You don't think that other people don't try to artificially inflate votes for their candidate? Ron Paul made $6 million in one day on the 16th. Quote from Ron Paul "The average donation was $102; we had 58,407 individual contributors, of whom an astounding 24,915 were first-time donors."
The thing that pisses me off is that Ron Paul gives all this talk about the evil Fed and the evil inflation and yada yada yada, and yet the Ron Paul fan club is just eating up all of this, believing everything. You're taking economics lessons from a US representative/gynocologist? You honestly think that a guy who looks at [female body parts] all day long/representing not even a state (senator) or governing one (governor) but only is a mere REPRESENTATIVE of a tiny district, and you believe it all when he talks out of his ass about economics??? I feel sad when i look at youtube clips of ron paul yelling at Ben Bernake and the Fed chairman is just there like, what the fuck is this politician lecturing to ME about economics for, and Ben has to correct him on his economic thinking. The only other people who eat up Ron Paul's economic conspiracy theories are other conspiracy theorists/people who aren't crackpots but still have no reputable official grounding in economics.
Listen up: The majority of economists believe that central banks are necessary for the world economy. Why else do you think every nation in the world has one? Why is there a European Central Bank? It's too late to go back to the gold standard. stfu. There is no connection between a falling exchange rate and inflation. Currencies affect EXPORTS/IMPORTS and INVESTMENTS. If there is a connection, it's through 4 variables, and there is no strong bi-variable coorelation between currency and inflation.
Also ben bernake says that actually in recent years Money Growth has been quite moderate.
Ron Paul keeps on saying he's not isolationist, just non-interventionalist. Does that mean he'll continue to engage in diplomacy and economic ties but not do anything militarily? NO. He's an isolationist. He wants to withdraw from the UN (basically crippling it as the US provides most of UN funding). He wants to withdraw from WHO, WTO, all the free trade agreements (world free trade is the reason why the world economy is growing 5% each year idiots), kill federal education, kill income tax, increase the economic inequality even more than it is now (which isn't that bad, as Ben Bernake says, inequality is going to be a fact of life in the process of globalization so the focus should be not economic inequality but economic MOBILITY. ron paul killing education, and vocational training, thats basically killing the mobility) , he'll basically make the United States not a Federal system anymore but a CONFEDERACY with minimal federal role, make america an isolated country as resurging tyrants like russia and china go flexing their muscle all over the ex-USSR provinces and china does the same in Asia (with taiwan and military build up) and their increasing influence in Africa (which supports corrupt regimes in order to secure resources for their economy).
He is a paleoconservative , the same kind of politician who opposed entering WWI, WWII, and voting no to America joining the League of Nations. The probability of success of The League of Nations with America was moderate at best, America not joining it doomed it.
so not only would ron paul screw up america. he will screw up the WORLD. we already have enough trouble with a collective action problem amongst the worlds nations to stop climate change; hes gonna make even more collective action problems by minimizing the federal government and basically having each state being more powerful and more incooperative with each other.
Listen up: The majority of economists believe that central banks are necessary for the world economy. Why else do you think every nation in the world has one? Why is there a European Central Bank? It's too late to go back to the gold standard. stfu. There is no connection between a falling exchange rate and inflation. Currencies affect EXPORTS/IMPORTS and INVESTMENTS. If there is a connection, it's through 4 variables, and there is no strong bi-variable coorelation between currency and inflation.
Also ben bernake says that actually in recent years Money Growth has been quite moderate.
Ron Paul keeps on saying he's not isolationist, just non-interventionalist. Does that mean he'll continue to engage in diplomacy and economic ties but not do anything militarily? NO. He's an isolationist. He wants to withdraw from the UN (basically crippling it as the US provides most of UN funding). He wants to withdraw from WHO, WTO, all the free trade agreements (world free trade is the reason why the world economy is growing 5% each year idiots), kill federal education, kill income tax, increase the economic inequality even more than it is now (which isn't that bad, as Ben Bernake says, inequality is going to be a fact of life in the process of globalization so the focus should be not economic inequality but economic MOBILITY. ron paul killing education, and vocational training, thats basically killing the mobility) , he'll basically make the United States not a Federal system anymore but a CONFEDERACY with minimal federal role, make america an isolated country as resurging tyrants like russia and china go flexing their muscle all over the ex-USSR provinces and china does the same in Asia (with taiwan and military build up) and their increasing influence in Africa (which supports corrupt regimes in order to secure resources for their economy).
He is a paleoconservative , the same kind of politician who opposed entering WWI, WWII, and voting no to America joining the League of Nations. The probability of success of The League of Nations with America was moderate at best, America not joining it doomed it.
so not only would ron paul screw up america. he will screw up the WORLD. we already have enough trouble with a collective action problem amongst the worlds nations to stop climate change; hes gonna make even more collective action problems by minimizing the federal government and basically having each state being more powerful and more incooperative with each other.
Last edited by -]Eucalyptus[- (2007-12-23 00:38:35)
The Paulbots are notorious for spamming polls. There has been more than one poll that had to be taking down because of it... CNBC was one of them.Phrozenbot wrote:
You don't think that other people don't try to artificially inflate votes for their candidate? Ron Paul made $6 million in one day on the 16th. Quote from Ron Paul "The average donation was $102; we had 58,407 individual contributors, of whom an astounding 24,915 were first-time donors."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/21257762/site/14081545/
And I don't see what the big deal is around "in one day"... other than useless hype. He is still getting buried in fund raising overall. This was before the big day. After his 6 million dollar day he was at 18 mil. Well short of the top tier candidates.
http://www.fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/map … chKeyword=
BTW I actually like a lot of what Paul has to say (not all).. his fans can be pushy loons though. I think it's turning people off.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I'm not feeling that ambitious right now . I was spamming Guilanni btw..lol.. no reason. Votes can exceed 300 mil. It looks like Paul is getting the Ukrainian vote also.rdx-fx wrote:
Now, if you could automate that a touch more.Kmarion wrote:
[google]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8060698392803996949&hl=en[/google]
weee...
Would truly amuse me to see over 300 million votes for one of the candidates.
300 million being an approximate number for the population of the USA, if one of the candidates alone had over 300 million...
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Doug Casey, James Turk, Al Korelin, Frank Veneroso and others I've read and listened to seem to be in the same boat with Ron Paul when he says the US economy is in a serious monetary crisis.-]Eucalyptus[- wrote:
The thing that pisses me off is that Ron Paul gives all this talk about the evil Fed and the evil inflation and yada yada yada, and yet the Ron Paul fan club is just eating up all of this, believing everything. You're taking economics lessons from a US representative/gynocologist? You honestly think that a guy who looks at [female body parts] all day long/representing not even a state (senator) or governing one (governor) but only is a mere REPRESENTATIVE of a tiny district, and you believe it all when he talks out of his ass about economics??? I feel sad when i look at youtube clips of ron paul yelling at Ben Bernake and the Fed chairman is just there like, what the fuck is this politician lecturing to ME about economics for, and Ben has to correct him on his economic thinking. The only other people who eat up Ron Paul's economic conspiracy theories are other conspiracy theorists/people who aren't crackpots but still have no reputable official grounding in economics.
Listen up: The majority of economists believe that central banks are necessary for the world economy. Why else do you think every nation in the world has one? Why is there a European Central Bank? It's too late to go back to the gold standard. stfu. There is no connection between a falling exchange rate and inflation. Currencies affect EXPORTS/IMPORTS and INVESTMENTS. If there is a connection, it's through 4 variables, and there is no strong bi-variable coorelation between currency and inflation.
Also ben bernake says that actually in recent years Money Growth has been quite moderate.
Ron Paul keeps on saying he's not isolationist, just non-interventionalist. Does that mean he'll continue to engage in diplomacy and economic ties but not do anything militarily? NO. He's an isolationist. He wants to withdraw from the UN (basically crippling it as the US provides most of UN funding). He wants to withdraw from WHO, WTO, all the free trade agreements (world free trade is the reason why the world economy is growing 5% each year idiots), kill federal education, kill income tax, increase the economic inequality even more than it is now (which isn't that bad, as Ben Bernake says, inequality is going to be a fact of life in the process of globalization so the focus should be not economic inequality but economic MOBILITY. ron paul killing education, and vocational training, thats basically killing the mobility) , he'll basically make the United States not a Federal system anymore but a CONFEDERACY with minimal federal role, make america an isolated country as resurging tyrants like russia and china go flexing their muscle all over the ex-USSR provinces and china does the same in Asia (with taiwan and military build up) and their increasing influence in Africa (which supports corrupt regimes in order to secure resources for their economy).
He is a paleoconservative , the same kind of politician who opposed entering WWI, WWII, and voting no to America joining the League of Nations. The probability of success of The League of Nations with America was moderate at best, America not joining it doomed it.
so not only would ron paul screw up america. he will screw up the WORLD. we already have enough trouble with a collective action problem amongst the worlds nations to stop climate change; hes gonna make even more collective action problems by minimizing the federal government and basically having each state being more powerful and more incooperative with each other.
Yes, central banks are necessary... for fiat currencies that is. They purposely make gold as unattractive as possible to keep the "system" going. Gold and fiat currencies are competitive you know. Data trends show that the DOW is not doing as good as everyone seems to think (it is in a down trend) when compared to gold standards. And the stock market kept rising for no apparent reason in Argentina, Weimar Germany, and countless other examples before their currencies failed. But the real reason for the US is that these excess dollars are trying to find a home, not because the economy is doing good. In fact there are a lot of major sectors worse than recession in the US.
If the Fed was abolished, then we could implement a gold or silver standard to the dollar, meaning it represents a tangible asset instead of thin air and our assets are would be much more secure. This business that you can just print money out of thin air to make liquidity is ridiculous. Just a week ago the ECB printed 348 billion Euros out of thin air. Hasn't anyone learned from Weimar Germany? And we are doing the same thing. Ben Bernanke's whole idea of thinking was to print money and now we have given him the printing press that is the Fed Reserve. You know all major investors are planning to or already are going to cut back how much they buy our t-bonds? Where are those excess dollars going to go that no one is buying?
It will only get worse as more people exit the dollar. We are living on borrowed time and money. And the talk about having the government baby sit us from cradle to grave just isn't feasible. The fed says the debt is about at $10 trillion, but if you take into account promised services from the government it totals to about $60 trillion. There is no way we can fund that and pay back our real debt if it is business as usual.
Besides economics, I think states should be the ones taxing our income to fund things like state education and health care etc. And with no Federal income tax, states could choose to tax people more with the money they save or let them keep it. People are not the same in the US. Some are more liberal, and some are more conservative, so they can decide what is best for them.
When it comes to intervention, I think fighting in WW II was just and the right thing to do, but WW I lead to WW II and WW II lead to the Cold War and that has lead to a lot of other wars. My point? If we are going to intervene, we better do it right, and it better be justified, or else you get situations like Iraq. Ron Paul isn't a isolationist, he just believes in something called blow back.
We have a constitution. If the things we want are not allowed then amend it and it will be constitutional, because it seems like it is respected less by our members in Congress and President more and more, and the constitution is what will continue keep to keep us free when other democratic societies give up their rights. And I don't see many candidates up there trying to win the nomination defending it well. NAU anyone?
I don't agree with everything Ron Paul has to say, but he speaks for the constitution and I think our founding fathers have given us priceless advice and principles if we follow them.
Last edited by Phrozenbot (2007-12-23 19:52:32)
I'm moving this to the proper thread.
Ron Paul on Glenn Beck last week. He gave him the full hour.
My Christmas gift to Ron Paul supporters.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt1.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt2.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt3.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt4.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt5.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt6.cnn
Or the lower quality youtube version
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Pme20JHPkwk
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7Y4j4m90-XM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=oNjnvp5z6kM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FGrlZTlD-Sc
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lF_92PpCyUs <<
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lnm1nPHdATQ
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DD1qMXMOjfo
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Kze69_lmGmA
This is how you support your candidate. You get his message out. Forget about wasting your time with useless polls.
Ron Paul on Glenn Beck last week. He gave him the full hour.
My Christmas gift to Ron Paul supporters.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt1.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt2.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt3.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt4.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt5.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestof … ew.pt6.cnn
Or the lower quality youtube version
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Pme20JHPkwk
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7Y4j4m90-XM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=oNjnvp5z6kM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FGrlZTlD-Sc
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lF_92PpCyUs <<
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lnm1nPHdATQ
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DD1qMXMOjfo
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Kze69_lmGmA
This is how you support your candidate. You get his message out. Forget about wasting your time with useless polls.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I was watching this earlier and was glad to be able to listen to more he has to say. I was extremely disappointed at CNN for giving him barely any time, so hopefully he can better explain himself to the American people before calling him crazy or a nut.
Discussion of the NAU will not give your candidate more credibility. Is it in the realm of possibility? Yes. Is it likely in my lifetime? Seriously doubt it.Phrozenbot wrote:
NAU anyone?
Here is the last segment. The Messiah is pleased..lol.Phrozenbot wrote:
I was watching this earlier and was glad to be able to listen to more he has to say. I was extremely disappointed at CNN for giving him barely any time, so hopefully he can better explain himself to the American people before calling him crazy or a nut.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
The EU came about in 50 years, why not the NAU? If it is the case, I won't see it until I'm 70 but I think we will see great changes before that happens.Stingray24 wrote:
Discussion of the NAU will not give your candidate more credibility. Is it in the realm of possibility? Yes. Is it likely in my lifetime? Seriously doubt it.Phrozenbot wrote:
NAU anyone?
But my point was the NAU is something either candidates are ignorant of or don't want to talk about it. I don't think Europeans 50 years ago suspected that trade agreements and communities would eventually lead to creation of the EU we see today. The NAU would mean we lose a lot more of our sovereignty, and that is the whole point about protecting the constitution.
He explains his stance on a NAU possibility in the videos I posted. He said he doesn't think it's next month or next year. His concern is the general direction we are heading towards. He feels the plans are being put into place... and who really can dispute that?Stingray24 wrote:
Discussion of the NAU will not give your candidate more credibility. Is it in the realm of possibility? Yes. Is it likely in my lifetime? Seriously doubt it.Phrozenbot wrote:
NAU anyone?
About 1:45 into the clip.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Watched Ron Paul on Meet the Press this morning. He sounded like a complete nutcase. He had no data to back up any of his platform's most fundamental positions. He couldn't tell Russert how much money the US would save by pulling all of our overseas military (not just Iraq, mind you) back to the US. He couldn't tell Russert how much the US would save by abolishing the IRS. He couldn't tell Russert what his alternative to raising the revenue lost by abolishing the personal income tax would be.
I thought I was in agreement with him, but I realized today I'm not. He's all talk. Can't even be bothered to have his campaign staff research their platform's primary points and tell us why it would be beneficial to do those things.
I thought I was in agreement with him, but I realized today I'm not. He's all talk. Can't even be bothered to have his campaign staff research their platform's primary points and tell us why it would be beneficial to do those things.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp … 9#22378798 ^^ For those who would like to judge for themselves.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Ron Paul deletes his cookies.
spoken like a true ron paul supporteraimless wrote:
I don't usually pay attention to politics, but I voted Ron Paul.
it was thinking like that that put bush in the white house in 2001. fuck man, havent we learned our god damn lesson!
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2007-12-23 11:22:14)
please tell me you remember my posts condemning that asshole? please. I know Kmarion has to remember.FEOS wrote:
Watched Ron Paul on Meet the Press this morning. He sounded like a complete nutcase. He had no data to back up any of his platform's most fundamental positions. He couldn't tell Russert how much money the US would save by pulling all of our overseas military (not just Iraq, mind you) back to the US. He couldn't tell Russert how much the US would save by abolishing the IRS. He couldn't tell Russert what his alternative to raising the revenue lost by abolishing the personal income tax would be.
I thought I was in agreement with him, but I realized today I'm not. He's all talk. Can't even be bothered to have his campaign staff research their platform's primary points and tell us why it would be beneficial to do those things.
people who know a cunt hair's worth of knowledge about the american political system will not vote for ron paul. not only because he just talks way too good of a game, but he has no practical way of achieving his goals. or realist. the guy belongs on the top of a mountain living in a tin shed with a black powder shotgun shooting at varmints, not in the white house making decisions for me and the people I know. I thyink I would vote for Dennis Kucinich before I vote for Ron Paul. I cant stand dennis kucinich.
Oh believe me...I remember. In fact, as I was watching Paul implode, all I could think was, "Gunslinger was right all along."GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
please tell me you remember my posts condemning that asshole? please. I know Kmarion has to remember.FEOS wrote:
Watched Ron Paul on Meet the Press this morning. He sounded like a complete nutcase. He had no data to back up any of his platform's most fundamental positions. He couldn't tell Russert how much money the US would save by pulling all of our overseas military (not just Iraq, mind you) back to the US. He couldn't tell Russert how much the US would save by abolishing the IRS. He couldn't tell Russert what his alternative to raising the revenue lost by abolishing the personal income tax would be.
I thought I was in agreement with him, but I realized today I'm not. He's all talk. Can't even be bothered to have his campaign staff research their platform's primary points and tell us why it would be beneficial to do those things.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
He didn't mention a specific plan but he did name some options and the thing is you can't phase out the IRS or Federal reserve over Friday night.FEOS wrote:
Watched Ron Paul on Meet the Press this morning. He sounded like a complete nutcase. He had no data to back up any of his platform's most fundamental positions. He couldn't tell Russert how much money the US would save by pulling all of our overseas military (not just Iraq, mind you) back to the US. He couldn't tell Russert how much the US would save by abolishing the IRS. He couldn't tell Russert what his alternative to raising the revenue lost by abolishing the personal income tax would be.
I thought I was in agreement with him, but I realized today I'm not. He's all talk. Can't even be bothered to have his campaign staff research their platform's primary points and tell us why it would be beneficial to do those things.
From my own experience it always seems Ron Paul has been able to site some good examples to support his points most of the time compared to other candidates. I agree though that he sounded a bit ignorant here.
I like his concepts more than his ideas, as I'm not entirely sure about them all. He has been the most thought provoking candidate I've ever seen. But he is right about their being a monetary crises. And I'm no sheep following everything he says about economics. I've listened to other people and read what they have to say and I just can't believe people don't get it.
the thing you've got to remember about ron paul is that even though he's not going to be allowed to do everything he wants to do, at least he wants to do it, and its different than the norm. he's going to find ways to save money and make us work better. sure, he might not be allowed to kill the fed, but he's going to do something to pull it back under national control. sure, he might not abolish the irs, but he's going to take a broken corrupted system and put it back under watch. do you see where i'm going here?Phrozenbot wrote:
He didn't mention a specific plan but he did name some options and the thing is you can't phase out the IRS or Federal reserve over Friday night.FEOS wrote:
Watched Ron Paul on Meet the Press this morning. He sounded like a complete nutcase. He had no data to back up any of his platform's most fundamental positions. He couldn't tell Russert how much money the US would save by pulling all of our overseas military (not just Iraq, mind you) back to the US. He couldn't tell Russert how much the US would save by abolishing the IRS. He couldn't tell Russert what his alternative to raising the revenue lost by abolishing the personal income tax would be.
I thought I was in agreement with him, but I realized today I'm not. He's all talk. Can't even be bothered to have his campaign staff research their platform's primary points and tell us why it would be beneficial to do those things.
From my own experience it always seems Ron Paul has been able to site some good examples to support his points most of the time compared to other candidates. I agree though that he sounded a bit ignorant here.
I like his concepts more than his ideas, as I'm not entirely sure about them all. He has been the most thought provoking candidate I've ever seen. But he is right about their being a monetary crises. And I'm no sheep following everything he says about economics. I've listened to other people and read what they have to say and I just can't believe people don't get it.
the executive branch, under the hands of somebody who respects the constitution, does not claim "executive privilege" or other such bullshit. he'll remind us what the president is supposed to be like, and thats what we really need right now.
he's a breath of fresh air.
'sides, better a nut that a corrupt neocon.
Yes, our spending has to do way more with our debt than how much we can raise to pay for it. And I understand his ideas and I'm sure him and his advisers will help find solutions to whatever he wants to change. I don't think the system can keep going and sustain itself for very long.
By the way Merry Christmas.
By the way Merry Christmas.
Well, Paul's certainly not representative of what the Republican party has become. I'll give you that much. You guys ought to return to true small government. The social conservative agenda is anything but small government.Stingray24 wrote:
Huckabee is about as Republican as Jimmy Carter and Ron Paul is a nut. Therefore, Romney or Thompson.
Romney is a twofaced asshole, but Thompson is ok. I'd much rather see Thompson win than Romney or Huckabee.
Last edited by Turquoise (2007-12-25 10:42:02)
Admittedly, I'm not 100% with Paul on his foreign policy. I believe in limited intervention -- much more limited than our current status. We need to get out of Iraq and do something about Darfur, for example.-]Eucalyptus[- wrote:
Ron Paul keeps on saying he's not isolationist, just non-interventionalist. Does that mean he'll continue to engage in diplomacy and economic ties but not do anything militarily? NO. He's an isolationist. He wants to withdraw from the UN (basically crippling it as the US provides most of UN funding). He wants to withdraw from WHO, WTO, all the free trade agreements (world free trade is the reason why the world economy is growing 5% each year idiots), kill federal education, kill income tax, increase the economic inequality even more than it is now (which isn't that bad, as Ben Bernake says, inequality is going to be a fact of life in the process of globalization so the focus should be not economic inequality but economic MOBILITY. ron paul killing education, and vocational training, thats basically killing the mobility) , he'll basically make the United States not a Federal system anymore but a CONFEDERACY with minimal federal role, make america an isolated country as resurging tyrants like russia and china go flexing their muscle all over the ex-USSR provinces and china does the same in Asia (with taiwan and military build up) and their increasing influence in Africa (which supports corrupt regimes in order to secure resources for their economy).
As for free trade agreements, most of them have opened our markets without opening those of others. NAFTA mostly benefitted Canada and Mexico, not us. CAFTA mostly benefitted Central America, not us. We need reciprocal trade policy. That is, we shouldn't open our markets anymore than our trade partners do.
I'd rather have a paleoconservative in the Oval Office than a neoconservative. Isolationism is still better than the level of interventionism we currently engage in.-]Eucalyptus[- wrote:
He is a paleoconservative , the same kind of politician who opposed entering WWI, WWII, and voting no to America joining the League of Nations. The probability of success of The League of Nations with America was moderate at best, America not joining it doomed it.
so not only would ron paul screw up america. he will screw up the WORLD. we already have enough trouble with a collective action problem amongst the worlds nations to stop climate change; hes gonna make even more collective action problems by minimizing the federal government and basically having each state being more powerful and more incooperative with each other.
Decentralizing authority is better than our current arrangement of a vastly larger federal government that serves special interests over the interests of the general public. I'd say we've erred on the side of big government for far too long.
I listened to Sunday's MtP with Dr. Paul, and I must admit I was less than impressed with his performance. That was the worst interview I've ever heard him give. He did much better on This Week a couple months ago, and in all the debates I've seen. If you're going to form an accurate opinion of Dr. Paul, that one interview is probably the worst single piece of evidence to use.FEOS wrote:
Watched Ron Paul on Meet the Press this morning. He sounded like a complete nutcase.
It's likely nearly impossible to determine, actually. We can calculate all the money budgeted for Iraq because Congress always sends it up in a standalone bill, separate from the rest of the budget. Regular spending for all our military in its standard, non-Iraq, non-Afghanistan function is rolled up into a single appropriations bill that's several hundred pages thick. Tallying up all the different allocations in all the different sections and determining what money is going to be spent on military upkeep in the States versus in Korea, Germany, Italy, Britain, etc. is probably a near-insurmountable task. Unless there's a specific reference to certain projects at an overseas base, the money is just allocated to general functions for the DoD and they spend it how they wish. He did, however, give a ballpark estimate of the money we would save by pulling troops out of the 130+ nations in which they are located now.He had no data to back up any of his platform's most fundamental positions. He couldn't tell Russert how much money the US would save by pulling all of our overseas military (not just Iraq, mind you) back to the US.
I don't think his position was ever that abolishing the income tax would be a revenue gain for the Treasury.He couldn't tell Russert how much the US would save by abolishing the IRS.
No, Russert (and you, apparently) simply wouldn't accept his answer that reducing spending dramatically would negate the need for that revenue.He couldn't tell Russert what his alternative to raising the revenue lost by abolishing the personal income tax would be.
He did tell you why they would be beneficial. Your only real beef is that he didn't have a ledger sheet on-hand to tell you, to the penny, how much each of his proposals would cost in lost revenue, and how much they'd save in revenue not spent.I thought I was in agreement with him, but I realized today I'm not. He's all talk. Can't even be bothered to have his campaign staff research their platform's primary points and tell us why it would be beneficial to do those things.
Jesus, I wish we had anti-karma. I'd smack you upside the head with a healthy dose of it. Who the hell are you to assume you know anything about Ron Paul supporters based on one person's statement that they don't USUALLY pay attention to the issues. This does leave open the possibility, you realize, that he is paying attention NOW because Paul has gotten him interested.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
spoken like a true ron paul supporter
Now please tell me I'm not a "true" Ron Paul supporter because I pay extensive attention to politics, read Supreme and Circuit Court opinions in my leisure time, have browsed every issue of the Congressional Record for the last two Congresses, and have voted in every federal election since I turned 18.