http://content.onlineagency.com/sites/38289/images/Ron-Paul-for-President1.jpg

I am super excited if he runs again. He filed his papers this week and will make it public in the next few weeks.

It will remain to be seen if he can muster up enough votes to win the primary, but I might actually go vote for him in the Republican primaries.

http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/lesforpres.jpg

Now what would be Les's platform????

Sailing ships with cheese
Rasing cars
Big Brown Bevers
Tomas the Cat :o (say baby)
Pork Soda

I'd rather vote for Rue Paul.

BTW for you lefties out there, Ron Paul was the only Republican to not vote for the recent military spending bill.

Rue Paul, Ron Paul

http://laughstore.stores.yahoo.net/patpaulforpr.html

I vote for Pat Paul

I'm holding onto a glimmer of hope that Al Gore will run again, but doubt that he will.

My predictions:
Republicans: NOT McCain, NOT Guilliani, some other dude loses to:

Edwards / O'Bama in '08!

p.s. Primus Still Sucks!!!

Now what would be Les's platform????

Sailing ships with cheese
Rasing cars
Big Brown Bevers
Tomas the Cat :o (say baby)
Pork Soda



**** Blue Collar Tweakers

Vote for me for President! Disc Golf Tournaments to settle disputes or to win a war! Being a bagger will be a new form of treason! Mandatory vacation time for the USDGCs....more to come!

Now what would be Les's platform????



To Defy the Laws of Tradition
Too Many Puppies
American Life
Pork Soda
Bob's Party Time Lounge
Antipop
Electric Uncle Sam
Laquerhead
The Last Superpower aka Rapscallion

I hate to say it, but the best candidates that the Dem's have the "heartland" is not ready for.

The "heartland" will never elect a black man or a woman, no matter who their running mates are.

It is truly a sad state that this country is still in. You still have to be a white, christian, socially conservative, male to be the president.

Bill Clinton is the closest we will probably get to a black president in my lifetime.

Ah, the late great Pat Paulson. That was some funny stuff back in the day.

That is kinda like Randee of the Redwoods.

Anyone remember this
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/uZvSRBBsl2k"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/uZvSRBBsl2k" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I'd rather vote for Rue Paul.



Why vote for some 6ft black transvestite over a good presidential canidate????? Ron Paul would be a great president. I guarantee it. He never would have put us in Iraq, he would have probably already got rid of our national debt. He would never sign a bill that ment more taxes. He has done something like 8 terms in the house already. Look up his voting record.

I also guarantee he would vote against a higher minimum wage bill too.

The Ron Paul
FREEDOM PRINCIPLES

-Rights belong to individuals, not groups.

-Property should be owned by people, not government.

-All voluntary associations should be permissible -- economic and social.

-The government's monetary role is to maintain the integrity of the monetary unit, not participate in fraud.

-Government exists to protect liberty, not to redistribute wealth or to grant special privileges.

-The lives and actions of people are their own responsibility, not the government's.

I voted for Andre Marrou / Nancy Lord back in the day and actually got to meet them both on separate occasions. I found them to be the only sane alternative to the drug war, (which i hate every bit as much as the war in iraq.)

Now that the back in the day days are back in the day, I realize that the inevitable result of a true libertarian society would be markets gone wild. Competiton at all costs and with no restraints would produce a very small number of mega-mega-corporations that destroy the environment, produce dangerous products, are minimally concerned with worker safety and result in a very few mega-mega-rich people a large population of worker bee types, and a huge outcast/criminal class.

i.e. George Bush must be a libertarian!

ARNOLD!!!

I'd rather vote for Rue Paul.



Les Paul?

http://www.hudobne-nastroje.sk/img_products/Gibson-Les-Paul-Classic.jpg

The "heartland" will never elect a black man or a woman, no matter who their running mates are.


Can't wait to repost this quote after O'Bama wins the 2016 election following 8 years as VP to John Edwards!!!

ARNOLD!!!


http://www.repmanblog.com/photos/uncategorized/gary_coleman1.jpg

The "heartland" will never elect a black man or a woman, no matter who their running mates are.


Can't wait to repost this quote after O'Bama wins the 2016 election following 8 years as VP to John Edwards!!!



Hey, O'Bama is my man, he is who I will vote for in the primary and November elections if he makes it.

I would love to be proved wrong...I would love to find out that the hidden bigotry that I have witnessed disappear. Yes, please....PROVE ME WRONG!

Can't wait for the far right to get ahold of Obama's books and try to use them against him....

didn't stop Clinton (puff, puff) or Bush (problem drinker, cocaine user, draft dodger, C student, failed businessman, and male cheerleader)

or Bush (problem drinker, cocaine user, draft dodger, C student, failed businessman, and male cheerleader)


...you clearly forgot IDIOT-LOSER in your list.

The "heartland" will never elect a black man or a woman, no matter who their running mates are.


Can't wait to repost this quote after O'Bama wins the 2016 election following 8 years as VP to John Edwards!!!



Hey, O'Bama is my man, he is who I will vote for in the primary and November elections if he makes it.

I would love to be proved wrong...I would love to find out that the hidden bigotry that I have witnessed disappear. Yes, please....PROVE ME WRONG!



Perhaps by 2016 the heartland will have moved beyond this. Let's at least hope so. But I have to agree that in 2008, it will be an issue for a sizeable percentage of heartland voters.

I'll be looking for 8 more years of Clinton.

If I could only sell short "stocks" of presidential candiates. I'd fund my retirement betting that Hillary is going to tank.

You won't see any of these three names at the top of any presidential ticket: Clinton, McCain, and Guilliani. (Clinton and Guilliani might make it onto a ticket as VP)

If I could only sell short "stocks" of presidential candiates. I'd fund my retirement betting that Hillary is going to tank.

You won't see any of these three names at the top of any presidential ticket: Clinton, McCain, and Guilliani. (Clinton and Guilliani might make it onto a ticket as VP)



What, again, has Guilliani done since 9/11 besides be mentioned as a potential President/VP candidate? :confused:

He hosted Saturday Night Live!

along with many, many other television appearances. money and (positive) media are what it takes to become president

then the election should come down to Oprah vs. The Donald ;)

then the election should come down to Oprah vs. The Donald ;)



The two contending tickets:

Oprah/Dr. Phil
vs.
The Donald/Simon Cowell

I'd sure love to see Oprah tearin' up Hillary in the primaries, that'd be a real battle, cuz it'll be waay too easy for Oprah to get The Donald fired up enough in a debate to turn every woman, minority, and overweight person in the country against him. Of course, Barbara Walters would have to be the moderator.

Oprah by a landslide...if ya' don't think a woman/or person of color could win...just get her name on a ballot. It would happen, even in the heartland

Oprah by a landslide...if ya' don't think a woman/or person of color could win...just get her name on a ballot. It would happen, even in the heartland



The majority of Oprah's fan base are white middle aged women. That demographic holds a lot of financial power in this world. Either directly or indirectly through spousal influence.

"IF" Oprah ran for office, you would see the % of White Middle Aged female voters increase drastically. Also the black demographic in general would support her.

It would be an interesting statistic to see if Oprah would run.

just don't lie to Oprah! (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.ihateoprah.com/osp2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.ihateoprah.com/oprahonsouthpark.htm&h=270&w=350&sz=24&hl=en&start=3&tbnid=WWi3n4p14wKEgM:&tbnh=93&tbnw=120&prev=/images%3Fq%3Doprah%2Bsouth%2Bpark%26svnum%3D10%26h l%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dopera%26rls %3Den%26sa%3DN)

I voted for Andre Marrou / Nancy Lord back in the day and actually got to meet them both on separate occasions. I found them to be the only sane alternative to the drug war, (which i hate every bit as much as the war in iraq.) <font color="red"> Voted for them too </font>

Now that the back in the day days are back in the day, I realize that the inevitable result of a true libertarian society would be markets gone wild. <font color="red"> now if the stock markets go wild, isn't that a good thing?? </font> Competiton at all costs and with no restraints would produce a very small number of mega-mega-corporations that destroy the environment, <font color="red"> How do you figure that, does Microsoft destry the enviroment??????? </font> produce dangerous products, <font color="red"> You produce a dangerous product, you are going to get sued out of business. </font> are minimally concerned with worker safety <font color="red"> Again, why would a company open them selves up to being sued. Does not make business sence. </font> and result in a very few mega-mega-rich people a large population of worker bee types, and a huge outcast/criminal class. <font color="red"> it opens up your freedom to start your business and thrive if you do it right. That is the American way. </font>

i.e. George Bush must be a libertarian!

<font color="red"> While George Bush does have some Libertarian ideas, he is not a true Libertarian. He never would have invaded Iraq. </font>

Let me give you some economic principles.

1st, supply and demand. The larger the supply, the less the demand and the cheaper a product becomes. The government currently passes law to reduce products to keep the prices artificially high. This hurts the small business more than it helps them. It just gives big corporations more profit for not producing as much as they can. If the big corporation (IE Microsoft) start charging too much or have an inferior product, others will pop up charging less or having better products.

(got to get some stuff done, will post more later)

just don't lie to Oprah! (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.ihateoprah.com/osp2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.ihateoprah.com/oprahonsouthpark.htm&h=270&w=350&sz=24&hl=en&start=3&tbnid=WWi3n4p14wKEgM:&tbnh=93&tbnw=120&prev=/images%3Fq%3Doprah%2Bsouth%2Bpark%26svnum%3D10%26h l%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dopera%26rls %3Den%26sa%3DN)


:D

S&D and markets by themselves do nothing to incorporate externalities into the prices of goods and services. If businesses were free to do whatever they wanted to lower costs, competition would force the elimination of all pollution controls as it would be cheaper to produce without having to spend the money on such economically unwarranted items. The air and water quality of the earth would be substantially degraded as a result. Of course, it wouldn't matter to the 10 really, really rich dudes that owned everything as they would be able to afford the latest and greatest in personal environmental control systems for their houses, offices, cars, and outdoor suits if need be. Also, in the event that their lungs were destroyed by breathing the caustic air that their factories created they would be first in line for synthetic organs, as well as having the option of relocating to satellite communities that S&D would dictate open outside our blackened atmoshphere.

S&D and markets by themselves do nothing to incorporate externalities into the prices of goods and services. If businesses were free to do whatever they wanted to lower costs, competition would force the elimination of all pollution controls as it would be cheaper to produce without having to spend the money on such economically unwarranted items. The air and water quality of the earth would be substantially degraded as a result. Of course, it wouldn't matter to the 10 really, really rich dudes that owned everything as they would be able to afford the latest and greatest in personal environmental control systems for their houses, offices, cars, and outdoor suits if need be. Also, in the event that their lungs were destroyed by breathing the caustic air that their factories created they would be first in line for synthetic organs, as well as having the option of relocating to satellite communities that S&D would dictate open outside our blackened atmoshphere.



Again, companies want to avoid law suits. If they are destroying the enviroment that effects you, then you have the right to sue them. You could sue them for damages to yourself (or property you own) or you could sue them to clean it up.

If you want to protect an area of forrest or grasslands, you for a non profit and buy the land. It is that simple. The Sierra Club (http://www.sierraclub.org/) is a GREAT example of this, so is Ducks Unlimited (http://www.ducks.org/conservation/).

Again, you seem to think only the rich get richer. I totally disagree, if you work on it, anyone in a free society can get rich. Some will do better than others, but in my opinion, those that don't want people to get rich are poor and don't want to work.

http://images.chron.com/content/chronicle/special/ryan/photos/5000k.jpg

but............After the BUSH family, a Texan may never step foot on 1600 Pennsylvania Ave ever again! :eek:

Again, companies want to avoid law suits. If they are destroying the enviroment that effects you, then you have the right to sue them. You could sue them for damages to yourself (or property you own) or you could sue them to clean it up.

If you want to protect an area of forrest or grasslands, you for a non profit and buy the land. It is that simple. The Sierra Club (http://www.sierraclub.org/) is a GREAT example of this, so is Ducks Unlimited (http://www.ducks.org/conservation/).

Again, you seem to think only the rich get richer. I totally disagree, if you work on it, anyone in a free society can get rich. Some will do better than others, but in my opinion, those that don't want people to get rich are poor and don't want to work.



So what happpens when the laws are written by the companies you're trying to sue? Our society is much closer to a kleptocracy thatn a democracy. Sure some people struggle out of poverty in the US today but don't act like all it takes is a little hard work.

Again, companies want to avoid law suits.



That hasn't been the case for many companies that have gotten sweetheart settlement deals under the Bushies. Our government agencies that are charged with protecting the environment have wanted a way in which they can consistently weaken the effect of environmental laws without appearing to be weak on environmental protection. They have found it by settling most suits out of court in closed sessions that environmental experts were not allowed to attend. Basically they invited the companies that they were supposed to be prosecuting in to give them everything they wanted. The beauty of the system is that nothing can be appealed to a higher court as signed settlements are binding and permanent. It smacks of the same philosophy of the presidents legislative signing statements and secret spying on Americans. (Only now are they backpeddling on the spying programs to CTA as the heat's about to come down on them.)

There's a few big problems with your "sue 'em if they pollute argument". First of all, most environmental disasters aren't like the Exxon Valdez. Most happen gradually, over time, and the damages caused to individuals is difficult to prove. (If people can't win cases against McDonald's that they visited 4-5 times a week for causing obesity, how will they win against a coal plant 50 miles away.) Many, many people have their quality of life diminished in ways that are impossible to quantify from pollution. There's the unsightly brown air, foul smell, effects on clothes and house paint, and thousands of minor breathing problems that will never be compensated for even though those individuals suffer one breath at a time. The world would need about a million more Erin Brockovich's for that plan to work.

If the legislative and executive branches as elected by the people ever went over completely libertarian, what do you think would happen to the courts? Being appointed by the executive branch, the courts would get stacked with libertarians as well.

As the newly minted libertarians would all still be beholden to the corporate money that got them elected, the corporation would be the most important "individual" in our society.

Don't get me wrong, there is a point where business would have to care about the environment. When the production and use of their product began to cause enough disability and death of their workers and customers that their ROI fell below that of an average mutual fund, they would have to change their business model or get out of the industry.

Seriously, I think the libertarians could become a lot more viable if they focused on individual rights, shrinking the war machine (drug and otherwise), and consequently lowering taxes and toned down their utopia-speak. basically being true to what the republicans claim to be for: "less taxes, more freedom". when they start talking about dismantling government agencies they lose a lot of people.

So what happpens when the laws are written by the companies you're trying to sue? Our society is much closer to a kleptocracy thatn a democracy. Sure some people struggle out of poverty in the US today but don't act like all it takes is a little hard work.



A little luck helps, but anyone can improve themselves if they actually try, I know a lot of people who put themselves through school and live the american dream.

Seriously, I think the libertarians could become a lot more viable if they focused on individual rights, shrinking the war machine (drug and otherwise), and consequently lowering taxes and toned down their utopia-speak. basically being true to what the republicans claim to be for: "less taxes, more freedom". when they start talking about dismantling government agencies they lose a lot of people.



I agree 100% with this statement. I wish the Libertarian party would tone down the "legalize it" stand and concentrate more on "no new taxes" and eliminating government waste.

Don't forget that several libertarians have been elected to positions that they elimentated. In Texas, we electe a county clerk. Libertarians run for these offices to eleminate them. They have been sucsessfull several times over the years.

The City of Carrollton that I live in if very Libertarian. We have eliminated the solid waste department and some of the streets department. (the streets department is run like a business, they have to bid on the job just like private business) Just about anything the city can outsourse, like bill collecting, has been outsoursed. (city property taxes are collected by Dallas country now)

off LP.org
Corruption has become epidemic on Capitol Hill. Politicians from both parties have violated the law and betrayed the public's trust. Last fall, Republican Congressman Duke Cunningham pleaded guilty to accepting $2.4 million in bribes. The Washington Post reported on May 22, 2006 that Democratic Congressman William J. Jefferson was caught on videotape accepting $100,000 from a Virginia businessman who was wearing an FBI wire.



Congress has sought to blame lobbyists and their undue influence over its members. Several lobbying and ethics reform solutions have been proposed. Some of the proposals include requiring lobbyists to file more frequent financial disclosures, and implementing more restrictions on meals and gifts that lobbyists can give to members of Congress.



These proposals will not solve the root cause of corruption on Capitol Hill. The expansion of federal power has lead to a crisis of corruption. Special interest groups seek favors from members of Congress because they have passed a myriad of laws and regulations that intrude into every aspect of our economy and private lives. Also, the federal government has co-opted many of the responsibilities of state and local governments, furthering its expansion.



To effectively prevent corruption, the influence of the federal government must be curtailed. The size of the federal government should be significantly reduced with power returned to the states and the people.

Perhaps it is because I work for Tarrant County, but I do not like the idea of privatizing government jobs.
Actually I am against privating because I do not feel it is run with the people first, but with the economics first.
I see this in some of what has already been privatized. Oh, and most of time when government jobs are cut, others take their place.

This essay is kinda old, but is still relivent. Denny read this and then tell me what you think.

Libertarian Enviroment (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~callib/docs/environment-notes.html)

Pizza:

Thanks for the post. I've gotta run to work on a new course project, but will read it and respond Sunday night.

Perhaps it is because I work for Tarrant County, but I do not like the idea of privatizing government jobs.
Actually I am against privating because I do not feel it is run with the people first, but with the economics first.
I see this in some of what has already been privatized. Oh, and most of time when government jobs are cut, others take their place.



In Houston Country Tenn, they recently had a vote to incorporate the city of Erin and the County into one government. (Nashville/Davison county already did this) This gives you one streets/roads department, one police force (instead of Sheriff and city police) same with Utilities.

some within the city of Erin fought the proposal because they could possibly loose there jobs.

1st, the mayor (a paid position BTW) apointed his 4 people on the committe as all government workers. The County Mayor (paid less BTW) appointed retired business leader like my dad.

This was the end of my dads political carear in a way. My dad was well liked by several of the people effected by this proposal. It was written in a way to avoid job loss (something my dad is good at) and would have saved the town of Erin from going bankrupt.

It was voted down 60/40. Some people my dad considered friends quit talking to him and started to ingore him. These people did not look at the big picture, only that so and so "could" loose there job and pension. (county employees do not get a pension, city employees have a huge pension that is close to being bankrupt)

The City of Erin depents on government grants to stay afloat. They do not collect enough taxes to pay for there current budget. If it were not for the state of Tenn, they would have already been bankrupt. Yet even with this looming over there heads, the did not vote for a solution.

That is our government at work folks. My dad and Uncle worked hard for the future of the City of Erin and Houston County, yet a few city employees spread rumors and basicly lied to keep there jobs secure.

New courses are always good and take priority over a good argument :D

BTW for those that want to know who will be running in 2008, here is the list.
wiki 2008 election (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election%2C_2008)

Lets see.............

Clinton/Obama..........

That way Pelosi would be president within a month..... :p

See what you get? :eek:

I quickly read the article and find this statement to best sum it up:


Here the standard should not be whether a sensitive device can detect some miniscule amount of chemicals but whether the pollution could actually harm someone or their property.




Basically we'd have to wait until people start dying from some harm caused to the environment by a company and then the families of the deceased could sue and maybe win and then maybe the company would stop the practice or maybe they'd just chalk it up to a cost of doing business and keep doing the same thing. Too bad that the people affected would never be able to reap the rewards of the air/water maybe recovering after a significant period of non-pollution, cuz they'd be DEAD.

That assumes the company is irresponsible.

Yes, there have been many irresponsible companies in the past. Did that stop them before?????? No.

TXU wants to build several coal burning plants in texas for future electrical needs. (texas is on it's own grid, we are close to maxing out our needs with current production)

These new plants will be the most advanced technology availabble and will burn MUCH cleaner than the current plants in production.

Yet they are fighting an uphill battle to get them built.

Stupid. Texans already pay some of the highest electric bills in the country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Without more electric production, supply and demand will cause the price to go up even more.

Stupid stupid stupid.

Of course I would like to see several new NUKE plants build. Much cleaner and produces less pollution. (of course wind and water are the best options)

the word that's off limits politicially regarding energy is Conservation.

The biggest problem is that we don't try hard enough politicially to build laws, transportation systems, and an economy where more people are more prosperous while consuming much less on a per-capita basis.

Our national pre-occupation is with GNP and stock market growth. Neither one of these numbers really tell us much about the true "wealth" of our nation. We can build billions of dollars worth of arms and then blow up a whole bunch of stuff and then pay one or two companies billions and billions to rebuild what we just blew up and the GNP will grow!

Since this is the highest current political thread I am posting this here. It's an article about how Cheney's people manipulated the press during the Plame case. It's pretty disgusting, regardless of your politics (that is, I'm confident both sides do this).

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070127/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cheney_under_fire

What's incredible is how well they played the press, taking advantage or their competitive nature and how they operate.

http://content.onlineagency.com/sites/38289/images/Ron-Paul-for-President1.jpg



There was a great NPR interview with Ron last week. I have to agree, while I don't love his politics, at least the guy is honest! An anomaly in todays world, an honest politician...

If I had a Gun to my head , I would vote for Obama first.

I just heard , Hillary Clinton , sold out on her personal Campaign Financing , to pursue more corrupt Financing so she can win !!!!!!! :mad: And she would say " I don't Recall " !!!! :mad: Indicted " C" ( hunt minus the h ).

She would sell out America to more Foreign countries than her late husband !!!!!!

Who is really getting blown here ? The American public. :mad:

Sorry about my anger and hate towards American politics.
It's just sad that people suffer because of those who don't really care in this world. :(

im voting 4 giulianni

im voting 4 giulianni



What's your basis for Guilianni? Just curious.

im voting 4 giulianni



What's your basis for Guilianni? Just curious.



He saved NYC after 9/11 and then...then...then...um...then...

im voting 4 giulianni



What's your basis for Guilianni? Just curious.



He saved NYC after 9/11 and then...then...then...um...then...



That is still debatable....maybe substituting some other word instead of "saved" would be more appropriate.

Some leaders get lucky from disaster.....

That still does not make them good leaders.

im voting 4 giulianni



What's your basis for Guilianni? Just curious.



He saved NYC after 9/11 and then...then...then...um...then...



That is still debatable....maybe substituting some other word instead of "saved" would be more appropriate.

Some leaders get lucky from disaster.....

That still does not make them good leaders.



I think the average American knows who he is !!!!! He has both the Firefighters and Police network voting for him and doing fundraisers !!!!!!

Wasn't he even on Saturday Night Live ? :D

Predictions:

Guilliani bails before '08.

McCaine runs a strong primary campaign and comes in a close second to some other dude.

Hillary supporters jump ship in droves as they realize she can't beat some other dude in the general election.

Edwards/O'Bama win a tight race against some other dude.

unless . . . Al Gore completes his quest to find Manbearpig and returns to politics where he's needed :)

Kris, my point exactly about Guiliani. ;)

Of course, I admit Obama has done less, but he seems to carry the "it" factor and is the breath of fresh air that is sorely lacking in DC.

(Plus, he can pronounce nuclear. :) )

unless . . . Al Gore completes his quest to find Manbearpig and returns to politics where he's needed :)



lol, now that was funny :D

Actually, what really bothers me about Gore is the fact he can't come to grips that he lost the election due to our election process.

Denny, I think you are dead on with your predictions. MS Clinton will never be elected. Rice has a better chance and he is not going to run. (I would prefer that no one from the Bush admin run)

I am still pushing for Ron Paul, I read up on some articles about Dr. No and hope he makes a run at it. He has already ruffeled some feathers of Libertarians on a few of his policies.

:eek: :eek: Hillary - with Bill Clintoris as VP. :eek: :eek:

unless . . . Al Gore completes his quest to find Manbearpig and returns to politics where he's needed :)



lol, now that was funny :D

Actually, what really bothers me about Gore is the fact he can't come to grips that he lost the election due to our election process.

Denny, I think you are dead on with your predictions. MS Clinton will never be elected. Rice has a better chance and he is not going to run. (I would prefer that no one from the Bush admin run)

I am still pushing for Ron Paul, I read up on some articles about Dr. No and hope he makes a run at it. He has already ruffeled some feathers of Libertarians on a few of his policies.



Gee, and here I thought he lost it due to a Supreme Court decision... /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

lets not go there again. Gore was trying to get recounts in only 3 counties that were heavy democratic. The state law on recounts says the whole state.

If Gore had WON the court case, he would have STILL lost the election.

Mr. Bender, you have no time to delve into the political arena as your child is in need of a burping...... :eek:

unless . . . Al Gore completes his quest to find Manbearpig and returns to politics where he's needed :)



lol, now that was funny :D

Actually, what really bothers me about Gore is the fact he can't come to grips that he lost the election due to our election process.

Denny, I think you are dead on with your predictions. MS Clinton will never be elected. Rice has a better chance and he is not going to run. (I would prefer that no one from the Bush admin run)

I am still pushing for Ron Paul, I read up on some articles about Dr. No and hope he makes a run at it. He has already ruffeled some feathers of Libertarians on a few of his policies.



Actually, referring to Rice as "he" is what's funny. And accurate?

lets not go there again. Gore was trying to get recounts in only 3 counties that were heavy democratic. The state law on recounts says the whole state.

If Gore had WON the court case, he would have STILL lost the election.



Gee, and here I thought the Supreme Court decided who was President... :D

yea, I noticed that typo yesterday when reading your post.

You can't tell me you think the court really gave Bush the election, can you? I know you are smarter than that.

yea, I noticed that typo yesterday when reading your post.

You can't tell me you think the court really gave Bush the election, can you? I know you are smarter than that.



You would think that after all the evidence that this government lies to us, about spying on us, WMD, and many other things, that you might be a little sceptical...

This is a BBC piece by Greg Palast. You need Real Player to watch it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/cta/progs/newsnight/palast.ram

You might ask why this has never been covered in the U.S. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

BTW - lest you believe this ended in 2000, read this article, also from the BBC, about 2004.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/3956129.stm#

lets not go there again. Gore was trying to get recounts in only 3 counties that were heavy democratic. The state law on recounts says the whole state.

If Gore had WON the court case, he would have STILL lost the election.



Gee, and here I thought the Supreme Court decided who was President... :D



BTW - here's something for you to think about...

Votes don�t �spoil� because they are left out of the fridge. Vote spoilage, at root, is a class problem. Just as poor and minority districts wind up with shoddy schools and shoddy hospitals, they are stuck with shoddy ballot machines. In Gadsden, the only black-majority county in Florida, one in eight votes spoiled in 2000, the worst countywide record in the state. Next door in Leon County (Tallahassee), which used the same paper ballot, the mostly white, wealthier county lost almost no votes. The difference was that in mostly-white Leon, each voting booth was equipped with its own optical scanner, with which voters could check their own ballots. In the black county, absent such �second-chance� equipment, any error would void a vote.

fun hillary (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo) video

Predictions:

Guilliani bails before '08.

McCaine runs a strong primary campaign and comes in a close second to some other dude.




Possible "other dudes":
http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/sag/sag_awards_2004_photos/fred_thompson/sag.jpg

http://www.eisenhowerinstitute.org/photographs/Hagel1.jpg

Predictions:

Guilliani bails before '08.

McCaine runs a strong primary campaign and comes in a close second to some other dude.




Another possible "other dude":
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/Michael_Bloomberg_speech.jpg/250px-Michael_Bloomberg_speech.jpg

president Brian Graham

president Brian Graham


I don't know Brian, but given the magical power to go back in time and replace dub-ya with Mr Graham, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

who dub ya?

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Uem3OIp6kzU"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Uem3OIp6kzU" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Bill tried to stump Dr Paul, but listen to the audiance and see who won this debate. Dr. Paul comes out pretty good in the end. (and what is this with Bill talking about the Civil War, does he not know that history repeats itself? we are suppose to learn from our history)

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pJzfS8ZhRSg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pJzfS8ZhRSg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-Bze5xpW1v4"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-Bze5xpW1v4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jyUcrBQIiJI"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jyUcrBQIiJI" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I agree with 80-90% of what he says. I think it's a travesty that our two major parties collude to keep other voices out of the forefront of the public exchange of ideas.

The times that the democrats have fought to not allow libertarians and/or Nader to be a part of the pres. debates have been particularly disgusting. Their actions show that they aren't truly interested in being a part of a real democratic process with an informed electorate, they want to win.

Sidenote on the Hillary front: given our limited amount of ideas that are "sanitized" for mass consumption, it's no surprise people think of Hillary as a liberal: She's NOT!

I don't like her for her position on the war, I don't like her for her lack of sincerity and ego-motivation, but the main reason that I don't like her is that she's not liberal enough. But people still think of her that way.

Thank you for watching Denny, This is his first video telling why he was thinking about running.

What is funny is that the "debate" scheduled for April was turned down by McCain and Guliani (or however you spell it)

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AH1qN4kAsMk"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AH1qN4kAsMk" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I truely believe if you watch these videos and see what Dr. Paul says it is hard to not support him.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2VzHDxYxKrE"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2VzHDxYxKrE" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

In this interview, Dr Paul talks about the worthless money our government prints. He advocates going back to the gold standard so our money is worth something other than good faith. (our money right now is backed by China and Saudi Arabia in a round about way)

Dr Paul is in the May debate :D Look for him to take over.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tPoFXl97wv4"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tPoFXl97wv4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

The May debate with fellow Republicans?

Is so, that's awesome news! :)

Yes that is correct, it is the Republican primary debate.

BTW, did you know that Dr. Paul is the only presidential canitate (from both parties) that voted against the war in Iraq and has already come out against a war with Iran.

One thing I like about Dr. Paul is that he actually works in government but does not surcome to peer pressure. He is known as Dr. NO because is sometimes is the only "NO" vote on a subject.

For instance, he votes against giving gold medels to public figures. He is against the government spending money for these medals. He has offered to donate $100 of his own money to pay for these awards and has asked those that voted yes to do the same. They choose instead to have us pay for it.

Kinda reminds me of the Hawkgammon membership deal. It was proposed as a vote, but a membership was given via donations. That was very Ron Paul like.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/O3RJVDe4oS4"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/O3RJVDe4oS4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LhSEeD1xYM0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LhSEeD1xYM0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/v6ZwHhl_gbY"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/v6ZwHhl_gbY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I agree with 80-90% of what he says. I think it's a travesty that our two major parties collude to keep other voices out of the forefront of the public exchange of ideas.

The times that the democrats have fought to not allow libertarians and/or Nader to be a part of the pres. debates have been particularly disgusting. Their actions show that they aren't truly interested in being a part of a real democratic process with an informed electorate, they want to win.



A few years ago, the state legislature of Oklahoma, in their infinite wisdom, introduced and passed a bill that excludes any candidate NOT a member of the two major parties from our ballot. Voters registered as independents cannot vote in primaries.
Representatives on both sides of the aisle were/are responsible for this travesty.
If your state's politicians are compared to those in Louisiana (no offense, those of you from Louisiana), there's a very stinky fish in your capitol city. :mad:

Amen Paul...when I was a registered Okie it always ticked me off that I couldn't vote in primary elections

and the majority democrat state always elects a republican gov.

Bring Back Bellmon :D

A few years ago, the state legislature of Oklahoma, in their infinite wisdom, introduced and passed a bill that excludes any candidate NOT a member of the two major parties from our ballot.


Thanks for pointing that out. It's a rare example of the parties having the chutzpah to go public with their collusion. Usually it's done behind the scenes. I saw a survey a few years back stating that 80% of high school seniors thought the constitution created the two-party system.


Voters registered as independents cannot vote in primaries.


I don't have a problem with this. In 2000 I was one of many non-republicans that enjoyed helping John McCaine win the Michigan primary, but felt that I shouldn't have been allowed to do it.

I actually think that parties should be allowed to run their primaries in any way they see fit, but that the government shouldn't play any part in conducting primary elections. This would include including/excluding anyone for any reason they see fit such. Each party that meets basic ballot requirements would be able to have one candidate for each open position listed on the ballot.

Probably the biggest change I'd like to see, election-wise, would be for the final elections to be financed completely by public funds. Each candidate who's party has met the basic ballot requirements and been nominated to be on the ballot would have a set amount of public funds to spend on media, travel, staff, etc.

Voters registered as independents cannot vote in primaries.


I don't have a problem with this. In 2000 I was one of many non-republicans that enjoyed helping John McCaine win the Michigan primary, but felt that I shouldn't have been allowed to do it.



I DO have a problem with it...I realize your point is that you shouldn't have been permitted to load the vote one direction or the other to satisfy your own desire to vote AGAINST someone, but placing restrictions on voters on the basis of "they're doing this unfairly to skew the numbers" is not a legitimate argument, IMHO. Ultimately, the fact that I'm not a 'member' of either of the 'Big 2' parties denies me the opportunity to express my own views by casting a vote for the person I consider the most qualified candidate. My voice is not represented simply because I refuse to be pigeonholed.
As I remember it, one of the primary reasons the Revolutionary War was started was on the basis of taxation without representation--I'm paying my taxes, but my voice is restricted simply because I believe I should have the freedom to vote across party lines if I consider the candidate on the 'other side' to be more qualified. Any Democrat, Republican or member of any other party, even if no party at all, should have the freedom to make that choice for themselves.

hey, remember that debate last week (I posted it on another thread)

here is an interesting fact about the canidates.

All of them few private jets.

Only Bidon owns his own.

The rest are Chartered or owned by corporations or Unions.

web page (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/27/candidates.planes.ap/index.html)

Fun to see Rep. Paul stand strong against the war.

I got a kick out of seeing three of the ten raise their hands to say they don't believe in the theory of evolution. And these guys are running for president!

Hands down, this "other dude" had the best showing and will probably jump up 4-5% in the next set of polls:
http://blogs.nydailynews.com/dailypolitics/archives/MittRomney.jpg

Can't wait till someone posts it on the net. I want to see it bad.

I got an email from Ron Paul saying he excepted an invitation to debate in SC on May 15th. Seems kinda quick, it is suppose to be telivised on FOX.

Found it on MSNBC. Just watched the whole thing.

Never heard Reagan mentioned so much, by almost everyone BUT Dr. Paul. He would have stated how much government grew during the Reagan administration.

They also never got around to Dr. Paul on the abortion issue. He is VERY pro life, however feels it is up to the states to make there own laws. Federal government had no business there.

Dr. Paul did pretty good. Answered most of the questions well. But I am afraid I agree with you, Romney the Morman did win this debate. (of course he got to answer all the questions asked?)

I did not like a lot of the questions asked. They were almost all loaded and did not really do a good job asking there views.

I mean what kinda question is it when you ask about Bill in the White house again.

In case you missed the debates, Ron Pauls debate answers.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/peBGJwE9NXo"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/peBGJwE9NXo" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

This is a great interview, only because Ron Paul shows up to this guys dorm room to be on his YouTube interview web site.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vjQwIcy4OTU"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vjQwIcy4OTU" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/umGpLGbWs9U"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/umGpLGbWs9U" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mtzq8tXMmHE"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mtzq8tXMmHE" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DBST0q5Doi8"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DBST0q5Doi8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I did not like a lot of the questions asked. They were almost all loaded and did not really do a good job asking there views.




Yeah, I find Chris Mathews entertaining, but don't think he was the best choice for moderator. Tucker would have been a better choice.

A speech Ron Paul gave to the Farm Food Voices DC 2007 Legislative Reception on 2/14/07.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2HdmcZrDKyQ"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2HdmcZrDKyQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Watch this, bad interviewers do not let the person they are interviewing answer the question. It gets so bad the guy next to him as to end the interview. (and he agreed with Ron Paul too)

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/i2fxzliDhSk"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/i2fxzliDhSk" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Ron Paul gets all the media buzz after the debate. I see why peoeple don't like the republicans, anyone who does not look at our past actions in the middle east and says they did not help cause 9/11 is an idiot. No question about it.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FXE45ncH1a8"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FXE45ncH1a8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

pre debate interview. i love the last comment, it came SO true

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/cfe9dBJ4hgc"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/cfe9dBJ4hgc" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Pizza: I'd hate to have to pay your phone bill next month after the 20,000 text messages you sent last night! :)

I loved watching those FOX guys poo-poo their own poll after the fact as being meaningless.

The real question is why does someone who is as smart as Guilliani ignore this? The issue is so clear that it isn't funny. Now, with all things there is no black and white. Saying it's all our fault is as stupid as saying they did it because they hate our freedoms.

Paul made one mistake, he actually believes in telling the truth. He won't lie to get himself into office. I don't agree with the man but if it were him against Hillary I'd have to vote for Paul; even though I don't agree with him, I'd vote for his honesty. Unfortuantly, that will never happen.

BTW - I really wish this guy wasn't a Libertarian, I really like his general philosophy, I just think his notion of entitlement is off. He has a standard conservative postion, everyone on the dole is obviously taking advantage. This is as wrong as thinking we've never done anything wrong in the world.

if it were him against Hillary I'd have to vote for Paul; even though I don't agree with him, I'd vote for his honesty. Unfortuantly, that will never happen.


Regardless of whom the two major parties nominate, you can vote for whoever you want in the election. I will vote for my favorite candidate whether or not he/she's been nominated by the Republicrats.

I think, particularly in light of next year's soon to be super-duper-tuesday, that the presidential election process has become even more loaded to the super rich and their friends. The field will realisticly be narrowed to two candidates in February! I think the whole two-party primary system needs to go away.

Have a primary election that narrows the field to any candidate that gets 5% or more of the vote, regardless of party affiliation or lack thereof, and then utilize only public funds for debates, ads, or whatever.

BTW - I really wish this guy wasn't a Libertarian, I really like his general philosophy, I just think his notion of entitlement is off. He has a standard conservative postion, everyone on the dole is obviously taking advantage. This is as wrong as thinking we've never done anything wrong in the world.



Why do you say you wish he was not libertarian???? He became a libertarian because he was frustrated with what the Republican party was becomming under Reagan. He joined in 1987 and then ran for president as a libertarian in 1988. He ran for office again for state Rep as a Republican because he felt it was the only way to get elected, and he wants to truely make a differance.

BTW, did you know it outseated an incombant???? People in the Galveston area know who he is and what he stands for, that is why he keeps getting elected even though the Powers of the Republican party want him out.

if it were him against Hillary I'd have to vote for Paul; even though I don't agree with him, I'd vote for his honesty. Unfortuantly, that will never happen.


Regardless of whom the two major parties nominate, you can vote for whoever you want in the election. I will vote for my favorite candidate whether or not he/she's been nominated by the Republicrats.

I think, particularly in light of next year's soon to be super-duper-tuesday, that the presidential election process has become even more loaded to the super rich and their friends. The field will realisticly be narrowed to two candidates in February! I think the whole two-party primary system needs to go away.

Have a primary election that narrows the field to any candidate that gets 5% or more of the vote, regardless of party affiliation or lack thereof, and then utilize only public funds for debates, ads, or whatever.



I've done this in every election except one, the last Presidential. In 2000, I voted for Nader; one of the outcomes of that is that we got Bush as President. As much as I hate to admit it, if an someone as dumb as Bush is running this time, I will vote for the candidate most likely to beat him... period.

BTW - I really wish this guy wasn't a Libertarian, I really like his general philosophy, I just think his notion of entitlement is off. He has a standard conservative postion, everyone on the dole is obviously taking advantage. This is as wrong as thinking we've never done anything wrong in the world.



Why do you say you wish he was not libertarian???? He became a libertarian because he was frustrated with what the Republican party was becomming under Reagan. He joined in 1987 and then ran for president as a libertarian in 1988. He ran for office again for state Rep as a Republican because he felt it was the only way to get elected, and he wants to truely make a differance.

BTW, did you know it outseated an incombant???? People in the Galveston area know who he is and what he stands for, that is why he keeps getting elected even though the Powers of the Republican party want him out.



Because Libertarians have an unrealistic view of taxation and government, and government�s obligations to the public. Even though he is running Republican, he still is basically a Libertarian in view.

His notion of non-intervention, as a beginning point is good. As an absolute value, it's foolish. However, even as President, his view on this would be mitigated by Congress so that would be O.K. But his views on entitlement are misplaced. He does understand that entitlement doesn't just mean the poor, that's good, but he also assumes that the poor are poor because they choose to be, that's incorrect. There is no doubt that many of the poor are poor because of poor choices, but if the rich had to pay the same price, Bush would be in jail or at least the poor house. The deck is stacked unequally. I don't support throwing money at the poor, but I do think we have an obligation as the richest nation on the planted to take care of our poor.

Other than this issue, I really like Paul's positioning. He refuses to lie, either to us, or to himself. That's the biggy, most politicians don't start out lying to us, they start out lying to themselves and that grows. Paul hasn't succumbed to that trap.

I've done this in every election except one, the last Presidential. In 2000, I voted for Nader; one of the outcomes of that is that we got Bush as President. As much as I hate to admit it, if an someone as dumb as Bush is running this time, I will vote for the candidate most likely to beat him... period.



I'm with you on the voting record. Kerry, preceded by Nader, Nader, and Andre Marrou. The only vote I had trouble with was Kerry. I think he had an opportunity to just flatten Bush in that election if he'd articulated a true leader's vision and fought like a heavyweight champ. As it turned out, however, his campaign was flat and sad.

I know people hate to hear me say this, but you're vote in a presidential election can never "matter". There is about 1,000 times more error inherent in the system than that one vote. Anytime an election is closer than the statistical error in the process, the election will be decided by a court, Supreme or otherwise.

The only way one can "waste" his/her vote is by not voting by conscience.

I've done this in every election except one, the last Presidential. In 2000, I voted for Nader; one of the outcomes of that is that we got Bush as President. As much as I hate to admit it, if an someone as dumb as Bush is running this time, I will vote for the candidate most likely to beat him... period.



I'm with you on the voting record. Kerry, preceded by Nader, Nader, and Andre Marrou. The only vote I had trouble with was Kerry. I think he had an opportunity to just flatten Bush in that election if he'd articulated a true leader's vision and fought like a heavyweight champ. As it turned out, however, his campaign was flat and sad.

I know people hate to hear me say this, but you're vote in a presidential election can never "matter". There is about 1,000 times more error inherent in the system than that one vote. Anytime an election is closer than the statistical error in the process, the election will be decided by a court, Supreme or otherwise.

The only way one can "waste" his/her vote is by not voting by conscience.



Andre M.? Never heard of him, tell us more.

I agree on Kerry; Gore did the same. Read Greg Palast's stuff on the election. The garbage pulled by the GOP to win the last two elections is horrible, nonetheless, we should all vote.

Andre M.? Never heard of him, tell us more.


The 1992 Libertarian ticket was Andre Marrou / Nancy Lord. I had the opportunity to meet them both briefly, that was kinda cool.

I was attracted to the LP for their opposition to the drug war. (which happens to be the only real hurdle stopping me from joining the Democratic party.) I got turned off by the LP's absolute doctrine of aboloshing the IRS and trusting markets completely.

Market purists tout the efficiency of pure competition and oppose any distortion of the market by government interference. The market is the sum of human behavior. In the absence of any government regulations, the profit motive would create much bigger pollution problems, dangerous products, and inhumane labor conditions, not to mention an even more inequitable distribution of wealth. Our current system is far from a pure market. (I'm not saying that all of the tariff's, regulations, subsidies, etc. are necessarily the best for our society.)

I've got a roommate who thinks that if businesses act unethically consumers will not demand their products. While I would love it if that were true, we know that all but the most extreme of us don't investigate a company before making purchases and still support unethical companies even when we know their true colors. (I feel a bit of guilt every time I eat a breakfast bagel sandwich from McDonald's.) One fine moment in our collective consumer history was when we pressured divestiture in South Africa and helped bring the end of Apartheid.

Andre Marrou, ran as VP with Ron Paul in 1988, and then won the Libertarian nomination in 92.

yes i voted for him both times. Along with Harry Brown in 96 and 2000 and Michael Badnarick in 2004.

(BTW, I voted for Reagan in 84 because I didn't know any better, I mean I was only 18)

(BTW, I voted for Reagan in 84 because I didn't know any better, I mean I was only 18)



(BTW, I voted for Bush in 88 because I didn't know any better, I mean I was only 18)

Sorry, I did not vote till 24 hours later. There just are that many Ron Paul Supporters out there. A voice of reason.

Bin Laden issued two fatwas�in 1996 and then again in 1998�that Muslims should kill civilians and military personnel from the United States and allied countries until they withdraw military forces from Islamic countries.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xcQQ05XtAQ4"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xcQQ05XtAQ4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I like the quote from the end of his speech so much it will be my sig line in just a few

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Sy4Eugc0Xls"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Sy4Eugc0Xls" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I love it, Ron Paul asking for an appology from Rudy.

Read the 9/11 commision report Rudy :D

I already posted the Fox response to Ron Paul, this is a funny video showing media bias against Ron Paul.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/J8oO_OD3PtI"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/J8oO_OD3PtI" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

BTW, did you know that there are several GOP leaders trying to exclude Ron Paul from future debates.

It's sweet that at least for fifteen minutes there are a few alternative viewpoints from the super-money talking heads.

In case you were curious as to how the Clinton's have managed to raise so much money:
here's the skinny (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aEPIGL0_pg)

That was funny as he double l! Very well put together. Let's see, why did all those folks chose Paul? Maybe cause they're tired of being lied to?

yes, I think there is a growing number of people who know what is going on and will listen to Ron Paul because he answers the questions and tells it like it really is.

Those that are disapointed in what Ron Paul said in the debate, either did not understand why he made that statement or take what others tell them for granted.


Ron Paul was stating that our Foriegn Policy in the Middle East is why we were targeted.

His policies would not be nation building as we keep trying to do.

BTW, when asked what we should do about Usama bin Lauden, Ron Paul says we need to go get him and quit attacking other Nations.

The chair of the Michigan Republican Party, Saul Anuzis, began a petition to ban Paul from further Republican debates after this last debate.

However, today, he has backed off that statement. It seems the phone system and unazis blackberry became overloaded.

Let the Revolution begin

http://laceylibertarian.us/wp-images/rPaulRev.jpg

Wow, Bill touting Ron Paul after his interview with him trying to make him look like a crack pot. Looks like Bill did his research and now understands that Ron Paul is not full of BS, but actually has the guts to call it like he sees it based on History.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5OeeevXtlDY"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5OeeevXtlDY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>


Now who was it that said "we must learn from our history or we are doomed to repeat it"?

good stuff, especially the terror/fear/toruture montage that is punctuated with the sound of crickets chirping after Ron Paul says, "The Republican party has a long history of opposition to war".

If he weren't so old I might vote for this guy:
http://www.etherbinge.com/jc1.jpg
Carter blasts bush on his global impact (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070519/ap_on_re_us/carter_bush)

This is great :D

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/naMtwqBzja0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/naMtwqBzja0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Ron on CNN today. Good Interview.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JAcFRIrt-3Q"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JAcFRIrt-3Q" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Ron Paul on income Tax
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qI5lC4Z_T80"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qI5lC4Z_T80" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Ron Paul on the Middle East

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mg7CeCFPEkU"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mg7CeCFPEkU" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Ron Paul on going to war

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DGV1ZLj-noE"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DGV1ZLj-noE" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Ron Paul on the debates

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/T4oJCS4nS4o"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/T4oJCS4nS4o" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Ron Paul on Past and Future

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RahgC1eptgk"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RahgC1eptgk" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Ron Paul talkes about Immigration and the boarders

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7U4RgUh5G38"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7U4RgUh5G38" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Ron Paul on the Constitution

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gHE_0bCSIVM"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gHE_0bCSIVM" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I have to post this. It speaks for itself. (media spin)

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mWMBI39UhUQ"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mWMBI39UhUQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Ron Paul on who will vote on him, civil liberties and monitary policies.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zw4sK6waiHU"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zw4sK6waiHU" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Just for you Za.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05112007/watch2.html

Watch it, you'll like it!

yep, I agree with most of what he says. I have kinda changed my stance on Immigration though. I don't think we need totally open borders. There needs to be some sort of limit. However it needs to be a lot more than what there is now.

You should go to Moyers blog. While he likes him he doesn't necessarily agree with the Libertarian platform.

If I remember correctly, Moyers' objection is the concept that unregulated business will modify their behaviour in such a way to be good stewards of the populace and the environment, a concern I share.

Many Libertarian ideas are good, but this one has been proven bad over and over, even when regulated businesses regularly prove they are poor stewards of pretty much everything they are charged with, including taking care of their investors' money.

I view libertarian ideas as ideas to work towards. In reality, they will never be done absolute. There are also those that do not have moral values and they would abuse others rights.

But then it will never be a perfect world. That is why I am so much behind Ron Paul, he has a lot of Libertarian views, but is more of a moderate.

Hmmmm,

My trusting side agrees with you and thinks that a dogmatic view of Libertarianism combined with the realities of the world (i.e. Congress and the Senate) might be a beautiful mix. On the other hand, when I was voting for Nader my wife said "you're giving the election to Bush!" My reply was, "what harm can he do?" Now, every night before I go to bed I get /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif "what harm can he do." Six years of smirks with two to go is a lot of smirks.

That is the beauty of supporting Ron Paul right now. Even registering to vote as a republican just to try to get him the party nomination. Ron Paul is like Libertarian light.

He has a GREAT chance if he wins the nomination. The problem is getting him past the NeoCon's that think they have to support a failed Iraq policy.

Remember, there are only 2 candidates who voted against allowing the Iraq invasion. Obama and Paul.

This is really the only point he differs from the rest of the field.

Abortion, holds the party line being Pro Life and would love to see Roe vs Wade overturned. However, he is for states rights and thinks the people of each state should decide if Abortions would be allowed.

Immigration, actually might have the toughest stance on it.

IRS, there are several candidate who have said they would like to abolish it. Only Ron Paul states that you have to stop spending money (like a drunken sailor) to abolish the Income Tax.

Do you know why Ron Paul does not have MILLIONS in campain funds????? Because he does not get PAC money. Why, they know they can't buy him!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (I read that 95% of the money Ms Clinton has raised is PAC money)

Wow, great interview of Ron Paul. Bill gave him a hard time back in March, but is now pushing him.

see next post

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-GX-bPyPBlY"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-GX-bPyPBlY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

A great video for those that skipped all the others. This is a recap of the last 4 months and the Revolution that is Ron Paul


Ron Paul - The Story So Far
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/da03Ml_Y2d8"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/da03Ml_Y2d8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I have to post this, this is right after the 5/15/07 debate

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pYkr435zPHU"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pYkr435zPHU" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Here is the transcript for you


American Foreign Policy had nothing to do with September 11th.

September 11th happened because these people who hate us�� hate us because of the freedoms that we have. They hate us in particular of the 2 freedoms we have.
They don�t want us to have, they don�t what there own people to have: freedom of religion and freedom for women.

And we�re not� we�re not giving up those freedoms, and we�re going to remain strong against them. Rudy Giuliani at a post debate party




Really now, here is the transcript of the tape released just before the last presidential election on Al Jazeera


You American people, my speech to you is the best way to avoid another conflict about the war and its reasons and results. I am telling you security is an important pillar of human life. And free people don't let go of their security contrary to Bush's claims that we hate freedom. He should tell us why we didn't hit Sweden for instance. Its known that those who hate freedom don't have dignified souls.like the 19 who were blessed. But we fought you because we are free people, we don't sleep on our oppression. We want to regain the freedom of our Muslim nation as you spill our security, we spill your security.

I am so surprised by you. Although we are in the fourth year after the events of September 11, Bush is still practicing distortion and misleading on you, and obscuring the main reasons and therefore the reasons are still existing to repeat what happened before. I will tell you the reasons behind theses incidents.

I will be honest with you on the moment when the decision was taken to understand. We never thought of hitting the towers. But after we were so fed up, and we saw the oppression of the American Israeli coalition on our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it came to my mind and the incidents that really touched me directly goes back to 1982 and the following incidents. When the US permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon with the assistance of the 6th fleet. In these hard moments, it occurred to me so many meanings I cant explain but it resulted in a general feeling of rejecting oppression and gave me a hard determination to punish the oppressors. While I was looking at the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it came to my mind to punish the oppressor the same way and destroy towers in the US to get a taste of what they tasted, and quit killing our children and women.

We didn't find difficulty dealing with Bush and his administration due to the similarity of his regime and the regimes in our countries. Which half of them are ruled by military and the other half by sons of kings and presidents and our experience with them is long. Both parties are arrogant and stubborn and the greediness and taking money without right and that similarity appeared during the visits of Bush to the region while people from our side were impressed by the US and hoped that these visits would influence our countries. Here he is being influenced by these regimes, Royal and military. And was feeling jealous they were staying for decades in power stealing the nations finances without anybody overseeing them. So he transferred the oppression of freedom and tyranny to his son and they call it the Patriot Law to fight terrorism. He was bright in putting his sons as governors in states and he didn't forget to transfer his experience from the rulers of our region to Florida to falsify elections to benefit from it in critical times.

We agreed with Mohammed Atta, god bless him, to execute the whole operation in 20 minutes. Before Bush and his administration would pay attention and we never thought that the high commander of the US armies would leave 50 thousand of his citizens in both towers to face the horrors by themselves when they most needed him because it seemed to distract his attention from listening to the girl telling him about her goat butting was more important than paying attention to airplanes butting the towers which gave us three times the time to execute the operation thank god.

Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or Al Qaeda. Your security is in your hands. Each state that doesn't mess with our security has automatically secured their security. Usama bin Laden

Al Jazeera: In Bin Laden's message he approached other points. He pointed to the contradiction which considers oppression and killing of innocents a legal act. They formed an international law as Bush [George H. Bush) the father did with the children of Iraq according to Bin laden. Bin Laden pointed to the millions of pounds of explosives dropped on Iraqi children as bush his son had done, as he said to remove an old agent and install a new agent to help in stealing the oil of iraq. And Bin Laden said the events of 9/11 came as an answer to this oppression and said that if the answer to this oppression is considered bad terror, then we need to do it. And he stressed that he wants to deliver this message to the Americans in words and in deeds since the 9/11 events. He reminded Americans of a few warning messages through various news media like Time Magazine and CNN and other Arab and correspondents since 1996. He warned them of the consequences of their countries policies. He talked about the damage Sept 11 caused the US economy and that it cost close to a trillion dollars. He talked about President Bush and that the emergency law requires more money.

Ok, did you read that??????

Now who is telling the [censored] Truth here. Straight from the evil terrorist Usama bin Laden. (will Al Jazeera's help)

Rudy, more proof, words from the terrorist himself

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zpfiC8Fxlpg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zpfiC8Fxlpg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Pizza: Thanks for having the guts to post that on Memorial Day. This being the day that many think free speech should take a back seat to quietly remembering our fallen war heros.

No one doubts the bravery and sacrifice of all who died trying to serve our country. We should never forget, however, that some died for noble causes and some died to help a selfish, delusional "leader" fulfill the agenda to benefit a few at the cost of many. If this statement angers some, it is because the truth doesn't mesh with the distortions we've been spoon fed. Use your anger to help insure that we as a nation never again misuse our military force.

The war was sold on lies to fulfill an agenda that was conceived before 9/11 ever took place. Just as Bush used this tragic event to scare the people into getting behind the atrocities that have decimated Iraq, Rudy Giuliani is attempting to ride the wave of fear into the Whitehouse.

R.G. has taken the credit that the mainstream media have bestowed upon him for saving NY after 9/11. Yes, the man performed his job well during those days, but he didn't save NY. The spirit of the people of NY that have endured many tough times going way back are what allowed the city to walk through this tragedy and move forward. The People of NY saved NY!

A true leader symbolizes what is great about the people he/she leads, on this account RG looked like a leader. A true leader, however, NEVER takes the credit for what was done by THE PEOPLE. R.G. is an opportunist. He will not get the nomination.

Let the real candidates shine!
Ron Paul
Joe Biden
Dennis Kucinich

I like Gravel on the Dem side.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1gMlHv2lDqA"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1gMlHv2lDqA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I really like what he says at 2:00-3.30

Ok, check this out. You can bet on who you think will be elected president.

Ron Paul was not even listed 3 weeks ago.

Then he was listed at 200-1
a week later he was listed as 100-1
Yesterday he was listed at 15-1

Today, I just checked and he is listed at 7-1

so in 2 weeks, he has gone from a long shot to a 7-1 odds.

WOW.

Article (http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-Odds-053107.html)

i'll give you 20-1 for as much as you want to lay down.

To tell the truth, I will put money on it. Everyone I have talked to supporting Ron Paul right now thinks the same as I do. If we can get Ron Paul though the Republican Primary, he will win the election for President.

But that is the key, we have to get the word out to the main stream republican party to show them all of Ron Pauls platform.

He is not a one issue person. So far, they (NeoCon's) are trying to make him out to be a kook, or even a liberal. When in fact, he is the most conservitive member of the House.

Fox news tried to say he was part of the 911 Truth movement. But all he has ever stated that he would support another investigation into who was behind it. Just because 911Truthers and Libertarians support Ron Paul does not mean he supports everything they believe. (shoot, even I don't support the Libertarian party platform 100% and I consider myself a Libertarian)

Even a lot of conservitive/moderate Democrats are starting to support him. He is the only candidate stating that he would pull the troop out of Iraq as soon a possible.

What people like about Ron Paul is that he speeks the truth when others talk spin. Ron Paul is for real.

i'll give you 20-1 for as much as you want to lay down.



I will do $5 to keep it simple. 100-5

You got that covered Pat, or do you want me to bet more :D

Shoot, I already donated $100 to the campaign, and hope to do more in the near future (max $2300 before the primaries)

Don't forget to watch the Ron Paul Debate on Tuesday night.

I'm actually considering registering as a republican to vote for rp in the primary.

although i'm anticipating a very entertaining campaign, i'm gonna go ahead and say the whole thing is a done deal:

hillary loses a close general election to our next president:
fred thompson

it might be Obama and F. Thompson. I would give the edge to Obama there. I don't think Edwards can do it. A lot of Democrats can not idenify with someone who gets $400 haircuts.

It sucks when it comes down to something stupid like that, but it's true. I think a huge mistake for Kerry was when he tried to make a point by bringing up Cheney's lesbian daughter. He fell flat on his face with that one. I think that was the tennis equivalent of an "unforced error".

I'd much, much, much, much rather see O'Bama as the democratic nominee, heck I'd even vote for him, but I think his youth experiences growing up in several distinct parts of the world, which should be an asset, will actually be a hurdle for him to overcome. Also, it seems that Hillary is really coming doing a great job of positioning herself as the candidate to beat and she's slick. She's not going to make a mistake to give away her position. If someone's going to beat her they're going to have to hit several home runs. (That exhausts my sports metaphors for the day.)

Congressman Ron Paul will be a guest on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" tonight at 11:00 pm ET.

Congressman Ron Paul will be a guest on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" tonight at 11:00 pm ET.



Thanks for the heads up, Za...I'll be watching

1st off, I really enjoyed going to the Ron Paul meetup last night. 50 people in a room with all sorts of backgrounds all supporting Ron Paul. We are meeting again in 2 weeks to work out something for the 4th of July and news coverage.

BTW, there were long time Republicans, Libertarians, Constitutionalists and even a few Democrats at the meeting.


Now for those that missed it last night, this is one of the best interviews of Ron Paul I have seen yet. John Stewart knew who he was talking with. He did his reasearch and gave a good interview.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nz1ex0MaaQw"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nz1ex0MaaQw" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

This interview really gets into foreign policy.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/NY8JeC4T9DE"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NY8JeC4T9DE" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

fyi, tommy "tom" thompson is not on my list of possible "other dudes".

sucks i missed the debate tonight.

Well I will not be able to watch the whole debate till later tonight (it is suppose to be available on CNN.com)

However, I did read about some of the debate on the CNN blogs and watch all of Ron Pauls answers on the few question he actually got.

Again, I agreed with all of Ron's answers and support him even more.

Did he win this debate. Not when he only got 5:51 time out of the 2 hours.

In fact here are some stats.

Rudy McRomney averaged just under 12 min each.

The other 7 candidates averaged UNDER 6 min each.

Ron Paul was not even the least covered.

From what i heard, they did not even mention Ron Paul in the post debate interview.

I also heard that the CNN comintator at half time said that all the candidates were pro-war. Where has she been?????

Za,

You've, well actually Ron has me about 90% convinced. I hate some things he stands for but man is he smart!

Za,

You've, well actually Ron has me about 90% convinced. I hate some things he stands for but man is he smart!



Trust me, it's not me, it is Ron and his message.

The NeoCons are trying to make it look like Ron Paul is a hard core Libertarian and not a Republican leaning Libertarian.

That is far from the truth. Ron Paul is more Constitutional Party than Libertarian. In fact, they may nominate him for there party. (I talked with a few Monday night, there Texas meeting is this weekend)

Even though the a lot Libertarians support Ron Paul, he will not get the backing of the party. (I fear that if the good Doctor wins the Republican Nomination, it could split the Libertarian party even more)

You could call Ron Paul "Libertarian Light"

Anyways, here he is at the debate last night. (all 6 min)
What makes America great is our Constitution and Bill of Rights, Documents that outline a way of running the country so that in theory all people are treated equally and have equal access to the control of our government. If you want to protect something, protect those documents, and work to eliminate the damage that has been done to the rights they protect, and our reputation in the world, by our current government. BTW - that includes the Executive, the Congress, and the Judicial branches. They've all let this happen.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/frtQ51TA3PY"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/frtQ51TA3PY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Interview today on Tucker Carlson

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2mb7aiM9K9Q"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2mb7aiM9K9Q" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Is it just me or does he look a little like Hugh Hefner?

I haven't seen a picture of hugh in 20 years. On the oher hand, he definitely doesn' look like a bunny!

I would never ever think that an assasination is a good idea, but if Jr. keeps his act up we will be at war with the rest of the world by the time we get a chance to elect someone new.

Why would he want to [censored] off the Russians? It's been very nice to put the Cold War behind us, why the hell is Jr rehashing it?

I would never ever think that an assasination is a good idea, but if Jr. keeps his act up we will be at war with the rest of the world by the time we get a chance to elect someone new.

Why would he want to [censored] off the Russians? It's been very nice to put the Cold War behind us, why the hell is Jr rehashing it?


I concur, why is it our business to want to build a missile defense system in Europe?

I would never ever think that an assasination is a good idea, but if Jr. keeps his act up we will be at war with the rest of the world by the time we get a chance to elect someone new.

Why would he want to [censored] off the Russians? It's been very nice to put the Cold War behind us, why the hell is Jr rehashing it?



I don't really think Bush gives a rat's backside about Russia. I suspect his real goal is the American voter. That is, if we need a missle defense in Europe, it's because those Iranians are getting really close to having nucularly armed missles. Therefore you'd better think about voting for the party that can "really" protect you.

Furthermore, if he doesn't do this, his legacy is basically that of a failed Presidency. Keep in mind that at some level he may really believe this; that is, that Iran or some terrorist is going to nuke Europe. He doesn't have the skill set to realize that a terrorist would have no ability to deliver such a bomb via missle; and that Iran would have to have decided, "well, we need to get wiped off the face of the earth," before they would do something that dumb. Not to mention that they are still over 10 years away from a bomb and that Israel would take out any real threat years before a bomb actually got made.

Putin, a donkey if there ever was one, is correct in his supposition that there is no need for this system. His notion that this is more as a deterent to Russia is based on that knowledge rather than an understanding that Bush and his cronies are idiots.

a terrorist would have no ability to deliver such a bomb via missle


That may or may not be true. Weren't the planes that hit the twin towers used as missiles?

I do agree, though, that it's much more likely that a terrorist would use a train, bus, or truck to deliver a nuclear device, and none of those three would be stopped by a missile defense system.

a terrorist would have no ability to deliver such a bomb via missile


That may or may not be true. Weren't the planes that hit the twin towers used as missiles?

I do agree, though, that it's much more likely that a terrorist would use a train, bus, or truck to deliver a nuclear device, and none of those three would be stopped by a missile defense system.



So your point was?

The plain and simple fact is that such a scenario is unlikely; no state is going to be dumb enough to do this. Even the case where Iran hands a missile and a bomb to a terrorist is highly improbable at best. Let's see, a terrorist uses an Iranian missile to launch a bomb at Europe. Hmmm, wonder where they got that from. Well, let�s not take any chances; we'll just nuke Iran to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Of course all that supposes that Israel lets Iran develop a bomb in the first place.

We're in more danger from missing materials from Russia than this source. Even in the event that a terrorist somehow got that much material together, making a bomb and delivering it is a tough job. The only reason 9/11 happened was because the Bush Admin. was beyond criminally negligent. Delivering a nuclear bomb to any country is way more complex than delivering 20 bodies, no matter what the delivery mechanism.

On the other hand, any thing is possible. So, if any thing is possible, why aren't we thinking about how a terrorist might get and deliver such a device as opposed to a useless missile protection system, one which doesn't work anyway?

Could it be that Raytheon will make millions off the first and nothing off of the second?

I do agree, though, that it's much more likely that a terrorist would use a train, bus, or truck to deliver a nuclear device, and none of those three would be stopped by a missile defense system.

So your point was?



My point was that a missile defense system won't stop the most likely terrorist means of attacking with a nuclear device.

That is beyond the fact that we've got no business initiating this venture. It'd be one thing if the E.U. got together and decided they wanted a missile defense system and they wanted to hire us to create one.

The good news is that this won't become a reality under Bush as it's just a political ploy.

it is the attempt by the CFR to change the subject off in imigration.

This immigration thing will be the death of us all. :mad:

This immigration thing will be the death of us all. :mad:



I agree, they're taking over...

Chief Cochise of the Apache Nation

This immigration thing will be the death of us all. :mad:



I agree, they're taking over...

Chief Cochise of the Apache Nation


Lyle, you beat me to the punch on that one, talk about a softball!

Ok, attended my second RonPaulMeetup.com meeting. This one in PLANO TX.

there were over 60 people who showed up. WOW, most were new people that did not attend the Dallas Meetup.

Of the people i talked with, about 1/2 knew who Ron Paul was before this year, the other 1/2 were because he is currently running for president.

One of the best things, one of the guys that came has worked already worked on 4 campaigns. The last campaign was for a Republican running for Govenor of Texas (the guy that Rick Perry beat in the primaries) He was in charge of campaign media. He currently runs a computer based company in Carrollton and offered his business address as our HQ.

We also had a guy who will be attending the Texas Straw Poll convention in Ft. Worth in August.

I will tell you what, the more I talk to people and no one has even heard of Ron Paul, the more excited I get of the potential out there.


There is "Hope for America"

Google Ron Paul, watch some of the videos I have posted, the man speaks for himself.

However, this is a grassroots campaign, WE need to get the word out. Educate the public on Ron Paul. Most people are basicly smart, they can figure out the best choice on there own if they have the correct information.

Vote for Freedom, vote for Liberty, vote for the only guy running for president that understands what our founding fathers intended our Federal Government to be.

I like to see the excitement about a candidate that is honest and speaks from the heart. These guys are certainly in the minority, and don't have a "realistic" chance of winning, but deomocracy will only work if we all truly vote our conscience in spite of the fact that we might be voting for a "loser".

The mentality that our two-headed monster of a political party the Republicrats is force-feeding us through their puppet media is that we can't have an opinion of our own, we can only vote for one of the two candidates that they've officially sanctioned as "electable".

I call shenanigans on their whole process. Dig deeper, get your own information and don't listen to the big-business "journalists" that attempt to convince you to only consider their candidates.

If you're looking for the best way to end the war in Iraq and you're a Democrat take a look at Joe Biden's positions on that topic. He's the only Democrat who actually has a plan. Clinton, O'Bama, Edwards are all standing tall on platitudes and taking the easy pot shots at Bush, but none of them is putting forward anything other than vague campaign slogans. Immediate withdrawal, timed withdrawal, and "building international coalitions" don't do anything more to solve the problem than our current "strategy" of winning hearts and minds by smashing one door down at a time.

Yesterday was Fathers Day so I called my dad. After doing all the catching up on what has been going on, I asked my dad if he has looked up anything about Ron Paul.

My dad likes some of the Libertarian views, but is a NeoCon and was against some of there views.

Well, he said he like a lot of what Ron Paul says, but one big thing. Then he said I would not like it, but I had to ask him. He then says that we should not pull out of Iraq, we need to fight terrorism over there. When I stated that they are attacking us because we are over there he stated, no we are being attacked by Extremest Muslims because they hate us, they hate us because we are free and there religion says they need to destroy us.

wow, I almost lost it.

So last night I did a bunch of research looking for the motives behind all Isamic terrorist attacks against the USA. So far I have not found ONE SINGLE ATTACK done becauses we are free or infadels. Every attack i have looked up so far was done because we either

A) Support Israel
B) Support the dictator ruling them
C) Have troops stationed on there land

Then I came across this article

http://www.amconmag.com/2005_07_18/article.html

Run Ron Run!

A little more recent article from the same guy (http://www-news.uchicago.edu/citations/06/060911.pape-ct.html)
An Egypt view of the book (http://www.egypttoday.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=6027)

So last night I did a bunch of research looking for the motives behind all Isamic terrorist attacks against the USA. So far I have not found ONE SINGLE ATTACK done becauses we are free or infadels. Every attack i have looked up so far was done because we either

A) Support Israel
B) Support the dictator ruling them
C) Have troops stationed on there land

Then I came across this article

http://www.amconmag.com/2005_07_18/article.html



Thank you!

I doubt that book makes it onto RG's reading list.

Predictions:

Guilliani bails before '08.

McCaine runs a strong primary campaign and comes in a close second to some other dude.




Possible "other dudes":
http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/sag/sag_awards_2004_photos/fred_thompson/sag.jpg

http://www.eisenhowerinstitute.org/photographs/Hagel1.jpg



wow Denny, looks like the McCain part is falling apart.

However one of your other dudes is doing well in national polls, yet still has not announced.

I hope for Americas sake that Rudy does pull out, the more I learn about him, the more I hate him.

just for those that might have missed it


A great video for those that skipped all the others. This is a recap of the last 4 months and the Revolution that is Ron Paul


Ron Paul - The Story So Far
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/da03Ml_Y2d8"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/da03Ml_Y2d8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>



and now for part two.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fm6yKIMDQfE"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fm6yKIMDQfE" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I hope for Americas sake that Rudy does pull out, the more I learn about him, the more I hate him.



he won't be around come super-tuesday. the dude's got about 50 skeletons just waiting to topple out of his closet.

The USA Today's article today "As Bush exits, his issues will linger" talks about how the next president will be burdened with cleaning up Bush's messes before advancing their own agenda.

Here's classic Tony Snow:

What the president does bequeath to his successor is a much greater sense of some of the challenges of the world.


SWEEET, THANKS MR. DECIDER!!!

I use to listen to Tony Snow on the radio

America, please stop this woman!
http://steelturman.typepad.com/thesteeldeal/images/hillary_clinton_boobs_bill_cleavage.jpg

i concur :eek:

arn't those a little lopsided

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dNu-8zMubZI"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dNu-8zMubZI" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

arn't those a little lopsided


yeah, sorta like fred thompson's victory will be if the democrats nominate hillary.

Ok, had to dig this thread out to post some video's I have watched the last few days that were not Ron Paul related :D

1st up

Mitt Romney showing how much of an [censored] he is.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TYPGqdZvbEg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TYPGqdZvbEg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Notice how he just walks off instead of answering the question. Sure it was a loaded question, but he could have treated it MUCH better and pointed out it was loaded.

Sean Hannity interviews Fred Thompson with his daughter and grandkids........ I mean his wife and kids.

Ok, the BIG question is, what are those kids chewing on.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CSCm0wu6k8c"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CSCm0wu6k8c" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Hannity asks those real tough questions doesn't he. What a tool.

The Log Cabin Republicans have alligned themselves behind Rudy for the most part, However some support Ron Paul too.

This is there commercial they are running in NH.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Elx3UWmyAY4"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Elx3UWmyAY4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I would like to see this video compared to Mitts flavor of the day.

Oh my word, that was repulsive. I'm not sure who bothered me most, Hannity (definitely an idgit), Thompson for marrying a little girl, or the little girl for marrying Thompson. At least Anna Nicol married someone with some real cash...

Ok, now for a poll, who has the best looking wife

http://www.offrampbums.com/kucinich.jpg http://www.libertyfilmfestival.com/libertas/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/thompsonphoto.jpg

FYI

Fred Thompson 65
Juli Thompson a very good looking 41

Dennis Kusinich 61
Elizabeth Kucinich 31 with a British accent.

BTW, both have daughters that are older than there wives.

imagine the possibilities

This primary thing is going to be over in the blink of an eye. Here are the current Denny-O-Meter predictions for each of the two major party nominations:

Republicans:
John McCaine: 60% chance of winning
Mitt Romney: 40% chance of winning
Huckabee: 0% chance of winning
Our boy Ron Paul: 0% chance of winning
Rudy "The Oportunist" Giulini: Snowball's chance in U-Know

BUT: Ron Paul continues to run an amazing campaign and stays in the election all the way as an independent!

Democrats:
Barack O'Bama: 50% chance of winning
Proposition H : 30% chance of winning
John Edwards: 20% chance of winning

And in the general election: If we are blessed with an O'Bama/Edwards ticket, nobody can beat them!!!

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/e/c/hillary_vader2.jpg

http://aura0.zaadz.com/photos/30/297427/large/ron_paul_doesn_t_suck.jpg

ever wondered how the sub prime loan market works. I think these guys explain it rather well.

<object width="425" height="373"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/SJ_qK4g6ntM&rel=1&border=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/SJ_qK4g6ntM&rel=1&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="373"></embed></object>

The bad part, they got it spot on

Craziness in New Hampshire:
The people vote Yes on Proposition H [email protected]%&amp;?

Earlier in Cali, Huckabee helps rock a cover of Stryper's "To Limbo with the Devil"
http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2008-01/34574744.jpg

What's wrong with Hillary? She puts her pants on one leg at a time just like every other guy! lol

I think you got that wrong Denny,

Barack chance of winning 50%
Preperation H chance of winning 30%
Edwards chance of winning 20%

Like it or not, Huckabee is going to win. Chuck Norris supports him! Oh well... :)

Chuck Norris' beard will make a fine vice president

Wow, she is [censored]. I know this is only one persons view, but she has been there, she has family there. She knows what they want. Only one presidential candidate agrees with her.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jlgav80cpbg&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jlgav80cpbg&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

The Police State

Video of the 8/22/02 protests.

Shots from he Police's own cameras.

This is What A Police State Looks Like (http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=24883005)
<embed src="http://lads.myspace.com/videos/vplayer.swf" flashvars="m=24883005&v=2&type=video" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="430" height="346"></embed>
Add to My Profile (http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.addToProfileConfirm&videoid=24883005&title=This is What A Police State Looks Like) | More Videos (http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.home)

mmm, makes you think twice about protesting doesn't it.

If it does, then the police did there job stomping the 1st amendment in the mud.

Please vote Republican!

http://img4.glowfoto.com/images/2008/01/14-1959409073T.jpg (http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=14-195940L&amp;y=2008&amp;m=01&amp;t=jpg&amp;rand=9073&amp;srv=img4)

Please vote Republican!

http://img4.glowfoto.com/images/2008/01/14-1959409073T.jpg (http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=14-195940L&amp;y=2008&amp;m=01&amp;t=jpg&amp;rand=9073&amp;srv=img4)



Yes, because if you're not beautiful, obviously you have no value...

wow...lighten up!

...and IRON MY SHIRT!

Ever wonder why Ron Paul talks so much about our American Dollar, this very telling view from outside the USA will show you.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/HdrNbhdl7uU&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/HdrNbhdl7uU&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Only one presidential candidate is talking about this, he is the only one that deserves your vote.

wow...lighten up!



Ahhh yes, quoting Don Imus, or perhaps it was Rush, who sang
"Obama the magic negro" when they were questioned about questionable taste.

In this I won't lighten up. You're wrong, like it or not. Personally, I dislike Hillary; I think she's a scum bag. The only thing I can think of that's worse is what is being done to her in conservative circles. Portraying it as a joke doesn't make it right.

If you want to say Hillary is bad then say so. You can point out that she played the media by crying when public surveys said she was cold and a-emotional. You can point out that Madeline did the whole ruby ridge massacre thing. But don't portray them as a poor choice because they ain't beautiful and then say "I was only jokin'"

Dude, you are reading way too much into this. Lighten up! Sometimes a joke is just a joke! I never said don't vote dem cause they're ugly, it's a pasted pic that is hilarious. Barak the magic negro is sung by Paul Shanklin, not Rush, and every line in it is a quote! I've never quoted Imus in my life, can't stand him. I mean this in all seriousness, get a sense of humor! In all un-seriousness, MAKE ME A CHICKEN POT PIE! Life is way too short to get that wound up over what I posted and attached "Please vote republican." I'm not a die-hard rep, but they overwhelmingly support things I believe in, and the dems overwhelmingly do not. So I tend to ascociate with the reps. If you were to come up with a simular picture of some bugly reps next to some hotty dems and wrote, "please vote dem" I wouldn't be reaching for the monkey butt powder because it simply wouldn't get me worked up. Why? Because it's a joke! Hope this helps...


http://img5.glowfoto.com/images/2008/01/15-1316286944T.jpg (http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=15-131628L&amp;y=2008&amp;m=01&amp;t=jpg&amp;rand=6944&amp;srv=img5)

First, the people who study media and perceptions and marketing tell me you're wrong. Second, Rush did sing the song and he sang it for a reason. Third, the reason this stuff happens is because people hide behind the lighten up mantra.

Let's take an elegant example. Jena LA. Some high schoolers hang a noose from a tree and cry "it really didn't mean anything." Yet the treatment of white students and black students in the case is patently different and obviously racist. Now, all of the sudden, a trend from the past is reappearing. The old dropped noose. They're showing up everywhere, well not everywhere, only on the doors and trees of black people.

Your notion that this is O.K. is wrong, I invite you to ask an expert, one in media studies or one in sexism, choose your poison. Even better, ask some of your female clients, no not the conservative ones, the Democratic ones, tell them you think it's darn funny and show them the picture. See how long you retain their business and then tell them to "lighten up."

Quote:

First, the people who study media and perceptions and marketing tell me you're wrong. Second, Rush did sing the song and he sang it for a reason. Third, the reason this stuff happens is because people hide behind the lighten up mantra.

Let's take an elegant example. Jena LA. Some high schoolers hang a noose from a tree and cry "it really didn't mean anything." Yet the treatment of white students and black students in the case is patently different and obviously racist. Now, all of the sudden, a trend from the past is reappearing. The old dropped noose. They're showing up everywhere, well not everywhere, only on the doors and trees of black people.

Your notion that this is O.K. is wrong, I invite you to ask an expert, one in media studies or one in sexism, choose your poison. Even better, ask some of your female clients, no not the conservative ones, the Democratic ones, tell them you think it's darn funny and show them the picture. See how long you retain their business and then tell them to "lighten up." Unquote, and nowhere near elogent...




... this spoken from the king of free speach and tolorance!

Quote:
Pulled up next to a pickup today. The gentleman had a cross hanging from his mirror. He was sucking on a Marlborough and had a bumper sticker that read:

"Jesus loves you, but I'm his favorite!" And I thought, "yes, that's the problem!"

--------------------
"Who's Zoomin' who?" Unquote

...but I'm the one who is judgmental based on looks! I was making a joke, you can't handle it, period. You've made your point, you think I'm a jerk for using absurdity to illustrate the absurd, and equate it to hanging! I think your wrong, will never try to get you riled up by using absurd humor again. All apoloGEEEZ!

Dude, you are reading way too much into this. Lighten up! Sometimes a joke is just a joke! I never said don't vote dem cause they're ugly, it's a pasted pic that is hilarious. Barak the magic negro is sung by Paul Shanklin, not Rush, and every line in it is a quote! I've never quoted Imus in my life, can't stand him. I mean this in all seriousness, get a sense of humor! In all un-seriousness, MAKE ME A CHICKEN POT PIE! Life is way too short to get that wound up over what I posted and attached "Please vote republican." I'm not a die-hard rep, but they overwhelmingly support things I believe in, and the dems overwhelmingly do not. So I tend to ascociate with the reps. If you were to come up with a simular picture of some bugly reps next to some hotty dems and wrote, "please vote dem" I wouldn't be reaching for the monkey butt powder because it simply wouldn't get me worked up. Why? Because it's a joke! Hope this helps...


http://img5.glowfoto.com/images/2008/01/15-1316286944T.jpg (http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=15-131628L&amp;y=2008&amp;m=01&amp;t=jpg&amp;rand=6944&amp;srv=img5)



Did you just say the "N" word?

America, please stop this woman!
http://steelturman.typepad.com/thesteeldeal/images/hillary_clinton_boobs_bill_cleavage.jpg



LOL. Great picture.

I saw a bumper sticker last week that said "Life's a BizzyIzzy,(the actual word was a synonym for female dog)Don't vote for one!"

"Barack The Magic Negro" is a song by Paul Shanklin, (not written by, or sung by Rush) that is a list of quotes put to the fine music of "Puff The Magic Dragon" (loved by one Mr. Focker)... I did not say the "N" word! Go "stir it up" somewhere else you groin injured rebel rouser! I got enough problems being equated to "hangings" for posting bugly photo's of dems!

America, please stop this woman!
http://steelturman.typepad.com/thesteeldeal/images/hillary_clinton_boobs_bill_cleavage.jpg



LOL. Great picture.

I saw a bumper sticker last week that said "Life's a BizzyIzzy,(the actual word was a synonym for female dog)Don't vote for one!"



did you think to yourself, "That's the problem"? lol

Quote:

First, the people who study media and perceptions and marketing tell me you're wrong. Second, Rush did sing the song and he sang it for a reason. Third, the reason this stuff happens is because people hide behind the lighten up mantra.

Let's take an elegant example. Jena LA. Some high schoolers hang a noose from a tree and cry "it really didn't mean anything." Yet the treatment of white students and black students in the case is patently different and obviously racist. Now, all of the sudden, a trend from the past is reappearing. The old dropped noose. They're showing up everywhere, well not everywhere, only on the doors and trees of black people.

Your notion that this is O.K. is wrong, I invite you to ask an expert, one in media studies or one in sexism, choose your poison. Even better, ask some of your female clients, no not the conservative ones, the Democratic ones, tell them you think it's darn funny and show them the picture. See how long you retain their business and then tell them to "lighten up." Unquote, and nowhere near elogent...




... this spoken from the king of free speach and tolorance!

Quote:
Pulled up next to a pickup today. The gentleman had a cross hanging from his mirror. He was sucking on a Marlborough and had a bumper sticker that read:

"Jesus loves you, but I'm his favorite!" And I thought, "yes, that's the problem!"

--------------------
"Who's Zoomin' who?" Unquote

...but I'm the one who is judgmental based on looks! I was making a joke, you can't handle it, period. You've made your point, you think I'm a jerk for using absurdity to illustrate the absurd, and equate it to hanging! I think your wrong, will never try to get you riled up by using absurd humor again. All apoloGEEEZ!



You're still wrong and ya still don't get it. Tommorrow I'll do some educatin' for ya, but start out with two sites. First google Freud relatives and mass marketing. You'll find out how one of Freud's relatives applied his studies to marketing and how easily manipulated the human mind is. Second go to Frontline on PBS.org and watch the piece on the sidebar about the teacher who covers prejudice in her classroom. We'll start there in the mornin'

BTW did you send out your joke to all your female clients yet? As soon as you've done that, then I'll believe that you "really" think this is a joke, until then, save it.

Quote:

First, the people who study media and perceptions and marketing tell me you're wrong. Second, Rush did sing the song and he sang it for a reason. Third, the reason this stuff happens is because people hide behind the lighten up mantra.

Let's take an elegant example. Jena LA. Some high schoolers hang a noose from a tree and cry "it really didn't mean anything." Yet the treatment of white students and black students in the case is patently different and obviously racist. Now, all of the sudden, a trend from the past is reappearing. The old dropped noose. They're showing up everywhere, well not everywhere, only on the doors and trees of black people.

Your notion that this is O.K. is wrong, I invite you to ask an expert, one in media studies or one in sexism, choose your poison. Even better, ask some of your female clients, no not the conservative ones, the Democratic ones, tell them you think it's darn funny and show them the picture. See how long you retain their business and then tell them to "lighten up." Unquote, and nowhere near elogent...




... this spoken from the king of free speach and tolorance!

Quote:
Pulled up next to a pickup today. The gentleman had a cross hanging from his mirror. He was sucking on a Marlborough and had a bumper sticker that read:

"Jesus loves you, but I'm his favorite!" And I thought, "yes, that's the problem!"

--------------------
"Who's Zoomin' who?" Unquote

...but I'm the one who is judgmental based on looks! I was making a joke, you can't handle it, period. You've made your point, you think I'm a jerk for using absurdity to illustrate the absurd, and equate it to hanging! I think your wrong, will never try to get you riled up by using absurd humor again. All apoloGEEEZ!



Yawn!

That the guy smoked, giving what we know about cigarettes, was a comment. That he somehow thought that God preferred him is a comment in and of itself. I judged him based on some obviously stupid and arrogant life choices.

That you've fallen prey to an elegant and effective marketing campaign doesn't mean that I think you're bad, it simply means that I think the people who started that marketing campaign are wrong and that you should be told why.

Rush sang the song, he received a lot of appropriate grief about the song. It's an appalling song but then, I'd expect nothing less from Rush.

Ok, dude this is getting very lame. An ugly picture is hilarious, especially in polotics. I don't give a flip what Freud says about this, or anything else! I'm growing very tired of this. I'd rather lick the floor of a thousand grand central stations than to try to refute your rambling, unrelated topics any more. I'll make you an offer, you can even get the last word in, I don't care, just make it stop! I'll stop responding to your (self cencored) coments and move on if you'll do the same. You CAN GET THE LAST WORD and say whatever you want, I won't respond, no matter what. Quote anyone you want, say anything want about it, I won't respond, not a peep! Just two conditions, when your done, yer done, quit your rambling. And two, you gotta do it knowing how funny this photo is! Deal or no deal? PLEASE VOTE REPUBLICAN!!!

http://img4.glowfoto.com/images/2008/01/15-1552021690T.png (http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=15-155202L&amp;y=2008&amp;m=01&amp;t=png&amp;rand=1690&amp;srv=img4)

"JUST MAKE THE DEAL MAN, HE'S MAKING ME LOOK BAD!"

Better yet, do whatever ya want, humor is lost on you, I'm done and will not try to refute anything you have to say ABOUT THIS SUBJECT, I've heard enough...

And now on this politcal thread, a word from our sponsor

<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://blip.tv/scripts/flash/showplayer.swf?enablejs=true&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Ftheblimp%2Eblip%2Etv%2Frss&file=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Frss%2Fflash%2F525805&showplayerpath=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Fscripts%2F flash%2Fshowplayer%2Eswf" width="400" height="255" allowfullscreen="true" id="showplayer"><param name="movie" value="http://blip.tv/scripts/flash/showplayer.swf?enablejs=true&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Ftheblimp%2Eblip%2Etv%2Frss&file=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Frss%2Fflash%2F525805&showplayerpath=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Fscripts%2F flash%2Fshowplayer%2Eswf" /><param name="quality" value="best" /><embed src="http://blip.tv/scripts/flash/showplayer.swf?enablejs=true&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Ftheblimp%2Eblip%2Etv%2Frss&file=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Frss%2Fflash%2F525805&showplayerpath=http%3A%2F%2Fblip%2Etv%2Fscripts%2F flash%2Fshowplayer%2Eswf" quality="best" width="400" height="255" name="showplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object>

Ok, dude this is getting very lame. An ugly picture is hilarious, especially in polotics. I don't give a flip what Freud says about this, or anything else! I'm growing very tired of this. I'd rather lick the floor of a thousand grand central stations than to try to refute your rambling, unrelated topics any more. I'll make you an offer, you can even get the last word in, I don't care, just make it stop! I'll stop responding to your (self cencored) coments and move on if you'll do the same. You CAN GET THE LAST WORD and say whatever you want, I won't respond, no matter what. Quote anyone you want, say anything want about it, I won't respond, not a peep! Just two conditions, when your done, yer done, quit your rambling. And two, you gotta do it knowing how funny this photo is! Deal or no deal? PLEASE VOTE REPUBLICAN!!!

http://img4.glowfoto.com/images/2008/01/15-1552021690T.png (http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=15-155202L&amp;y=2008&amp;m=01&amp;t=png&amp;rand=1690&amp;srv=img4)

"JUST MAKE THE DEAL MAN, HE'S MAKING ME LOOK BAD!"



Good enough, let me ask you, how many funny, ugly pictures of white male candidates are present in the political threads on this site? How many have you posted that show white male candidates with huge bulging - shall we say - body parts? How many of Hillary are there?

The number of such pictures and themes out there of the white male "joke" variety is very little. So, the reality is that this material and it's presence and quantity reflects a sexist bias.

The fact that it's wrapped as a joke is just common sense. If the propagators of such came out and said look at this ugly old hag the effectiveness of their method would be diminished.

Is it effective? Yes it is. This kind of material first appeared about two months ago. At that time Hillary was dominating in the polls. She wasn't just smoking the the Democratic contenders, in polls placing her against GOP candidates she was winning by a double digit margin. Since this stuff started appearing her numbers have dropped to the point where it looks like she might even lose (you really should take a time to look up the Freud stuff, it's very informative and quite entertaining. What it tells us is that modern mass marketing is based in our psychological fears - by playing to a person's fears you can not only sell them something they don't want, you can sell them something they don't need and that may even be bad for them - more on this later).

What really concerns me is that later, these same techniques will be used to market other candidates and when we're down to white males only, they'll begin to use it against each other. For example Karl Rove used it effectively against John McCain in the 2000 election so that instead of getting a credible, well educated, highly experienced, war veteran, we got a buffoon for a President.

Back to Hillary and the pictures. What the media experts and psychologists who study this stuff tell us is that the men (yes men) who create and present this stuff do so because, well they're insecure. That is, this material plays to their fears. They feel threatened by a strong female presence. Now personally, I disagree with that. I think those men have lots of machismo...

Oh, and you are correct, it is a joke, I'm just sure that the real recipients of the joke realize that the joke is on them.

Typical conservative response "It's a joke."

Whether is was or not. Lyle is right. Perception becomes reality.


-A Marketing guy.

BTW Hero,

How many bumper stickers have you seen that say, "life's a Bass, don't vote for one." Where Bass = illegitimate male son? How easily we accept biased items and how fervently we defend them.

One thing is for sure, this positioning of Hillary is effective. One has to give credit where credit is due. Rather than even consider her credentials and debate their merits, she's been submarined by... jokes. I'm glad we use such powerful methods to choose our candidates. No wonder Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance.

http://img4.glowfoto.com/images/2008/01/16-1030009349T.jpg (http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=16-103000L&amp;y=2008&amp;m=01&amp;t=jpg&amp;rand=9349&amp;srv=img4)

you done?

BTW Hero,

How many bumper stickers have you seen that say, "life's a Bass, don't vote for one." Where Bass = illegitimate male son? How easily we accept biased items and how fervently we defend them.

One thing is for sure, this positioning of Hillary is effective. One has to give credit where credit is due. Rather than even consider her credentials and debate their merits, she's been submarined by... jokes. I'm glad we use such powerful methods to choose our candidates. No wonder Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance.



True. True.

Ron Paul is a joke and Hillary Clinton has already run the country for 8 eight years :D

BTW Hero,

How many bumper stickers have you seen that say, "life's a Bass, don't vote for one." Where Bass = illegitimate male son? How easily we accept biased items and how fervently we defend them.

One thing is for sure, this positioning of Hillary is effective. One has to give credit where credit is due. Rather than even consider her credentials and debate their merits, she's been submarined by... jokes. I'm glad we use such powerful methods to choose our candidates. No wonder Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance.



True. True.

Ron Paul is a joke and Hillary Clinton has already run the country for 8 eight years :D



Now see Player, Hero is funny. He can laugh at his own positions while creating new ones that make fun of your's.

You'll just see what you want to see, doesn't matter what I say...

http://img4.glowfoto.com/images/2008/01/16-1322067915T.jpg (http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=16-132206L&amp;y=2008&amp;m=01&amp;t=jpg&amp;rand=7915&amp;srv=img4)

vvvv Here we go! vvvv :D

Ron Paul is a joke



don't [censored] me off. I am sick and tired of all the lies spread around about Ron Paul

They guy has won 10 elections, including one where both Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. endorsed the other candidate.

He is probably the ONLY candidate to run for president because he DOES NOT WANT TO RUN YOUR LIFE.

He is the most popular Republican candidate in the world right now. [sorry I was unable to find that web site just now] Unfortunately, cracks like that and people who DON'T look at the issues is our main hurtle in winning this election. When the talk radio circuit all talk like Ron Paul when it comes to just about every issue [well except the war], then they turn around and trash Ron Paul, you have to wonder why.

Oh yea, it's all lip service.

... he DOES NOT WANT TO RUN YOUR LIFE.





Totally agree. I think he's more about freedom than all of the reps. Fred's for freedom too though...

The war thing, foreign affairs? That's another story, but domestically, RP would be incredible for America! You might be surprised to know how many good things Rush says about RP on a regular basis...

vvvv Here we go! vvvv :D




Weeeee! :D
http://img5.glowfoto.com/images/2008/01/16-2039407518T.jpg (http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=16-203940L&amp;y=2008&amp;m=01&amp;t=jpg&amp;rand=7518&amp;srv=img5)

The war thing, foreign affairs?



Foreign Policy is probably Ron Paul's biggest difference from EVERY candidate, Republican or Democrat. This is one of the biggest reasons he has so much support around the world. Believe me, the rest of the world is tired of our meddling in there affairs. We bully other countries around. 700 military bases in 130 countries.....................

And you Democrats out there think your candidate is going to get us out of war, think again. They talk about sending troops into Dalfor and other regions of civil unrest. At least we didn't cause that one.........[at least that I know of]

more later, I have to go make some dough :D