Ron Paul 2012!!! Your thoughts on who we should pick for our "Cause"?

[gaiusmarius]

right. Ron Paul has said he's in favor of abolishing social security, just "not overnight." and we the people have said we want to keep social security. this puts Ron out of step with the majority of voters, particularly older Americans (many, if not most, republican) who payed into the system all their lives and have seen how useful it is.

and Ron's notion that sex is sinful unless you're married and making a baby is sure to turn off anyone who still has a pulse.

this only tells part of the philosophy. yes ideally he'd like to see the gov out of the business of providing SS, he thinks this is the business of your local community, who would know what the real needs are and who the real needy are. it's your neighbors and local community who is in the best position to know what a poor person really needs. what we see when gov does this is massive entitlement thinking and even worse tons of abuse. then there is the whole bureaucracy running the thing. it all makes it very inefficient. the idea is to let folks keep what they earn so they will mostly not need support and have a bit to spare for a needy person. further more it is so much easier to hold your hand out to the state anonymously then it would be to be depending directly on your local community. this is much more motivational to get back on your own feet. the idea is that private industry, when the playing field is level, will do a much cheaper and more efficient job of even SS and pensions for elderly and the disabled. then the money you pay in will be like a insurance account thats actually yours, which the gov can not steal like they did SS funds.

yes SS has been paid into, but that doesn't change the fact that they took the money and blew it. it is not there anymore, everyone who paid into it was ripped off. so promising it will be there in future would be just plain dishonest unless one also has a plan to come up with the shortfall to allow it to continue.

 

[dagnabit]

Yeah didn't they have that in the 90s robin hood movie?

This one

i don't think i seen that one?!?!?
who's in it?
is that the guy who played the angel in dogma?(alan rickman)

 

[itisme]

Fuck I supported Bush but now regret that...hate myself for it...but at the time I really believed....just goes to show ...I've moved farther right over past the moon now and think I know better now we'll see. Don't we all think that really..?

I know how you feel....I have been bent over three times in a row by the whore media...I beleived they were trying to get the "TRUTH" out......Man when I started posting all the RP bias one thing led to another....I was like, the whole dang system is complete corruption at the top levels. I wanted to shot myself in the foot, since I had already been doing so...Ron Paul is the best candidate out there for me. I like Gary Johnson a lot though as his take on the prisons is dead on. The Corporate Prisons owners are buying politicians and having state slaves turned into private slaves......My owe my...Some people need to wake up. The Drug War and our oversea wars are only doing harm to everybody and everything.

dagnabit :

Or maybe you post postulate horseshit and people find it unhelpful?
Nah must be the system...

3 out of 9 members found this post helpful

Odds are you right

 

[itisme]

I would like to mention that psychology has been mastered and the media is the most powerful psychological weapon on planet earth. It's a magic wand controlled by some of the wealthiest and greedy human beings on the planet.

So true.

 

[zymos]

I like Gary Johnson a lot though as his take on the prisons is dead on. The Corporate Prisons owners are buying politicians and having state slaves turned into private slaves......

Then why was he so gung ho to privatize the prisons when he was Governor of NM?

 

[MadBuddhaAbuser]

Where are you getting that from?

"The Social Security and Medicare Trustees project a deficit this year of $46 billion and continuing annual shortfalls until the $2.5 trillion fund is exhausted in 2036. Beyond that point, the program is expected to have sufficient funds from continuing infusions of payroll taxes to pay about 75 percent of promised benefit"
(according the SSA themselves, who should know)

" cial Security reserves forecast to run dry in 2022

February 14, 2012
Washington Times

Stephen Dinan

"Social Security’s bank account will go bust in 2022 — the first time the program’s combinedtrust funds will run a deficit, according to President Obama’s budget released Monday.

One of Medicare’s trust funds also will be in the red for much of the next decade, according to the numbers in the briefing book that the White House provided to Congress along with the budget, which lays out Mr. Obama’s tax and spending plans for fiscal year 2013 and beyond.

Social Security has taken in less in taxes than it has paid out in benefits since 2010, but the shortfall has beenmade up as the government has dipped into IOUs left in the trust funds from previous years.

Monday’s numbers, though, show the combined trust fund itself will run a deficit of $2.6 billion in 2022."

Together, Medicar

 

[ShroomDr]

2012 Republican Presidential Nomination Gallup Tracking

Santorum 33, Romney 27, Gingrich 16, Paul 11 Santorum +6



The guy who will buy the nomination in the end has just over 1/4 of the peoples support!

Does Dr Paul have a chance of winning any state outright? Utah, N Dakota, Montana, anywhere?


Anyone interested in the facts of today, and not the conjecture of what RP will do tomorrow?
-

 

[MadBuddhaAbuser]

And of course these projections are based on an economic recovery and increased wages fire existing workers, two things I don't see happening. So it's hard to know for sure.

 

[ShroomDr]

Santorm was just another name for 'anal fecal froth' until he started winning states outright.




-

 

[MadBuddhaAbuser]

i don't think i seen that one?!?!?
who's in it?
is that the guy who played the angel in dogma?(alan rickman)

Oh shit man, that was the best one. Some old witch reads thee entrails for alan (who is the sheriff I think) and it read bad news for him and he got real pissed.

I know it's got him, kevin costner, morgan freeman, and christian slater for some reason.

alan will always be "bad guy from die hard" to me though.

 

[MadBuddhaAbuser]

Santorm was just another name for 'anal fecal froth' until he started winning states outright.




-

I think a lot of people either forget or don't know it's called that because of him and his homophobic policies.

Gays were outraged and named it after him.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

you totally prove my point. you are so wrong it's funny. he has very good sensible peaceful plans to deal with foreign nations. everyone knows that all the crap the US has been doing has only encouraged the terrorists and made their recruitment easier. you are the perfect example of what i mean, if you really had spent the hours listening to what he actually says when the msm is trying to trip him up with their bs, you'd know how misinformed you are about his intentions. he said that he knows that we can't cut peoples SS and similar programs, while he is philosophically against that stuff, he knows that too many people are dependent on these programs for them to be abolished just like that. but he also knows that the 60 trillion in promises made to future generations and creditors all over the world can never be paid, because the money for these programs was misused and misspent on other stuff making the programs bankrupt and dependent on perpetually creating more debt to pay for them.

you can not think you know Ron Pauls plans if you are taking someone else's word for it. listen and watch the interviews posted here, specially the longer ones, they even tried to trip him up with 3 people asking him questions together with a harsh glare shining on his head and he talks nothing but common sense, no matter how hard they try and imply the crap you are implying above, he just shuts them up with simple basic common sense. at one point they try to make it seem bad to have principles, it's incredible, they are like don't you think having principles is bad nowadays? he's like how can you want someone without principles, hes astounded at the idiotic implication. like i say, he seems the only straight shooter who means what he says, so all you have to do is listen to what he says to know what he will really work to achieve.

You're right because I'm wrong. Sounds a little DE-facto.

I've heard Ron reference pulling out troops and trade. You know trade has a way of begetting disputes? Sometimes these disputes are fought over. Ron's against an international arbitrator so he'd have the same snarls with other nations that the states had with the Articles of Confederation. If you don't allow an overseeing, centralized arbiter, you have little legal recourse.

We stopped selling Japan petroleum because we didn't agree with their imperialist policies. Japan didn't like that and attacked us. Fortunately it got us out of our isolationist faze.

Beyond bringing the troops home, I haven't heard any plans. Bringing the troops home is a goal. IMO, the strategy and the tactics are worth considering when it's such a monumental task.

We have international agreements and in some cases they're legally binding. Of course we CAN reform what we require but there's no mention of contingents that have to be implemented where the US military provided required management and operations. Japan and Germany never rearmed as requirements under their WWII surrender agreements. Those kinds of things would require Japan and Germany adopting defense responsibilities. We wouldn't want rouge nations to take advantage of fledgeling nations we turn our backs on.

The only people trying to trip Ron up are people who know lots of things he doesn't consider enough to mention. He's never added anything to "gold standard" other than a brief acknowledgment that a gold standard is actually impracticable. Of course, Ron doesn't say impractical, he sounds more like, "We might have to consider some type of fractional.... (sorry, I couldn't make out the last syllables.) I don't get the impression he's given it much thought. I think "gold standard" is a battle cry but I don't think there's any details beyond that. W was sometimes said to lack the curiosity to muddle the details before he acted. IMO, Ron makes George seem like Pericles. There are immeasurable details in what Paul suggests would happen under his leadership. I wouldn't mind getting at least one. I wouldn't mind seeing him backed by or even advised by economists rather than the idea that Ron's his own economic adviser.

Conservatives don't consider private sector options as abolition of programs. Ron might acknowledge the popularity of SS but he also acknowledges it's unconstitutional. That unconstitutional stuff seems to drive his fever more than passing agreement that SS is popular.

Not sure I could justify listening to hours of Ron's varied message. Especially when the stump hasn't meandered one iota since 1988 and probably as long as Ron's been around. What's new are the new evil government conspiracies that inundate any necessary time to discuss what happens when you convert ~$4300 of GDP based dollars with $1 of gold? I've heard an offer of voluntary as an explanation for the mathematical disparity but I'm not sure how that applies either. Voluntary seems to take the starch out of standard, especially when it's purported to be one of gold.

First you appear to reassure that Paul wouldn't "cut people's SS". Then you say it's bankrupt. It's only bankrupt if we don't realign and then it's only bankrupt when it's bankrupt. We don't shut down corporations over their outward projections of red tape. We manage the situations and distribute accordingly. Unless of course there's an ideological obstacle and IMO Ron has a philosophical disagreement with federal government programs, the safety net, socialism, fascism... all that stuff. Freedom baby, that's where it's at. You're free to take care of yourself, i.e. others are free to exercise their idea of their freedoms on you.

How much does corporate freedom cost us, President Paul?

I listen what Ron Paul says. Doesn't mean I get any details. The more one listens to Ron Paul, the more one becomes immersed in government conspiracies and I'm not interested in that shit. There's no new ring to the after-caucus/primary dances because all I here is, "we're scaring the establishment...".

Rather than treat the latest of way-too-many debates for sanity as another venue to introduce his ideas, he should be long past the cover. He plays a good first groove on the LP. I want to hear all the rest of it but not the same old "this one's broken, mine's not" skimmers and the ever unending conspiracy theories.

I watched a video of a 911 truther asking if Ron Paul had followed up on his comments that he'd spur an investigation through Denis Kucinich. Ron Paul answers he hasn't been able to deal with the 911 conspiracy because he's moved on to other conspiracies. And then he lambasts Jake tapper like Jake's an idiot for inquiring over government involvement in 911.

I don't imagine Paul's going anywhere with these conspiracy theories in regard to governance. IMO, he has an active imagination and he's ok with humoring the base. But he shouldn't react the way he did to tapper. You can't command both of those scenarios. It's either one or the other -or- we get an explanation and not the reaction that suggests Tapper's out of line.

You may have missed several comments that infer we don't know, as pundits are merely speculating. In fact, I've reminded others with the propensity to hear something and equate it with (false) consensus. So characterizing my take as anything more than reasonably curiosity is misleading. I know I don't know Ron Paul's details because he manages to espouse a goal without ever broaching the strategy - for more than 30 years.

I get the impression there are no details. He'll take it one day at a time. Like his assumption the market will oversee economic matters. The market can't keep birds from shitting their own nest so I wonder if even Paul himself has the details you say I'm getting from others. Paul is remarkably mum on what I'm interested in and no pundit attempts to offer strategy of governance. They're only discussing the apparent campaign strategy.

Tripping folks up sounds like a way to trip folks up. When I want to hear policy (not just the name on the header) the no-trip aspect is left field. We're on first base. Ron's says he's going to score and I want to know how he plans to do it. If he's gonna steal second with Santiago behind the plate, that's the info I'm looking for. Because Santiago would throw out 99 out of 100 runners.

That would make me say, "bring in the pinch runner."

But if his strategy was possible, I might leave him in to help execute it. But we'll never know when fans run onto the field and start accusing me of not understand how to formulate information. I don't have to deal with the peanut gallery. We either get it from Ron or his ass is on the bench.

Next time you feel the need to tell others they're wrong, point out the actual disparities rather than float the narrative that Ron's the redheaded stepchild of the entire circus. I'll grant your corrections. If you basically say I'm wrong by mirroring your opinions, so are you.

 

[dagnabit]

Oh shit man, that was the best one. Some old witch reads thee entrails for alan (who is the sheriff I think) and it read bad news for him and he got real pissed.

I know it's got him, kevin costner, morgan freeman, and christian slater for some reason.

alan will always be "bad guy from die hard" to me though.

Careful now..
Reading entrails is a "gay slur"

 

[itisme]

and Ron's notion that sex is sinful unless you're married and making a baby is sure to turn off anyone who still has a pulse.

Stating your thoughts on sex and them being based on the Bible is not forcing anything on anybody.
He is practicing free speech and giving an opinion, just like all of us.
He says you can make your own mistakes. Santorm on the other hand, now he wants to impose those thoughts or similar views on people. That is two very different things.

Thinking unmarried sex is a sin, is his point of view. You go that correct.
Can you give me an example of him imposing that on anybody? His views seem the exact opposite of that to me.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

The scenarios were based on all promises, promises without any actual plan and a middle ground, not strength of economy.



I know, slantedly


No, the fact that they did not show how the other candidates worst case scenarios would increase debt is obviously showing some agenda. Unless you chose not to quote those figures in your original post.

I hardly need everybody to kiss rons ass all the time. It would take all the fun out of the debate. Hes not my god, just my president.



I did, and it only showed the middle scenario for the other three.

I didn't quote the rest because I'm on a mobile and it will only let me go so far down in the post box. Thats the only reason. It also won't let me enter rep messages.

It sure makes correcting long posts a pain, but hey what can ya do.

Know what? The article makes Ron look the best of the candidates (in his better scenario.) I learned Newt's worst was 7 trillion and I'm not paging back to reference Romney's two different scenarios. And Rick's no mention is an indicator it's not worth mentioning. All that and you say nothing's there. You could look for splinters but you'd have to go to the report. It's probably linked in the article.

There's nothing wrong with quantifying candidates pontifications. All Ron's said is he'll cut and cut. The analysis shows it'll take a strong economy along with those cuts or he'll add almost 2 tril to the debt.

If you don't want to consider folks who crunch figures as analysis, I'm not sure how your heart is going to calculate the score. One might imagine your confidence is based in faith more than analysis and you're banking, not scrutinizing.

 

[dagnabit]

How were those devilish details for our current joke?
Gitmo?

 

[ShroomDr]

Romney is a moron again.


"I drive a Mustang, and Pickup truck.. Ann, well Ann drives a couple Cadillacs"

LOL.

All this while outside there is a huge banner that says.

Let D̶e̶t̶r̶o̶i̶t Romney Go Bankrupt.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Careful now..
Reading entrails is a "gay slur"

Fuck you.

 

[dagnabit]

Somebody no likey being wrong...

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

I'm not the one that equated your comment to felching.

Sac, your thread's days are numbered. I said I knew dag wouldn't get this thread closed. And he's up to any challenge.