-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
Ron Paul 2012!!!
- Thread starter CannaBunkerMan
- Start date
stc9357
Member
Ron Paul will win when hell freezes over is what there thinking might as well close this thread just like the one below it ......................
Silly rabbits tricks are for kids!
Kids under 30 who think they'll get 'rich' - 50%
Kids under 30 who still live with parents, due to unemployment or underemployment - 40%
We've chased corporate policy longer than some here have lived. We've watched every economic indicator fall for everybody except the top. The 40% figure is the highest in modern history.
Kids under 30 who still live with parents, due to unemployment or underemployment - 40%
We've chased corporate policy longer than some here have lived. We've watched every economic indicator fall for everybody except the top. The 40% figure is the highest in modern history.
An unfortunate side effect of debt serfdom. The young generations futures' has already been spent on the excesses of yesterday. Now the bill is due, which means they have no future except debt slavery.
Neither do any of the kids in Europe or Japan so we are all in the same boat.
Let banks rule the world and debt slavery and usury is the norm.
if you can't see that there really is no option then you aren't looking
what we are given are 2 people who claim to be polar opposites
hell, you can even call it black and white recently
one choice will always be change, the other the same old thing. You will even see same party candidates promising change from their predecessors run. Then you pick same old BS or a new "change". Only problem is there are no 2 parties, it is all a game, and we are losing. It is US and Them, plain and simple. No one involved in major politics is anything like us, not at all. I come from a well to do family, and we aren't even close to the wealth those that are given a slight rule. As much as it sounds like a conspiracy, old money rules this nation of ours.
There is no choice, either vote is your own doom. The system has been broken since it began, the only way to make it is to learn to live in the fringes
what we are given are 2 people who claim to be polar opposites
hell, you can even call it black and white recently
one choice will always be change, the other the same old thing. You will even see same party candidates promising change from their predecessors run. Then you pick same old BS or a new "change". Only problem is there are no 2 parties, it is all a game, and we are losing. It is US and Them, plain and simple. No one involved in major politics is anything like us, not at all. I come from a well to do family, and we aren't even close to the wealth those that are given a slight rule. As much as it sounds like a conspiracy, old money rules this nation of ours.
There is no choice, either vote is your own doom. The system has been broken since it began, the only way to make it is to learn to live in the fringes
Lol. We all need something to take the focus off 400x wage disparity.
T
texsativa
Romney, war.
Obama, war.
Ron Paul, no war.
We're going to war.
Obama, war.
Ron Paul, no war.
We're going to war.
i think his position is ok,let the states manage themselves and the executive manages the military,and thats it,it isnt to force policies on to the states.they all adopted the constitution and bill of rights so freedom to practice and beleive what you want is up to you,as well as maintaining it, and the direction and local policy of your state.
in other words he's not a dictator and you'll be safe,his stance is ending all wars and close all basses if war was your concern .
[YOUTUBEIF]NyfnHOPAhHo[/YOUTUBEIF]
[YOUTUBEIF]6iX62Q5--gc[/YOUTUBEIF]
in other words he's not a dictator and you'll be safe,his stance is ending all wars and close all basses if war was your concern .
[YOUTUBEIF]NyfnHOPAhHo[/YOUTUBEIF]
[YOUTUBEIF]6iX62Q5--gc[/YOUTUBEIF]
stc9357
Member
Thanks this point isn't reiterated enough not voting for him and keep giving me negative rep like I give a shit. If you don't know that Ron Paul has no chance of winning your living in delusional land ... Colorado has a better chance of legalizing this year and thats what you should be trying to help with fuck this election.
Agreed. Ron does not believe in the separation of Church and State and THAT is a deal killer.
"[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders' political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government's hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life."
Full quote from his "War on Religion" bullshit here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html
Unfortunately for Ron, his claim that the Constitution is replete with references to God is incorrect. The Constitution has ZERO references to God. And Ron really should know this, since he has a copy of the Constitution on his website.
He does believe there is a war on Christmas and a war on Religion.
[/FONT]
What do you guys think he's gonna do? Make you pray everyday?
The other candidates don't believe In separation of corporations and state. What is proving to be the bigger problem these days?
The other candidates don't believe In separation of corporations and state. What is proving to be the bigger problem these days?
excellent point^
also...
he stated that we were heavily influenced on the basis that god/forces of nature (whatever you beleive) created man and man deligated certain limited powers to govenment,that restricted it from over taking our natural rights. (freedom of speech/religion) ect...
thats where "we the people" comes from.
Frederic bastiat-Government
" The Americans formed another idea of the relations of the citizens with the Government when they placed these simple words at the head of their constitution: -
"We, the people of the United States, for the purpose of forming a more perfect union, of establishing justice, of securing interior tranquillity, of providing for our common defense, of increasing the general well-being, and of securing the benefits of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity, decree," &c.
Here there is no chimerical creation, no abstraction, from which the citizens may demand everything. They expect nothing except from themselves and their own energy."
-The law
"What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.
Each of us has a natural right — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend even by force — his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right — its reason for existing, its lawfulness — is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.
Such a perversion of force would be, in both cases, contrary to our premise. Force has been given to us to defend our own individual rights. Who will dare to say that force has been given to us to destroy the equal rights of our brothers? Since no individual acting separately can lawfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces?
If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all."
bastiat was a french economist during the french revolution.
our constitution was also influenced by the magna cater and other ideas and documents,but you get where he would state that there is influence of religion/natural rights in the document.
he should have expanded but he's correct.
he's not going to force anything on you.
Last edited:
Plant Early
Member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZXP2uqV3OU .. Dr. Ron Paul speaks on Rand Paul's endorcement of Romney! Good move Ron! monkey5
That is true, since he isn't getting the nomination or elected President.
However, historical evidence has shown that when a government system is religiously motivated you get things like the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials, etc.
Want to see theocracy in action? Look at Iran
And don't fool yourself into thinking that if the Religious groups got control of the Government that your precious Cannabis would be spared.
And I guess you didn't bother to read his whining little piece on the non existent War on Religion. There is no War on Religion. But we non Christians are tired of being bashed over the head with a cross, and when we say something about it are accused of Persecuting Christians. Or in Ron's case, claiming a non existent War on Religion. But not every Religion, specifically Christianity. Read his spiel carefully. He bitches about people saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas".
If enough Religious nutters get elected, we go from them bitching about "Happy Holidays" to laws forbidding people from saying it. Give a Christian an inch and the next thing you know he wants the whole damn ruler. We got enough of these fools trying to impose their religious beliefs already. We don't need a President that doesn't believe in the separation of Church and State to encourage that behavior.
That being said, even if he did get elected by some bizarre circumstance, absolutely none of his ideas would be implemented. And for one simple reason. Virtually no one in Congress agrees with his stances on anything. Congress holds the power. His isolationist Foreign policy? Not going over too well with the war hawks. His economic policies? There is a reason we got off the gold standard. His position on drugs? Too much vested interest in the WOD, and too much profit from it.
Congress will do what it wants and he would be powerless. He could veto stuff all day, and congress will just do an end-run around him and over ride his veto.
He isn't getting elected, face facts.
