Pimpin' for Ron Paul

[Bocefish]

As an Englishman, my only contribution to this debate (that I actually find fascinating but am in no way in a position to make any form of educated comment about the American political system) is that Politicians will tell you exactly what they think you want to here and then it seems as soon as they get in power they drive straight to the centre and stay there

Unfortunately, that is true the vast majority of the time. That's why it's crucial for people to be informed about how they have voted in the past... Their past behavior and accomplishments are about the only viable source you can rely on for their future behavior. If a politician's lips are moving, they're probably lying to some degree.

 

[sweetiebatman]

And my second, rather more flippant point is:

If only the Whitehouse was more like The West Wing!

Bartlett for President!

 

[lexmark402003]

lol PokerBabe. Are you a libertarian?

What Ron Paul and his son want is white supremacy--which is why people from Stormfront like Don Black suck up to him, and send him contributions. A lot of people look at the surface of Ron Paul only and think that he is all about "freedom." But is freedom from government better than freedom from greedy, unregulated corporations, that you can't even vote for their leaders?

You either don't understand Ron Paul's position from a Constitutional standpoint, or you are intentionally taking unwarranted cheap shots. I suspect the latter, but in case it was the former...

Ron Paul is simply saying certain abortion and civil rights laws are not the legitimate role of the Federal government, that they should be left to the states. It isn't "code" for anything, it's what the Constitution says (see, especially, the 9th and 10th amendments).

Ron Paul is simply saying that Congress does not have the right to grab power from the states UNLESS they follow proper procedure. The proper procedure would be to AMEND THE CONSTITUTION. Instead, Congress ignores the Constitution and just passes any law it wants- and since probably 97% of adult Americans haven't read the Constitution since Junior High School, they get away with it.

Ron Paul doesn't hate black people. He routinely treated poor blacks for free when he was practicing medicine (because he refused to accept Medicaid, because it, too, is un Constititional). Watch this and then come back with more of your "Ron Paul hates blacks" nonsense:


BTW, Ron Paul is the only candidate from either party who will never try to shut down porn sites or cam sites. Other Republicans might want them shut down because they feel the Federal government should legislate "morality." Democrats are also anti-porn crusades because they believe the Federal government should shut down anything they feel "dehumanizes" women. Ron Paul will defend your rights, even when he personally disagrees with them.

And that is one of the reasons I support Ron Paul for President!

 

[bawksy]

That's right, main stream media, you keep telling us Ron Paul will never win the election. You've been saying it for months. He has no chance. Even if he wins the Republican primary, he has no chance of beating Obama in the general elections. That's why you've been ignoring him at every chance you can get. He's got no chance, so why even mention him?

Wait... what's that?

He's fucking tied against Obama right now?

ohshi...



http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-tied-with-romney-paul-in-november-showdowns/


If you really want a laugh, get a load of some of these news clips from back in August 2011. "The top tier is Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, and Michele Bachmann". Yeah, great prediction that turned out to be:



CNN's comments starting at 3:55 are particularly nauseating. Sarah Palin and Rick Perry? Really? Really, CNN?

 

[Poker_Babe]

That's right, main stream media, you keep telling us Ron Paul will never win the election. You've been saying it for months. He has no chance. Even if he wins the Republican primary, he has no chance of beating Obama in the general elections. That's why you've been ignoring him at every chance you can get. He's got no chance, so why even mention him?

Wait... what's that?

He's fucking tied against Obama right now?

ohshi...



http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-tied-with-romney-paul-in-november-showdowns/


If you really want a laugh, get a load of some of these news clips from back in August 2011. "The top tier is Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, and Michele Bachmann". Yeah, great prediction that turned out to be:



CNN's comments starting at 3:55 are particularly nauseating. Sarah Palin and Rick Perry? Really? Really, CNN?

THANK YOU 4 POSTING THAT CLIP... I luv how he brings the truth out no matter how sickening it is and still says it in a way that makes ya laugh. Same old shit that they media whores did to Paul last election, only now they are putting more effort into it sense RP is doing so much better now.
Ever see Colbert's clip about "Crazy Old Ron Paul" he did during the last election? Super Funny

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/149062/january-31-2008/ron-paul-sounds-alarm

 

[Nordling]

Yeah, when I hear "unelectable" I just laugh. Ron P isn't insane, but we've had a few people elected who either were insane or definitely sociopaths, like the genocidal Andrew Jackson or the totally unfit Warren G. Harding. I may not like Ron Paul but "unelectable" is not how I'd describe him.

 

[Poker_Babe]

LOL Just 1 other thing... U know shit is getting serious when Bawksy's only post in an entire thread has no kind of "troll" comment in any part of his reply Hahahaaha

 

[luvsyou]

lol PokerBabe. Are you a libertarian?

What Ron Paul and his son want is white supremacy--which is why people from Stormfront like Don Black suck up to him, and send him contributions. A lot of people look at the surface of Ron Paul only and think that he is all about "freedom." But is freedom from government better than freedom from greedy, unregulated corporations, that you can't even vote for their leaders?

You either don't understand Ron Paul's position from a Constitutional standpoint, or you are intentionally taking unwarranted cheap shots. I suspect the latter, but in case it was the former...

Ron Paul is simply saying certain abortion and civil rights laws are not the legitimate role of the Federal government, that they should be left to the states. It isn't "code" for anything, it's what the Constitution says (see, especially, the 9th and 10th amendments).

Ron Paul is simply saying that Congress does not have the right to grab power from the states UNLESS they follow proper procedure. The proper procedure would be to AMEND THE CONSTITUTION. Instead, Congress ignores the Constitution and just passes any law it wants- and since probably 97% of adult Americans haven't read the Constitution since Junior High School, they get away with it.

Ron Paul doesn't hate black people. He routinely treated poor blacks for free when he was practicing medicine (because he refused to accept Medicaid, because it, too, is un Constititional). Watch this and then come back with more of your "Ron Paul hates blacks" nonsense:


BTW, Ron Paul is the only candidate from either party who will never try to shut down porn sites or cam sites. Other Republicans might want them shut down because they feel the Federal government should legislate "morality." Democrats are also anti-porn crusades because they believe the Federal government should shut down anything they feel "dehumanizes" women. Ron Paul will defend your rights, even when he personally disagrees with them.

And that is one of the reasons I support Ron Paul for President!

Well said. The constitution is the foundation of our government and too many people forget that. The federal government does not have the authority (per the constitution) to make you buy health insurance, determine who you should marry, etc. It is the state's jurisdiction. If you don't like it, change the constitution. We need less government not more. Government regulation is way beyond what most people can comprehend. The FDIC says a bank cannot hire someone convicted of a crime of trust.....sounds fine on the surface. However, get convicted of shoplifting a tube of toothpaste and you can't work for a bank....FOREVER. (I've seen it).

I'll step back and now let people call me a racist or whatever they want to make up. I think everyone should have equal opportunities to succeed or fail.

 

[Nordling]

I don't think anyone has called anyone else a racist in this thread. Not sure why it's been brought up twice now.

I agree that everyone should have an equal opportunity to succeed or fail.

One question: Do you think the states' have the authority to say who you may or may not marry?

The Constitution does indeed sets up the framework for the government. Not sure who is "forgetting that." It also sets up, via The Bill of Rights and successive amendments to ensure the rights of individuals. The rights of individuals are not to be protected by the U.S. government only to be lost to the states. Rights are absolute, and no state has a right to circumvent them.

 

[luvsyou]

Unfortunately, the states do have the right to say you can't be in a marriage with the same sex......I am for same sex marriage, but that's why I should vote in my state election. We are a republic of states joined for a common good (united states). The states have most of the rights in government.

And yes, I think states have the right to leave the US. I don't like it, but that doesn't change it.

 

[Nordling]

Unfortunately, the states do have the right to say you can't be in a marriage with the same sex......I am for same sex marriage, but that's why I should vote in my state election. We are a republic of states joined for a common good (united states). The states have most of the rights in government.

And yes, I think states have the right to leave the US. I don't like it, but that doesn't change it.

Well, we had a war about that in the mid-19th century. Guess who lost?

IMHO, it's not about who has the MOST rights, it's about whose rights are we (the government) here to defend? In cases of human rights, yes, the federal government prevails. Who gets to be dog catcher, mayor of Peoria or local water rights, are left to the states.

 

[Poker_Babe]

My main concern for keeping States Rights secure is this...
1.) What works for one state, may not work for another. And if a state tries something that turns out to be a utter catastrophe, then it's better that it only happened to one state and not the whole country, and other states have the opportunity to learn from their mistakes instead of having to suffer threw it with them.
2.) But my biggest reason, is that it protects us from the centralization of power. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
This is also why I don't like the UN. I realize that most of the UN members are there with sincerely good intentions. But I also believe that even with their good intentions, they are unaware of the serious dangers that lie within.
The same powers that be who started the UN attempted this after WWI with the "League of Nations" but not enough countries would go along with it. Although it looked good on the surface, there were still many who could see the many underlining threats to their sovereignty that came along with it.
Oh lord, I'm sure I've just opened up a whole other can of worms with that last UN comment.

 

[Nordling]

My main concern for keeping States Rights secure is this...
1.) What works for one state, may not work for another. And if a state tries something that turns out to be a utter catastrophe, then it's better that it only happened to one state and not the whole country, and other states have the opportunity to learn from their mistakes instead of having to suffer threw it with them.
2.) But my biggest reason, is that it protects us from the centralization of power. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
This is also why I don't like the UN. I realize that most of the UN members are there with sincerely good intentions. But I also believe that even with their good intentions, they are unaware of the serious dangers that lie within.
The same powers that be who started the UN attempted this after WWI with the "League of Nations" but not enough countries would go along with it. Although it looked good on the surface, there were still many who could see the many underlining threats to their sovereignty that came along with it.
Oh lord, I'm sure I've just opened up a whole other can of worms with that last UN comment.

I agree with a lot of your concerns. We certainly don't need the federal government telling a city how to pave their streets or setting speed limits on highways (Unless they're Interstate highways) but centralized local power can be worse than centralized national power; that's why there does need to be a balance, because the opposite can be true too.

My main concern is about human rights. If states are so different culturally that human rights don't apply the same in one state, then maybe we should ask why. The slave states in antebellum days thought that having slaves was "their thing." Can we be one nation with that kind of thinking? Most of the cultural differences have to do with local dialects, cuisine, art and all the many diverse things that make a large nation wonderful. I wouldn't want the Fed to tell Louisiana they couldn't make gumbo or someone in North Dakota they weren't allowed to eat lutefisk--wait... lol That might be a good idea. j/k lol

 

[Poker_Babe]

Don't forget everyone... Ron Paul is not only known for being "the tax payers best friend", he's also the adult industry worker's best friend as well! LOL
A vote for RP, is a vote to keep sites like MFC, Streamate, LiveJasmin, and the like; available to you for many years to come.

 

[Poker_Babe]

As a matter of fact...

ANNOUNCEMENT TO ALL FELLOW LIBERTY LOVERS AND RON PAUL SUPPORTERS:

Starting now until the end of the current pay period on MFC (January 31, 2012), EVERY tip I receive with an attached 'TIP NOTE' that says: "Support Dr. Paul"; I will donate 50% of that tip to the Ron Paul Presidential campaign on the first of February.

THIS WILL ONLY BE DONE FOR TIPS THAT SPECIFICALLY HAVE A NOTE THAT SAYS "SUPPORT DR. PAUL".

RP supporter or not, this is still my job and I still have a family to feed! So all you anti-Ron Paul premiums (Nordling LOL :whistle: ), premiums who aren't "anti-Paul" but none the less have decided to vote for another candidate, or just those of you who could give a sh*t less about politics therefore would rather just see that the model keeps all of the tokens from your tip...

DO NOT BE DISCOURAGED FROM TIPPING ME!!!!!!!! LOL

If the thought of tipping me bothers you because of the possibility that in doing so, you might also be financially contributing to a cause that you don't agree with, WELL DON'T WORRY!
Not one penny of any money I receive from any of your tips will go towards that Campaign. And I'm a women of of my word.

 

[RedHerby1]

...
I will donate 50% of that tip to the Ron Paul Presidential campaign on the first of February.
...
Not one penny of any money I receive from any of your tips will go towards that Campaign.
...

 

[Poker_Babe]

...
I will donate 50% of that tip to the Ron Paul Presidential campaign on the first of February.
...
Not one penny of any money I receive from any of your tips will go towards that Campaign.
...

Are you implying that I have no intentions of donating any money from tips that say "Support Dr. Paul"???
If so, that's not very nice! FOR SHAAAAAAAAME!!!!! :naughty:
I'm just saying that by tipping me, your money won't be going to fund a cause that you may be against.
I'll donate the money live on cam if you like... although that still doesn't prove anything really. That could be faked as well.

 

[Poker_Babe]

Not one penny of any money I receive from any of your tips will go towards that Campaign. And I'm a women of of my word.

[CORRECTION:]

Not one penny of any money I receive from any of your tips ^ THAT DON'T SAY "SUPPORT DR. PAUL" IN THE TIP NOTE ^ will go towards that Campaign. And I'm a women of of my word.

 

[RedHerby1]

...
I will donate 50% of that tip to the Ron Paul Presidential campaign on the first of February.
...
Not one penny of any money I receive from any of your tips will go towards that Campaign.
...

Are you implying that I have no intentions of donating any money from tips that say "Support Dr. Paul"???
If so, that's not very nice! FOR SHAAAAAAAAME!!!!! :naughty:

haha, the powers of selective quoting !

 

[Nordling]

As a matter of fact...

ANNOUNCEMENT TO ALL FELLOW LIBERTY LOVERS AND RON PAUL SUPPORTERS:

Starting now until the end of the current pay period on MFC (January 31, 2012), EVERY tip I receive with an attached 'TIP NOTE' that says: "Support Dr. Paul"; I will donate 50% of that tip to the Ron Paul Presidential campaign on the first of February.

THIS WILL ONLY BE DONE FOR TIPS THAT SPECIFICALLY HAVE A NOTE THAT SAYS "SUPPORT DR. PAUL".

RP supporter or not, this is still my job and I still have a family to feed! So all you anti-Ron Paul premiums (Nordling LOL :whistle: ), premiums who aren't "anti-Paul" but none the less have decided to vote for another candidate, or just those of you who could give a sh*t less about politics therefore would rather just see that the model keeps all of the tokens from your tip...

DO NOT BE DISCOURAGED FROM TIPPING ME!!!!!!!! LOL

If the thought of tipping me bothers you because of the possibility that in doing so, you might also be financially contributing to a cause that you don't agree with, WELL DON'T WORRY!
Not one penny of any money I receive from any of your tips will go towards that Campaign. And I'm a women of of my word.

Ha ha! Thanks for the mention. You know that I admire you as a person and would never let one issue we disagree on affect that. xoxo I think we most likely agree on most things and I simply believe that RP isn't really the one who will get us to where we want to be (politically) but that's what makes the country great, that we can disagree passionately on politics while admiring one another for what we really believe in.

 

[Bocefish]

More food for thought...

 

[bawksy]

More food for thought...

That shit chilled me to the bone. I can't believe I had never heard that speech before. Fuck.

 

[AmberCutie]

...but that's what makes the country great, that we can disagree passionately on politics while admiring one another for what we really believe in.

And thank goodness for that, or I'd have put the kaibash on this thread a lot sooner!

 

[JickyJuly]

With Ron Paul or against, it's easy to see he's a better dude than Mittens. If we end up with President Romney, I will cry a sea of tears. I don't want to live in a country where a man can drive to Canada with a dog strapped to the roof of his car, giggle about it on television and end up in charge of the joint. The high cost of running for presidency pretty much eliminates anyone decent from having a shot, but dog on roof?! Unacceptable.

 

[Poker_Babe]

That shit chilled me to the bone. I can't believe I had never heard that speech before. Fuck.

Took the words right out of my mouth.
YES! Definitely chilling. Surprised that i have never heard this before either.

 

[Poker_Babe]

I simply believe that RP isn't really the one who will get us to where we want to be (politically)

I don't think any "one person is capable of this... it's gonna' take all of us as a country to turn our way of thinking around and change things.

but that's what makes the country great, that we can disagree passionately on politics while admiring one another for what we really believe in.

ABSOLUTELY!!!

 

[LadyLuna]

I cannot trust what the media says about the politicians, because they will twist the facts to their liking.

I cannot trust what the politicians say about themselves, because they will twist the facts to their liking.

I cannot trust what the politicians say about other politicians, because they will twist the facts to their liking.

I cannot trust what the people say about the politicians, because they will twist the facts to their liking.

The only thing I can trust is what the politicians themselves have done or not done, but finding out the truth of that is hard because the media twists the facts to their own liking.

OBAMA HAS VERY LITTLE CONTROL WHAT LAWS PASS. OBAMA HAS VERY LITTLE CONTROL WHAT GETS ADDED TO LAWS HE PROPOSES. DO NOT JUDGE OBAMA ON WHAT HAS BEEN DONE AND NOT DONE, BECAUSE THAT IS MOSTLY IN THE HANDS OF CONGRESS AND THE HOUSE.

With all that said, my political views are such:

On Abortion

-a woman should have a right to get an abortion if she wants to.
-a doctor should have a right to not perform the abortion if he doesn't want to.

On Marriage

-a couple has the right to get married if they are two consenting adults, no matter what sex and race each person in the couple are.
-a church has the right to not perform or recognize the ceremony if they don't want to.
-government marriage officials have no right to deny marriage to anyone

On Education

-government needs to get their nose out of education
-the only law that should be in effect nationwide about education is that every town will have public schools that cannot deny a child education for any reason
-children who don't want to learn and whose parents don't care should not be forced to attend class.
-classes of every level should be available for every level of child
-the only way standardized tests should be used is to determine what level a person has obtained
-if women can keep women-only institutions of learning, then men should be allowed their men-only institutions of learning (I am in favor of allowing the students a choice between co-ed and separate at any point after elementary school).
-schools, not governments, should determine what the criteria for their own teachers are.

On Bearing Arms

-people should have the right to buy and use guns
-I am not sure about registration of guns

On Drugs

-anyone over 18 should have the right to put whatever the hell they want into their own bodies.

On Business

-businesses should have the right to deny employment to anyone who doesn't fit their criteria. Their criteria should not include age, race, or sex. Their criteria might include competency and/or physical ability. If a person is denied employment due to such criteria, there should be tests to prove that they do not meet such criteria.
-businesses should have the right to deny access to anyone they do not wish to serve. (please note: I would never create a business that excluded service to anyone based on anything other than their behavior.)

On Hate-Crimes

-Harmful hate-crimes should not be tolerated (this includes damage to a person's property, libel, slander, and injury to a person)

On Politically Correct Language

-Can we just say what we mean, please? My roommate was not an African American, because she was not American. She was from Africa. Therefore, she was a Black African.

On Capital Punishment

-first, every jury must be reminded that a person is INNOCENT until their guilt has been PROVEN BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT. That means that if any one person has any doubt, then capital punishment cannot be condoned.
-second, the only reason to kill a person is if they are likely to do it again, and if their crime was one of the more heinous (not just theft or property damage)

On the Prison System

-Jail is more appealing than poverty... that needs to change

 

[Poker_Babe]

I cannot trust what the media says about the politicians, because they will twist the facts to their liking.

I cannot trust what the politicians say about themselves, because they will twist the facts to their liking.

I cannot trust what the politicians say about other politicians, because they will twist the facts to their liking.

I cannot trust what the people say about the politicians, because they will twist the facts to their liking.

The only thing I can trust is what the politicians themselves have done or not done, but finding out the truth of that is hard because the media twists the facts to their own liking.

http://www.votesmart.org​

 

[Nordling]

I agree with Luna about 95%. That's pretty darn good.

The only statement that jumped out at me a lot and that I have a quibble with is the one about businesses and who they may choose to serve. No one should have the right to have a public business and deny service to anyone for race, gender, religion or sexual orientation. They MAY have a dress code within reason and may refuse you service if you are behaving terribly. A private business, like a club, sure deny whomever you want, even my grandmother. lol (what is defined as a "private club," however, should be regulated. I can't just open a 7-11 franchise and deny Albanian obstetricians by claiming it's a "private store.")

 

[LeenaLiberty]

yay! I am glad to have found this. I'll be around here more, soon.
Thanks PokerBabe!