• Ron Paul Answers questions submitted by Reddit (in person)
    61 replies, posted
[QUOTE=w00tf1zh;34559431]This was made in 2009, by the way. Check the date. (vid)[/QUOTE] Wow, you know reddit was made back in 2005!? I thought it was a new thing...
[QUOTE=Swagger420;34562163]WILL HE CREATE JOBS THO?[/QUOTE] Is it really so difficult to type out "though"?
[QUOTE=Koenigsegg;34562717]Wow, you know reddit was made back in 2005!? I thought it was a new thing...[/QUOTE] what are you doing [editline]5th February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Boba_Fett;34563396]Is it really so difficult to type out "though"?[/QUOTE] who cares tho
[QUOTE=Pace.;34556662]To all the people who say they dont support ron paul, what other politician would directly answer internet questions, including controversial ones? (hint obama) Besides, would you prefer Romney, Newt, or Santorum? In before another idiot says obama, worry about that when the nominations are over.[/QUOTE] Why is it that people like you feel the need to be an elitist prick about your own opinion? Some people have different opinions, that doesn't make them idiots or bad people.
[QUOTE=Darth_GW7;34556617]Too liberal for republican voters. Too republican for liberal voters. [/QUOTE] He's a Libertarian. Basically shorthand for fiscal conservative, social liberal. He wants the government to sit down and shut up about people's personal lives. Republicans hate him because he's for shrinking our presence overseas and getting the government out of moral legislation, Liberals hate him because he wants to end entitlements and other big-government programs. I love him :) He has a true understanding of the original vision for the country, hes just a few generations too late...
[QUOTE=sdwise;34563624]He's a Libertarian. Basically shorthand for fiscal conservative, social liberal. He wants the government to sit down and shut up about people's personal lives. Republicans hate him because he's for shrinking our presence overseas and getting the government out of moral legislation, Liberals hate him because he wants to end entitlements and other big-government programs. I love him :) He has a true understanding of the original vision for the country, hes just a few generations too late...[/QUOTE] Ron Paul is the only surviving member of the founding fathers.
[QUOTE=The golden;34565540]Totally excluding the fact he wants to ban abortion. Old men should not be allowed to dictate what women do with their bodies. For that reason alone I would not vote for him.[/QUOTE] I don't like his stance on abortion either, but if that's your top priority that's sad. Plus if its super early he said you'd still be able to, just not 7 months after it happened.
[QUOTE=The golden;34565540]Totally excluding the fact he wants to ban abortion. Old men should not be allowed to dictate what women do with their bodies. For that reason alone I would not vote for him.[/QUOTE] yeah we should just let our current government riddled with corruption continue dragging us down until it leads to a total economic collapse
[QUOTE=The golden;34566656]Yo, [/QUOTE] You know what's a financial disaster waiting to happen? Our current budget and spending 100 billion a month on bullshit like trying to force Sweden and Italy to pass censorship laws. What did Obama have to say about that? What did he have to say to half of the questions asked by people on his recent online town-hall? Oh wait -- he didn't. (he ignored them and refused to answer, deeming marijuana an "inappropriate" topic) I know Obama is a good sport and a decent guy personally -- but he's a very weak president. Hell, he's trying to force the states into writing laws that enforce schooling for everyone until they're at-least 18. I hope you enjoy your freedom, because it won't be around forever, [I]yo[/I]!
I agree with all of his policies except for the war on drugs, his foreign policy, etc. Sorry guys but Mitt Romney is the only electable candidate who WILL create jobs and save america.
A while ago, I bought Ron Paul's "The Revolution: A Manifesto". Here's a short excerpt from his chapter titled "Economic Freedom" [release]David Walker, the comptroller general at the U.S. Government Accountability Office, tells us that Social Security and Medicare are headed for disaster because of demographic trends and rising health care costs. The number of younger taxpayers for each older retiree will continue to decline. The demand for "free" prescription drugs under Medicare will explode. If present trends continue, by 204 the entire federal budget will be consumed by Social Security and Medicare. [I]Forty percent of our entire private-sector output[/I] will need to go to just these two programs. The only options for balancing the budget would be cutting total federal spending by about 60 percent, or doubling federal taxes. Furthermore, Walker asserts, we cannot grow our way out of this problem. Faster economic growth can only delay the inevitable hard choices. To close the long-term entitlement gap, the U.S. economy would have to grow by double digits every year for the next 75 years. Issues like these are predictably portrayed as contests between generous souls who want to provide for their fellow men on one hand, and misers and misanthropes who care nothing for the suffering of their fellow citizens on the other. I should not have to point out this absurd caricature. The fact is, [I]we do not have the resources to sustain these programs in the long run.[/I] There is no way around this simple fact, a fact politicians consistently ignore or conceal in order to tell Americans what they think their fellow countrymen want to hear.[/release] Page 82-83. All emphasizes are his, not mine.
[QUOTE=Stick it in her pooper;34556573]Who cares if random Facepunchers say they hate Reddit[/QUOTE] Do the majority of Facepunchers hate Reddit? Is it around 60%-100%? I WANNA KNOW IF I SHOULD HATE REDDIT OR NOT! #peerpressure
I was kind of interested, but as soon as he started into "net neutrality means regulation and I'm against regulation" I just facepalmed and stopped the video.
So I typed in Mitt Romney into YouTube and sorted by rating. Got an entire page of pro-Ron Paul videos.
Ron Paul is very... different. I do disagree with him on a lot of issues, but for some reason I could see myself voting for him, though I'm decently left-wing. He's definitely better than any of the other Republicans, though. And by a huge margin.
[QUOTE=Stick it in her pooper;34566816]You know what's a financial disaster waiting to happen? Our current budget and spending 100 billion a month on bullshit like trying to force Sweden and Italy to pass censorship laws. What did Obama have to say about that? What did he have to say to half of the questions asked by people on his recent online town-hall? Oh wait -- he didn't. (he ignored them and refused to answer, deeming marijuana an "inappropriate" topic) I know Obama is a good sport and a decent guy personally -- but he's a very weak president. Hell, he's trying to force the states into writing laws that enforce schooling for everyone until they're at-least 18. I hope you enjoy your freedom, because it won't be around forever, [I]yo[/I]![/QUOTE] if this isnt sarcasm then nice job sidestepping that entire fuckin post and then posting something incredibly dumb "I hope you enjoy your freedom, because it won't be around forever, [I]yo[/I]!"
[QUOTE=RichyZ;34568607]hate it because "my hobbies include atheism and gasmasks" -reddit users[/QUOTE] Sounds like facepunch.
[QUOTE=The golden;34559754] he wants to flatout ban abortion.[/QUOTE] Read the abortion bills he has introduced to congress,they all include legal clauses banning the Federal Government from restricting or regulating the act of abortion in anyway This man does not allow his personal opinions cloud his judgement when it comes to the rights of people on the federal level
[QUOTE=VistaPOWA;34556758]At this point, it's pretty much Romney vs Obama, right? You guys really need a third choice. Obama is pretty good, but maybe it's time for a third party to win the election.[/QUOTE] Voting for a third party because you're sick of one party and hate the other. Look how well that turned out in the UK.
[QUOTE=cheesedelux;34572418]Voting for a third party because you're sick of one party and hate the other. Look how well that turned out in the UK.[/QUOTE] It's all about the election system. It needs to be changed. FPTP needs to go. Alternative Vote or better or bust.
[QUOTE=Hidole555;34572448]It's all about the election system. It needs to be changed. FPTP needs to go. Alternative Vote or better or bust.[/QUOTE] Knowing it would fuck them over forever, they somehow managed to convince people that it was "too confusing" when it was extremely simple. Basically telling people that they're too stupid to work something out, and then they make no effort to work said thing out. Good job everyone.
I knew how AV would work, I just thought that FPTP was fit for purpose. PR would be a perhaps more nationally fair way of doing things, but then you'd lose constituency level MP representation. But back to the topic.. Not really following this round of the US elections, don't know enough about it to comment really. Only happy that Rick Perry got nowhere.
Not bad
[QUOTE=Chicken_Chaser;34566223]I don't like his stance on abortion either, but if that's your top priority that's sad. Plus if its super early he said you'd still be able to, just not 7 months after it happened.[/QUOTE] "If one of your major priorities is candidates' stance on banning a woman's right to her own bodily tissues and how to use them, then that's sad." And he signed the pledge that he would ban abortion and claimed to be the most "pro-life president" that we would ever have.
[QUOTE=Matriax;34577409] Not really following this round of the US elections, don't know enough about it to comment really. Only happy that Rick Perry got nowhere.[/QUOTE] Supporting Romney, Gingrich, or Santorum is bad. Supporting Obama or Ron Paul is... acceptable, for now.
[QUOTE=Splarg!;34568374]I was kind of interested, but as soon as he started into "net neutrality means regulation and I'm against regulation" I just facepalmed and stopped the video.[/QUOTE] Well, you also have to factor in his free-market mentality. If net neutrality were to be legislated, it would let you visit whatever sites you wanted, sure. But it would also be a huge government overstep into the markets. So let's say it's not legislated and ISP's decide to start charging more to visit certain sites. What happens? People leave those ISP's for cheaper/less restrictive ones. The ISP that stays neutral or cheaper will essentially come out on top, and the free market has solved the problem with no government intervention or regulation. This is Ron Paul's (and my own) mentality.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.