The Choice

Dixie said:
The Pauls are saying different things because they are two different people with differing opinions. They are similar, and they are related, but there is nothing mystical or magical about what they are saying. The TEA Party is saying essentially what they are saying, but you don't like the TEA Party, because they have been branded as 'un-cool' while the Pauls are 'cool' and 'hip'!!
Click to expand...

Damn straight, what they're saying is American!!
 
Dixie said:
Now, it occurs to me, while the people I support have NOT served in Congress, the person you 'worship', Ron Paul, has served in Congress since 1997. 13...almost 14 years. What has his "track record" been? What has he gotten done? Are you SURE it is ME who supports people who just "CLAIM" to want smaller government? Are you positive it is ME who has "sold out?" Could it be, after 14 years of virtual nothingness from Ron Paul, it's time to at least LISTEN to what someone else has to say?
Click to expand...

You really don't know much about Dr. Paul.

He was a congressman in the 70's and 80's as well.

He's never voted for a tax increase.

He wants to end the war on drugs.

He's always been behind repealing the income tax, and ending the federal reserve.

He's for getting rid of the department of education.

Ohhhh, what's the point. You're a big govt guy anyway. Worshipping the republican faction, and then turning around and saying that people you support aren't even in congress makes me think you're kind of crazy if you ask me.

If you don't like Ron Paul, you're a big govt guy Dixie, and could care less about your rights. It's that simple.
 
Liberty said:
You really don't know much about Dr. Paul.

He was a congressman in the 70's and 80's as well.

He's never voted for a tax increase.

He wants to end the war on drugs.

He's always been behind repealing the income tax, and ending the federal reserve.

He's for getting rid of the department of education.

Ohhhh, what's the point. You're a big govt guy anyway. Worshipping the republican faction, and then turning around and saying that people you support aren't even in congress makes me think you're kind of crazy if you ask me.

If you don't like Ron Paul, you're a big govt guy Dixie, and could care less about your rights. It's that simple.
Click to expand...

First of all, the fact that RP has served in congress much longer than the 14 years I gave him credit for, makes the questions you avoided even more salient! Instead of honestly answering me, you dive into a defense of RP, and regurgitate his campaign talking points. Then you basically attempt to 'intimidate' me, by claiming I am for big government and don't care about rights, if I don't like Ron Paul! I never said I didn't like RP, read my posts again, I said I do like much of what RP says, and I once supported him vigorously.

I'll pose the same question again in another way, where is the legislation produced by RP, to eliminate the department of education, the federal reserve, or income tax? Surely in 40 years of congressional service, he has had the opportunity to craft some legislation on these things, right? Not voting for any new tax increase, yeah, that's wonderful, but aside from George H.W. Bush, that is pretty much anyone with an (R) beside their name, for the past 40 years. I certainly don't hear the TEA Party people advocating tax increases.

And I am confused over where you get that I am "worshiping the republican faction" by supporting TEA Party candidates, who are not a part of the Republican faction, and are upsetting many of them in their primaries. I don't understand why you believe Sara Palin has served in Congress... or Glenn Beck... or Alveda King... or Bobby Jindal... or Rubio... Christie... O'Donnell... the TEA Party people have NOT been in power in Washington, that is why the Washington elite establishment is so adamantly against them!

But now, you don't want to give the TEA Party a chance, because some people said they were "racist" and they believe in The Bible and stuff... It's cooler to put on your tie-dye shirt, fire up a doobie, and chant "Ron Paul!" And hey, I'll join ya! Pass it over this way, bro! But now, when we come down from our high, we need to face reality again, and understand this very important thing... Ron Paul can't change things by himself.
 
Dixie said:
First of all, the fact that RP has served in congress much longer than the 14 years I gave him credit for, makes the questions you avoided even more salient! Instead of honestly answering me, you dive into a defense of RP, and regurgitate his campaign talking points. Then you basically attempt to 'intimidate' me, by claiming I am for big government and don't care about rights, if I don't like Ron Paul! I never said I didn't like RP, read my posts again, I said I do like much of what RP says, and I once supported him vigorously.

I'll pose the same question again in another way, where is the legislation produced by RP, to eliminate the department of education, the federal reserve, or income tax? Surely in 40 years of congressional service, he has had the opportunity to craft some legislation on these things, right? Not voting for any new tax increase, yeah, that's wonderful, but aside from George H.W. Bush, that is pretty much anyone with an (R) beside their name, for the past 40 years. I certainly don't hear the TEA Party people advocating tax increases.

And I am confused over where you get that I am "worshiping the republican faction" by supporting TEA Party candidates, who are not a part of the Republican faction, and are upsetting many of them in their primaries. I don't understand why you believe Sara Palin has served in Congress... or Glenn Beck... or Alveda King... or Bobby Jindal... or Rubio... Christie... O'Donnell... the TEA Party people have NOT been in power in Washington, that is why the Washington elite establishment is so adamantly against them!

But now, you don't want to give the TEA Party a chance, because some people said they were "racist" and they believe in The Bible and stuff... It's cooler to put on your tie-dye shirt, fire up a doobie, and chant "Ron Paul!" And hey, I'll join ya! Pass it over this way, bro! But now, when we come down from our high, we need to face reality again, and understand this very important thing... Ron Paul can't change things by himself.
Click to expand...

Being honest, you always seem to post a novel. It would be nice if you could condense your thoughts a bit.

The legislation is always cut down by the Dems, and "The Marxist REPULICANS" you want me to support.

I never said, or emplied that I didn't support the TEA party. And I don't think that Palin is embraced by true TEA partiers.

When did I say Palin was in congress, or any of the names you bring up?

Other republicans have been on a tax and spend orgy for decades. Are you saying they haven't been?

When did I tell you I smoked dope?

When did I say negative things about the TEA party because of some of their pro bible views?

If I hated TEA party candidates, I wouldn't be sending them money.
 
Liberty said:
Being honest, you always seem to post a novel. It would be nice if you could condense your thoughts a bit.

The legislation is always cut down by the Dems, and "The Marxist REPULICANS" you want me to support.

I never said, or emplied that I didn't support the TEA party. And I don't think that Palin is embraced by true TEA partiers.

When did I say Palin was in congress, or any of the names you bring up?

Other republicans have been on a tax and spend orgy for decades. Are you saying they haven't been?

When did I tell you I smoked dope?

When did I say negative things about the TEA party because of some of their pro bible views?

If I hated TEA party candidates, I wouldn't be sending them money.
Click to expand...
You send them money, wow!
 
Liberty said:
Being honest, you always seem to post a novel. It would be nice if you could condense your thoughts a bit.
Click to expand...

I'm just responding to your comments, you should feel honored that I am actually having dialogue with you, instead of ignoring or ridiculing you.

The legislation is always cut down by the Dems, and "The Marxist REPULICANS" you want me to support.
Click to expand...

Again, the TEA Party candidates I am asking you to consider, have NOT SERVED IN CONGRESS! They weren't there! How the hell did they "cut down" Ron Paul's legislation? Isn't Ron Paul a REPUBLICAN? Doesn't he have an (R) beside his name? How is Ron Paul's view of smaller limited government different from Sara Palin's view of smaller limited government? Are you planning to ever answer my questions, or are you just going to keep defending a particular republican's 40-year congressional record, which has produced NONE of what you seem to advocate?

I never said, or emplied that I didn't support the TEA party. And I don't think that Palin is embraced by true TEA partiers.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what this entire debate has been about, you implied you can't support Palin because she endorsed McCain and Perry. If you don't think Palin is embraced by true TEA partiers, you are a fucking moron who isn't paying attention.

When did I say Palin was in congress, or any of the names you bring up?
Click to expand...

You continue to say that I want you to support "marxist republicans" who have stopped Ron Paul's legislation! I've "sold out" because I am supporting REPUBLICANS, who haven't been any better than the Democrats! You keep wanting to revert to that line of argument, and I keep calling your attention to it, and now you are claiming you never went there!

Other republicans have been on a tax and spend orgy for decades. Are you saying they haven't been?
Click to expand...

Not really. The taxing and spending, for the most part, has come from the Democrat side of the aisle. Most Republicans have campaigned on tax cuts, not increases. People like GW Bush and John McCain, have veered from conservative principles to go along with idiot Dems on spending, but I have been very outspoken on that. They both thought that appeasement of Democrats on some of this stuff, would win them favor with moderates and independents. Trouble is, it pushed away even more true conservatives.

When did I tell you I smoked dope?
Click to expand...

You didn't, I assumed it. You're one of those "libertarian" types who favors legalizing dope, aren't you? Didn't you tout RP's desire to end the war on drugs? Most people from that camp, are dope smokers. Not that I have a problem with that, or ending the war on drugs... but I think we have bigger problems facing America, to be honest. (btw... Palin also favors ending the war on drugs.)

When did I say negative things about the TEA party because of some of their pro bible views?
Click to expand...

Again, I am assuming... you won't answer my questions, so I have to assume things. I am trying to figure out how you can be so 'up the butt' of Ron Paul, and not be willing to give Sara Palin the time of day? Her message, and the TEA party message in general, is pretty much what Ron Paul has always stood for. About the only real difference I can see, is Paul's more libertarian view on social issues, as opposed to the more religiously-based social conservative views, held by Palin and many in the TEA Party.

If I hated TEA party candidates, I wouldn't be sending them money.
Click to expand...

LOL... then why are you attacking me? What are you doing here?
 
Dixie said:
I'm just responding to your comments, you should feel honored that I am actually having dialogue with you, instead of ignoring or ridiculing you.



Again, the TEA Party candidates I am asking you to consider, have NOT SERVED IN CONGRESS! They weren't there! How the hell did they "cut down" Ron Paul's legislation? Isn't Ron Paul a REPUBLICAN? Doesn't he have an (R) beside his name? How is Ron Paul's view of smaller limited government different from Sara Palin's view of smaller limited government? Are you planning to ever answer my questions, or are you just going to keep defending a particular republican's 40-year congressional record, which has produced NONE of what you seem to advocate?



Yes, that's what this entire debate has been about, you implied you can't support Palin because she endorsed McCain and Perry. If you don't think Palin is embraced by true TEA partiers, you are a fucking moron who isn't paying attention.



You continue to say that I want you to support "marxist republicans" who have stopped Ron Paul's legislation! I've "sold out" because I am supporting REPUBLICANS, who haven't been any better than the Democrats! You keep wanting to revert to that line of argument, and I keep calling your attention to it, and now you are claiming you never went there!



Not really. The taxing and spending, for the most part, has come from the Democrat side of the aisle. Most Republicans have campaigned on tax cuts, not increases. People like GW Bush and John McCain, have veered from conservative principles to go along with idiot Dems on spending, but I have been very outspoken on that. They both thought that appeasement of Democrats on some of this stuff, would win them favor with moderates and independents. Trouble is, it pushed away even more true conservatives.



You didn't, I assumed it. You're one of those "libertarian" types who favors legalizing dope, aren't you? Didn't you tout RP's desire to end the war on drugs? Most people from that camp, are dope smokers. Not that I have a problem with that, or ending the war on drugs... but I think we have bigger problems facing America, to be honest. (btw... Palin also favors ending the war on drugs.)



Again, I am assuming... you won't answer my questions, so I have to assume things. I am trying to figure out how you can be so 'up the butt' of Ron Paul, and not be willing to give Sara Palin the time of day? Her message, and the TEA party message in general, is pretty much what Ron Paul has always stood for. About the only real difference I can see, is Paul's more libertarian view on social issues, as opposed to the more religiously-based social conservative views, held by Palin and many in the TEA Party.



LOL... then why are you attacking me? What are you doing here?
Click to expand...
Dear gawd, now there is some genuine Narcissism, I didn't read past the fist comment, I was laughing too hard!

I'm just responding to your comments, you should feel honored that I am actually having dialogue with you, instead of ignoring or ridiculing you.
 
Dixie said:
I'm just responding to your comments, you should feel honored that I am actually having dialogue with you, instead of ignoring or ridiculing you.



Again, the TEA Party candidates I am asking you to consider, have NOT SERVED IN CONGRESS! They weren't there! How the hell did they "cut down" Ron Paul's legislation? Isn't Ron Paul a REPUBLICAN? Doesn't he have an (R) beside his name? How is Ron Paul's view of smaller limited government different from Sara Palin's view of smaller limited government? Are you planning to ever answer my questions, or are you just going to keep defending a particular republican's 40-year congressional record, which has produced NONE of what you seem to advocate?



Yes, that's what this entire debate has been about, you implied you can't support Palin because she endorsed McCain and Perry. If you don't think Palin is embraced by true TEA partiers, you are a fucking moron who isn't paying attention.



You continue to say that I want you to support "marxist republicans" who have stopped Ron Paul's legislation! I've "sold out" because I am supporting REPUBLICANS, who haven't been any better than the Democrats! You keep wanting to revert to that line of argument, and I keep calling your attention to it, and now you are claiming you never went there!



Not really. The taxing and spending, for the most part, has come from the Democrat side of the aisle. Most Republicans have campaigned on tax cuts, not increases. People like GW Bush and John McCain, have veered from conservative principles to go along with idiot Dems on spending, but I have been very outspoken on that. They both thought that appeasement of Democrats on some of this stuff, would win them favor with moderates and independents. Trouble is, it pushed away even more true conservatives.



You didn't, I assumed it. You're one of those "libertarian" types who favors legalizing dope, aren't you? Didn't you tout RP's desire to end the war on drugs? Most people from that camp, are dope smokers. Not that I have a problem with that, or ending the war on drugs... but I think we have bigger problems facing America, to be honest. (btw... Palin also favors ending the war on drugs.)



Again, I am assuming... you won't answer my questions, so I have to assume things. I am trying to figure out how you can be so 'up the butt' of Ron Paul, and not be willing to give Sara Palin the time of day? Her message, and the TEA party message in general, is pretty much what Ron Paul has always stood for. About the only real difference I can see, is Paul's more libertarian view on social issues, as opposed to the more religiously-based social conservative views, held by Palin and many in the TEA Party.



LOL... then why are you attacking me? What are you doing here?
Click to expand...

I think your reply, and comments will suffice Dixie.
 
Fat, ignorant, slothful Americans foolishly believe they choose their leaders, when it is evident they are a nation of debt slaves.

So-called 'democracy' is a farce.
 
Threedee said:
We have enough pointless trolls already...
Click to expand...

If you disagree why dont you have the balls to justify your disagreement.
Here is an abstract from a non American news source. Because you appear incapable of understanding messages without villifying the messenger I will refrain from telling you from whence it comes. It is a genuine pity that so many Americans share the same brain cell.

In his Cairo speech, Obama attributed the blame for some of the misunderstanding between the West and the Muslim world to the acts of terrorism carried out by a minority of Muslims. "The attacks of September 11, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights," he said. But he totally glossed over the fact that before - just as after - 9/11, the US engaged in unjust wars against mainly Muslim countries - a threat that is more potent than any plan to burn Qurans.
If it were not for these wars and a history of US support for the Israeli occupation and dictators in the region, the threat to burn Qurans - as ugly and offensive as it clearly is - would not have been anything more than the act of a small-time minister searching for attention and obsessed with his own prejudices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top