an independent?
As I've stated repeatedly (even before the graphic on spending was posted), the Republican party has become the party of deficit spending. If he meant what he says, he should have had the courage of his convictions.
Also, his position on Fed intervention is outdated (to put it nicely). Greenspan was a Republican appointee and he used his powers as a good Republican would... and largely facilitated the current mess.
-
calmus, listen to it later if you have a chance. Its more general philosophies and I don't think you would completely disagree. R.P. is very much against this war, our policies of policing the globe (which is not helping our internation reputation or our budget), our fiscal irresponsibility and borrowing $ from other countries to finance our imbalanced budgets. He's not the savior or some personal economic think tank. He is just applying some basic economic principles and shining light on the fact that both sides need to rethink our policies and spending.
He lumped Bush and Paul together, I can't take anything calmus says seriously anymore, where I at least gave him a chance and an open mind before. How can anyone say those two men are the same is beyond me.
Paul was talking about stuff that's affecting us before anyone even knew what day it was, that's why no one took him seriously, now that shit hit the fan all the othe canidates are saying some of the same things and are being praised for it like it was just new news.
-
He should have distanced himself from the nut-bags... repudiated them very early in his campaign so people realize their nutty policies are not his.
He already addressed that issue at one of the debates.
-
Ron Paul defines himself as a constitutionalist. He states they are the traditional/original republicans. Its extremely clear that he is not a Bush republican. I don't know how you can maintain they are similar.
Running on an independent ticket does not work in this country. I hate the 2 party system, but unless there is a major change, candidates need to ally with one party or the other. We must concern ourselves with the message itself. Ron, himself, is not some great poised political icon...its the message thats important, the message of balance and common sense.
-
Ron Paul defines himself as a constitutionalist. He states they are the traditional/original republicans. Its extremely clear that he is not a Bush republican. I don't know how you can maintain they are similar.
Running on an independent ticket does not work in this country. I hate the 2 party system, but unless there is a major change, candidates need to ally with one party or the other. We must concern ourselves with the message itself. Ron, himself, is not some great poised political icon...its the message thats important, the message of balance and common sense.
Thats the major difference between Paul and EVERY other canidate, he and his supporters know he is not as important as the MESSAGE.
McCaim, Obama, Hilary, they are all duplicitous politicians and people fall for their brand of delivery everytime.
-
Ron Paul defines himself as a constitutionalist. He states they are the traditional/original republicans. Its extremely clear that he is not a Bush republican. I don't know how you can maintain they are similar.
I'm not sure what you mean by constitutionalist. If you mean "originalist" .... that's not a recommendation in my book. Originalists appear to think that what worked in the eighteenth century should work for a country of 300 million with a $14 trillion GDP. Originalists also think that a constitution is a code, which it is not.
As the greatest supreme court justice john marshall said, let the judges not forget that it is a constitution they are expounding. He didn't say "applying" which is quite significant. It's not some rigid document that is stuck in the eighteenth century.
Why are Bush and Ron Paul similar? Well, they both like talking about complex things as if they're simple. Granted, we could use more simplicity in some areas, but in a world as big as ours, that's not always going to be possible. Both of them appear to be equally naive about that, albeit in different ways.
Running on an independent ticket does not work in this country. I hate the 2 party system, but unless there is a major change, candidates need to ally with one party or the other. We must concern ourselves with the message itself. Ron, himself, is not some great poised political icon...its the message thats important, the message of balance and common sense.
Well, since the REpublican party isn't working for him, he might as well be an independent. it's not like he would have had any less of a chance at the presidential nomination. And he does want to be a political icon. Why else does one run for president?
-
Why are Bush and Ron Paul similar? Well, they both like talking about complex things as if they're simple. Granted, we could use more simplicity in some areas, but in a world as big as ours, that's not always going to be possible. Both of them appear to be equally naive about that, albeit in different ways.
RP isn't saying that fixing the economy will be simple. Common sense will tell you that what he proposes (no US military presence abroad, heavily decreased government) will save money, no matter if it's 1808 or 2008. Complex problems are best tackled by going back to basics. Bush doesn't have a clue.
-
I'm not sure what you mean by constitutionalist. If you mean "originalist" .... that's not a recommendation in my book. Originalists appear to think that what worked in the eighteenth century should work for a country of 300 million with a $14 trillion GDP. Originalists also think that a constitution is a code, which it is not.
As the greatest supreme court justice john marshall said, let the judges not forget that it is a constitution they are expounding. He didn't say "applying" which is quite significant. It's not some rigid document that is stuck in the eighteenth century.
Why are Bush and Ron Paul similar? Well, they both like talking about complex things as if they're simple. Granted, we could use more simplicity in some areas, but in a world as big as ours, that's not always going to be possible. Both of them appear to be equally naive about that, albeit in different ways.
Well, since the REpublican party isn't working for him, he might as well be an independent. it's not like he would have had any less of a chance at the presidential nomination. And he does want to be a political icon. Why else does one run for president?
Ron Paul, naive? lol
This coming from the guy that thinks taking troops from one part of the world and putting them in another is going to somehow cost less, (in bodies and money), then having them in Iraq and will allow Obama the financial freedom to implamnet his extra spending for more government bureaucracies. .. This coming from the guy that thinks Obama is some civil rights prophet, but can't explain why Obama supported the Patriot Act and National ID cards for citizens, two items that trample all over American civil liberties.
Obama can embrace a racist pastor and calmus has no problems excusing it but thinks Ron Pauls views are skewed. ::)
Anyone that would even entertain the thought that Obama's 37 minutes of rhetoric and Martin Luther Kings speech are somehow in the same league is ludicrous. No one will remember Obamas speech 2 months from now.
-
RP isn't saying that fixing the economy will be simple. Common sense will tell you that what he proposes (no US military presence abroad, heavily decreased government) will save money, no matter if it's 1808 or 2008. Complex problems are best tackled by going back to basics. Bush doesn't have a clue.
He wants government to stop "running" the economy and the welfare state, which I don't agree with at all.
A monster economy like ours needs sophisticated regulation, and while we have a decent reg system, it needs to be made better.
About the welfare state. I know everyone on here but me (and maybe War-Horse) believes it should be abolished.... My dad is a radiation oncologist, and he used to take me in with him on some Saturdays, when he saw patients who couldn't afford to see him during the week. After seeing all that suffering, there is no way I can support the abolition of governmental support for the indigent.
-
He wants government to stop "running" the economy and the welfare state, which I don't agree with at all.
A monster economy like ours needs sophisticated regulation, and while we have a decent reg system, it needs to be made better.
About the welfare state. I know everyone on here but me (and maybe War-Horse) believes it should be abolished.... My dad is a radiation oncologist, and he used to take me in with him on some Saturdays, when he saw patients who couldn't afford to see him during the week. After seeing all that suffering, there is no way I can support the abolition of governmental support for the indigent.
He didn't say he would just cut off welfare for people because he understands that people are dependant on those programs. The people need to be weened of slowly, so he offers the next generation to opt out of those programs willingly, (not rely on having social security, etc.), and slowly phase them out. It's simple, we have two choices, either we get out of welfare entitlment programs by choice or we wait untill the money runs out and panic.
I think Ron Paul knows a little more about the economy then you.
-
I think Ron Paul knows a little more about the economy then you.
And I'd be willing to bet he doesn't. ;D However, he does know a lot more about "female troubles" and delivering babies than i do.
-
And I'd be willing to bet he doesn't. ;D However, he does know a lot more about "female troubles" and delivering babies than i do.
Economics and the female reproductive system go hand in hand. What school did you go to. ::)
-
Economics and the female reproductive system go hand in hand. What school did you go to. ::)
Clearly, not the right one. >:(
-
I have a doctor's appointment today. I'll be sure to ask him about what the Fed should do. ::)
If your doctor is anything like Ron Paul, then by all means ask him.
Ron Paul is no ordinary doctor.
Being an MD for so long, Ron Paul knows about the health care system.
Having served in the military, he has experience with that too, unlike many politicians who have never served but are eager to send troops over seas.
Unlike many politicians, Ron Paul knows the US constitution well, and he knows US history too.
Because he is fascinated with economics, Ron Paul has taught himself more about the US and world economy than your average politician cares to know.
He has served in congress for a long time, so he knows much more about laws and politics than your average doctor.
Yeah, I'd say Ron Paul knows what he's talking about.
-
Ron Paul was a flight surgeon in the US airforce from 1963-1968. He served in congress from the mid 1970s until 1984. Returned to OB/GYN practice. Was then elected to the house of representatives in 1997 and has served the congress for the last 11 years. During his first 10yrs in congress, Congressman Paul served on the House Banking committee, where he was a strong advocate for sound monetary policy and an outspoken critic of the Federal Reserve’s inflationary measures. He presently serves on the House Committee on Financial Services and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. He advocates a dramatic reduction in the size of the federal government, its spending and a return to constitutional principles.
Here are a few facts based on congressional voting records:
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
-
calmus, you cannot discredit this guy based on his experience.
You can absolutely apply constitutional principles to todays world. It doesn't always have to be specific, as many of these are principles. These would of course be interpreted in context with todays issues and time but the principles are the same. Hardly anyone agrees 100% with any candidate, but the majority of his ideas are sound and fit with common sense and responsibility.
I've also had experiences in inner city free clinics and have seen a lot of everything...from heart breaking cases that make you poor your heart out; to people that have very good access to care but are too careless and irresponsible to show up for appointments even though their care was free; to angry people who were extremely demanding and insulting even though most of us were volunteering to be there. A fair % of the people had an attitude of entitlement that surprised me at the time. In some of these clinics you can clearly see a good % of people who don't have any motivation or initiative and choose to remain on assistance programs because they are too lazy and unmotivated to work. I saw people lining the streets all day long. For the % of people we did care for that really needed the extra help and assistance...that made the whole experience gratifying and rewarding to me. The point of this is that we must have accountibility for handouts and assistance programs so we change behaviors and work ethic.
In case you don't know what I do...I have a bit in common with Dr. Paul.