Fastone
Well-known member
Having lived through a lot more of "it" than you have, this studying you speak of is not necessary. You keep your ideas and the BS you've been fed and I'll keep mine.
Election of 2012....Who ya got?
- Thread starter AE14
- Start date
Having lived through a lot more of "it" than you have, this studying you speak of is not necessary. You keep your ideas and the BS you've been fed and I'll keep mine.
ax1
Legend
Going to war with an executive order is unprecedented in American Politics, not even Bush pulled that one off although he helped solidify the stepping stone of having an Executive Dictatorship, and now we have our Super Congress that is a House Dictatorship.
fueledpassion
Well-known member
Agreed. Regardless which office or party is at fault, it is clear that our government as a whole is moving towards more federal control and less state and local control. This is socialism at the heart - central power overwhleming the rest. I dont mean to piss u guys off. Its silly that u'd let ur political stance cause u to hate or fight others. At least I have historical reasons why I think the way I do about it. And I hope it secretly encourages others to research on their own. Stop embracing momma's view for once. And also, I appreciate ur input btw on things that I could be wrong about. The reason I suggested that democrats are for socialist movements and repubs r not is simply because the GOP has candidates that are promoting the exact opposite of socialist movements such as returning government power back to states as well as getting hands off on the things that states and corporations can do on their own such as taxes and regulatory agencies...the Federal Government was injtially created to be a tool OF THE STATES. After the 17th amendment, the states became a tool of the federal government further reducing our natural rights and pushing to more central control which is nit a democratic state. Anyways, to each his own. Happy voting!
AE14
Board Sponsor
they have become one in the same. The last 2 administrations are no longer divided by party.
That is why it continually cracks me up how many people call our current administration socialist. Its laughable
ax1
Legend
What socialist movement do the Democrats and Obama really have? I dont see anything. All they have done was hand power and money to the corporations. Its corporatist, there is no socialism especially Obamacare. All I see them doing is supporting the Military industrial complex. They are the same as republicans.
fueledpassion
Well-known member
Invalid Link RemovedThat could be a start. Not to mention the restrictions his admin has placed on corporations. The very fact that communists parties are supporting him should say sometuing about what he stands for. I dunno. I'm starting to think it doesnt matter who is in office and that we're going down tuis road regardless now. I mean socialism sounds really nice on paper but it never works because the leaders and government always fail to remain above reproach. The human factor kicks in and things go bad. Thats been the case for any socialist/communists state. It happened to Rome, Greece, Germany, Russia, Japan and China but fortunately China fed off of american capitalism and indutrialization so they r making money now.
ax1
Legend
Im not going to that website, I dont have time sorry. I wanted specific examples from you, and not who supports or who votes or what they say...I want real policy that passed.
Restrictions? lol...ooohh lets hand them over trillions in tax dollars so they can keep their million+ bonuses and lets expand the wars over to Libya and possibly Syria so we can continue to finance the Military Industrial Complex, make Halliburton and countless other private overseas contractors billions of dollars more, lets force people to buy health insurance or go to jail, lets make TSA more powerful and help finance billions of dollars in contracts for naked body-scanner companies, lets give the Fed-Reserve more banking powers and even far less authority to oversight what they are doing, who they are sending money to and why, I can go on and on.
Obama is a corporatist, I still dont see where this socialism is coming from, who is he trying to help? and not who he is going to say who he will help, but who did he in fact help? The corporations.
I think our difference is that you think he is socialist moving on to communism, Im saying he went straight to fascism (in some ways) from day 1 after he won the election which was marketed socialist by the mainstream media and his teleprompter.
I know socialism doesnt work, Its nice but your 100% right you cannot trust government to do anything. The fact is that Karl Marx's paper was financed by NYC Wall Street bankers to solidify power over the populations.
True socialists are Ralph Nader or Bernie Sanders who I respect because they stick up for what they believe in.
fueledpassion
Well-known member
Then let's just agree to respectfully disagree with each other. Although, I really don't think we have a disagreement abount political philosophy, but rather, Obama's agenda. And that's ok really.
ax1
Legend
Yeah, seems like that, lol
Jessep76
Well-known member
I think his down fall was not entirely with the criticism of US foreign policy and the roots of 9-11, but also the comment that we do not give palestinians fair treatment. That is such a taboo subject especially (for some reason) if you believe they are in fact being mistreated which he alluded to. Which is ballsy. I'm not completely sure if all his radical ideas would work or not in our current society, but I'd vote for him in a heart beat.
ax1
Legend
Why would you think his ideas are radical? His ideas are make the most sense. All the other candidates are pro-war which is extremely radical to me.
I dont think Im really asking you a question, so you dont have to answer...just my point of view.
To me, talking economics without addressing ending all the wars and military industrial complex is very radical...all the candidates appear to be guilty of this besides Ron Paul. Ron Paul's idea's are the norm.
Jessep76
Well-known member
fueledpassion
Well-known member
Yeah I agree and I'd vote for Ron Paul in a heart beat, too. I personally dont think the war is necessary and since we're only getting a very small amount of our oil from the middle east I dont even think we have good reason to be over there.
ax1
Legend
We have enough oil in Dakota and Montana alone to take us completely out of debt and also give Americans enough oil until at least 2040.
The wars arent about protecting the oil supply for America...the wars are about (partly about, but wont get into it here) profiting off the oil thats exported throught the world.
ax1
Legend
We should find him any day now.
fueledpassion
Well-known member
yea I know. When one looks at all the excuses the government has given to be over there one can see something doesn't add up.
-Taliban isn't a real threat anymore. Sure, they might be able to do a sneak attack on us again but no more or less than they could 10 years ago.
-W. finished his daddy's work from years ago, so thats not a reason.
-We only pull maybe 4% of our oil supply from that region anyways. Hmmm...
ax1
Legend
Well, it is their land..Im not sticking up for them as a people but Im sure if China was building bases in Texas China would be getting sneak attacks too.
ax1
Legend
I think Bob Barr is someone to look into for his VP and would potentially be legitimate, although I have to look into it more.
AE14
Board Sponsor
I hate to disagree, but I do not see the socialist thing at all. In fact, I see quite the opposite. TO me, the Obama admin, is an extension of the previous 8 years, more like Bush III
ax1
Legend
Everybody is just going by the marketing instead of the policies...I agree with AE14, Obama is not socialist in any way, Obama= Bush's 3rd term. Look at what they do, not what they say.
carpee
Well-known member
Perhaps I misused socialism, which is my own ignorance.
My point is to agree with what he said about not only this administration, but most in power these days. Everyone wants a globally connected whatever, one world currency, one world gov't.
That is a truly scary road to be traveling down.
My point is to agree with what he said about not only this administration, but most in power these days. Everyone wants a globally connected whatever, one world currency, one world gov't.
That is a truly scary road to be traveling down.
Jessep76
Well-known member
O kept almost everyone on staff from W's team. He grants the republicans everything they ask for (up until this last weekend). I'm not even sure he's a democrat.
ax1
Legend
He is corporatist.
Conagher
Active member
Agreed.I just don`t see the socialism that is all the buzz amongst the Republicans and FoxNews.Obama just seems like business as usual to me.
ax1
Legend
I just want you Ron Paul supporters to be aware of 1 thing...
do not get excited and emotional if he wins.
for several reasons...
1st...he needs to finally be put to the test.
2nd...he has to deal with congress and the house, he refuses to abuse is executive order powers that have been established by bush and obama, therefore everything will be a long process and most in congress and the house may disagree with him
3rd....it will be short lived...4 years, 8 years tops then what? back to business as usual I bet with the next president.
Im just saying, dont get all emotional, It happened with me w/ Obama, and after a couple of months he flipped flopped on every campaign promise. Im not saying this will happen to Ron Paul, I almost feel confident (I will never put my trust completely in any politician) Ron Paul is true to what he believes, but we still have to deal with issue 2 and 3 that I posted.
do not get excited and emotional if he wins.
for several reasons...
1st...he needs to finally be put to the test.
2nd...he has to deal with congress and the house, he refuses to abuse is executive order powers that have been established by bush and obama, therefore everything will be a long process and most in congress and the house may disagree with him
3rd....it will be short lived...4 years, 8 years tops then what? back to business as usual I bet with the next president.
Im just saying, dont get all emotional, It happened with me w/ Obama, and after a couple of months he flipped flopped on every campaign promise. Im not saying this will happen to Ron Paul, I almost feel confident (I will never put my trust completely in any politician) Ron Paul is true to what he believes, but we still have to deal with issue 2 and 3 that I posted.
fueledpassion
Well-known member
Well said
ax1
Legend
I agree, after Ron Paul earn his right to be president, he will end the wars and will not win the Nobel Peace prize the way Obama did for expanding them. "War is Peace"
AE14
Board Sponsor
thank you for the good laugh AX.
In all honesty, you seem like a bright guy, I dont get how you support him. Certain policies make sense no doubt, but his isolationist philosophy as well as his "constitutionalist" thought wont work in a global economy. The world is much different than our founding parents had it, so using their policies in silly. Furthermore, Ron probably would have been good in the 18th century, but he is completely outdated. Being an isolationist cant work considering our current problems. The more I hear him speak, the more I wish he would stop.
With that said, I dont like any options. My vote will depend upon the Repub ticket. If they throw out a Perry/Palin or Perry/Jindal then my vote swings to Obama. If they put out a Romney/Huntsman or even Romney/Rubio I am going that way.
edit: the other thing too that I dont get with Paul supporters, he is a friggin career politician. What is it, 25+ years in the same spot?
ax1
Legend
I appreciate you liking my humor from time to time, I do not indeed believe Ron Paul will win the election....some chance but I wouldnt even put a $5 bet on it. I do dislike how our media is portraying him to be on the back of the line when he is on top, or winning the online debate polls.
Ron Paul isnt using the founding fathers as the basis of his economic policy. Ron Paul incorporates Austrian Economics in his political agenda Invalid Link Removed
His support for the founding fathers would help our economy in ways of our monetary system (end federal reserve, stop printing money out of thin air) the trillions wasted on wars, bad political policy such as war on drugs, unlimited expansion of government, etc..
To be any candidate who doesnt call for the immediate end of the wars cannot be taken seriously in my eyes in regards to economic policy.
I know he is a career politician 25+ years, but he is a consistent career politician. Ive been watching video's of his from the 80's and he is the same as he is today. As I have warned in a few previous posts, even if he wins I wouldnt suggest his supporters getting emotional over the victory as I clearly warn he needs to be truly tested should he be president.
I do not agree with all of Ron Paul's views on government. I personally wouldnt mind supporting and paying taxes on true non-corporate socialist idea's, and true universal health care/social security...I however do not trust government any longer to run such socialist policies and I would prefer to have government out of my life as much as possible from here on.
Im not sure how you think he is such an isolationist...it seems that may be inaccurate unless Im misunderstanding what you meant by that. Ron Paul is very open to talks and trading with every country including Cuba and Iran. To me he seems less of an isolationist than all our current politicians.
edit: Ill add, if Ron Paul is not in, I do not feel it is even in my ethics to even vote for anybody, unless Ralph Nader runs again Ill vote for him believe it or not.
Jessep76
Well-known member
Its seems like nobody is exceptionally thrilled with anyone. If other states have been bold enough to elect an independent, how long before the whole country would be willing to? At least for myself, I'd vote independent if it didn't mean it would put the safety of our country in jeopardy. 2008 I would have given my Obama vote to an independent or another party if Palin wasn't so bat sh!t crazy, which appears to be what other people are frightened of. Fear of the lesser of two evils losing by one vote.
ax1
Legend
Can you specify what ideas your referring to that you believe wouldnt work?
ax1
Legend
I dont think Bachman's problem is that she is a woman....Bachman's problem is that she is Michelle Bachman.
ax1
Legend
She has a rare allergic reaction to ink. Palin tried teaching her that one but unfortunately nothing could be done.
ax1
Legend
Im not a fan of Perry using an executive order to mandate a vaccine, but if she was president she would at least give some late night TV show hosts an unlimited supply of material.
ax1
Legend
Well, another debate that Ron Paul dominates down the books.
Fox News
Friday, September 23, 2011
The screenshot below shows results from a Fox News poll on who won the debate last night. Once again Ron Paul emerges as the winner, with close to 40% of over 70,000 votes.
Invalid Link Removed
Fox News
Friday, September 23, 2011
The screenshot below shows results from a Fox News poll on who won the debate last night. Once again Ron Paul emerges as the winner, with close to 40% of over 70,000 votes.
Invalid Link Removed
AE14
Board Sponsor
AX please take the blinders off. Online polls are like straw polls, utterly useless. How many of the Paul cult do you think sit there and actually vote over and over again? Probably most. Face it, he is not going to win. The right will never vote for him, and his base is too inconsistent to actually make it to the polls. He will be gone after a few primaries like most.
The interesting thing to me was Perry's fall and Huntsman making slight gains (actually in double digits in NH). Perry looks awful, and might not last with his debate performances.
Although, it might not matter, as the rumor mill is starting to move quickly that Mitch Daniels has convinced Chris Christie to run. Being a public employee in NJ, that makes me laugh :rofl:
The interesting thing to me was Perry's fall and Huntsman making slight gains (actually in double digits in NH). Perry looks awful, and might not last with his debate performances.
Although, it might not matter, as the rumor mill is starting to move quickly that Mitch Daniels has convinced Chris Christie to run. Being a public employee in NJ, that makes me laugh :rofl: