Lifestyle > Train of Thought
Where's the Ron Paul People??
WestCoasta:
--- Quote from: Ron Paul = greatest American since Thomas Jefferson on February 10, 2008, 08:19:35 PM ---
--- Quote from: Mr. Javii on February 10, 2008, 01:11:29 PM ---
--- Quote from: Machiavelli on February 10, 2008, 01:07:54 PM ---
--- Quote from: Mr. Javii on February 10, 2008, 01:00:53 PM ---LOL It's not wise to follow the Constitution in a strict manner. Times change.
--- End quote ---
Why is that? This country was founded on that principle, and many politicians say that we should be strict. There the ultimate papers of democracy and freedom. The founders of whom were one of the smartest people advised us to be strict to the document. We have been drifting further away from it ever since its creation, and look at whats happening in this country slowly but surely.
--- End quote ---
Times change.
--- End quote ---
It doesn't matter. If you look at the ideals and the fundamentals of liberty and freedom, those are timeless and the reason that this country was founded. That can never be outdated.
--- End quote ---
exactly.... M Dogg and Javi, do you guys support Bush? because he sure as hell had tried to change the constitution
M Dogg talking about Ron Paul has an "extreme" following
Huckabee wants to change constitution and is against abortion, you don't think motherfuckers following him are "extremists"? give me a fuckin break
this is why politics is disgusting, supposedly what's right and wrong will never end... or better yet fact and fiction
we're all being fucked in the end
M Dogg™:
--- Quote from: Ron Paul = greatest American since Thomas Jefferson on February 10, 2008, 11:54:43 AM ---
--- Quote from: Mr. Javii on February 10, 2008, 11:09:53 AM ---M Dogg never stated that they are ideologically similar. He said, "Same extreme following, with the same extreme politics, just different sides of the extreme." Extreme isn't the right word there, but he's saying it's a similar small following just on the opposite side of the political spectrum.
--- End quote ---
Well he keeps saying that Ron Paul is Ralph Nader which is a stupid statement. He's also saying that Paul has dropped out, that he's a Libertarian, and that he stole people's money with no intent of running for the presidency. He also admits that nobody pays attention to him unless he mentions Ron Paul.
Even if you draw that parallel between Paul and Nader, it's still weak as hell and I could list 100 reasons why they aren't even remotely close to similar. Mdogg is just trying to smear Paul.
--- End quote ---
I tried to be civil at one time with debates with Ron Paul people. I have respect for him and MOST of his supporters, but when ya'all started saying things about Obama, like his pro-war when his the most anti-war president in the contest, that's when I was like, ok, if they want to distort the truth, let me do the same. You took Obama's words about national security and made it into his campaign platform. OF COURSE his going to say his going after Osama, what you want him to say, we invite him to dinner after he killed 3,000 Americans. Obama is for getting out of Iraq, and joining in on a UN occupation of Afganistan, and the capture of Osama Bin Laden. That's not being a hawk, that's being the man who wants to be commander and chef. But to hear you guys talk, it's as if Obama will bomb every Middle Eastern country outside Israel.
Straight up, you guys are annoying. I post some pro-Obama stuff, the same way you post your pro-Ron Paul stuff, and either it's ignored or you guys start dissing Obama, saying when are you going to wake up. REALIZE, I BEEN UP. I've supported Obama since he started, I have been a liberal for as long as I can remember, and his the first candidate I can honestly say I am not compromising my politics supporting him. You smear Obama, I smear Paul, that's how this works now.
Oh, and how Paul and Nader are simular. Both were ideal candidates, neither had an honest shot at winning the presidency. Pauls main objective is to move the Republican party more to the right, the same as Nader wanted to move the Dems more to the left, or risk having some votes taken (which happened), and honestly, Paul is so far right, and Nader so far left that they both actually have simular policies. On a side note, the Reform Party, or the Republican Party of crack with such great politicans as Pat Buchanan and Ross Parol as their nominees in the past, nominated Ralph Nader in 2004, so that shows you how easy Nader's views can fit in the right, just like Paul's anti-war, keep peoples lives private fits the left.
Javier:
I guess it's getting hard for people to understand, so let me sum it up like this.
The Constitution is a bit vague to be taken strictly. That's why the Founding Fathers didn't write the Constitution in stone. When did Bush try to change the constitution? Oh yeah that's right, he used it as a political stunt to get the Southern idiots to vote for him.
J @ M @ L:
--- Quote from: M Dogg on February 10, 2008, 11:08:39 PM ---Paul is so far right, and Nader so far left that they both actually have simular policies.
--- End quote ---
LOL... this guy has lost it
M Dogg™:
--- Quote from: J @ M @ L on February 11, 2008, 12:11:04 AM ---
--- Quote from: M Dogg on February 10, 2008, 11:08:39 PM ---Paul is so far right, and Nader so far left that they both actually have simular policies.
--- End quote ---
LOL... this guy has lost it
--- End quote ---
I pointed out some simularities. I know for the most part they are different, but then again, both are anti-war, both are isolationist, and both don't have many supporters over 30.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version