[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32067864]
"If they want to oppress people, I say let them!" Truly a great policy to have.
[/QUOTE]
How is it oppression if the people of the state got what they wanted? Most gays are oppressed [B]right now[/B]. LGBT rights being thrown out the window when you let states decide? If you're following the news, most social progress has come from [B]states that have legalized same sex marriage[/B]. Why are you against that? I don't see Obama now, or in the future, creating any amendment to the Constitution allowing same sex marriage.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32067864]
Yes, because it's totally feasible to move states in an economy where it's incredibly hard to find a job.[/QUOTE]
And we wouldn't be in this economic situation (or at least it wouldn't be so bad) if we listened to Ron Paul back in 2002-03 when he predicted the housing bubble that would be caused by federal government interference which began this economic recession: [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnuoHx9BINc"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnuoHx9BINc[/URL] & [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04B3Wl2qouw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04B3Wl2qouw[/URL]
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;32065242]pro-life, anti gay, anti porn, anti but sex, but, pro cocaine, crack, heroin, and weed.
sounds reasonable.[/QUOTE]
Ron Paul is pro-life, but it isn't because of religious beliefs. When he was studying to become a gynecologist, one of his instructors performed an abortion and it deeply disturbed him. Also Ron Paul is actually pro porn and is cool with people watching it: [URL="http://www2.tbo.com/news/politics/2011/may/13/3/tea-party-godfather-ron-paul-running-for-president-ar-207073/"]http://www2.tbo.com/news/politics/2011/may/13/3/tea-party-godfather-ron-paul-running-for-president-ar-207073/[/URL]. There are even strippers who support Ron Paul: [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPfPnF4Mbog"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPfPnF4Mbog[/URL]. As for Ron Paul being anti gay, how? He's totally cool with states legalizing gay marriage. Ron Paul doesn't go around like the other Republican candidates and say being gay goes against God and all that other crap. Listen to what a gay guy says on Ron Paul: [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2yIxMtQLZU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2yIxMtQLZU[/URL]
I do not care why he is pro life! All that matters is that he is!
[QUOTE=person11;32068917]I do not care why he is pro life! All that matters is that he is![/QUOTE]
Oh my gawd, you sound like some redneck: "I do not care why he is [B][I]black[/I][/B]! All that matters is that he is!"
[QUOTE=GoodStuff;32068946]Oh my gawd, you sound like some redneck: "I do not care why he is [B][I]black[/I][/B]! All that matters is that he is!"[/QUOTE]
swing and a miss
Honestly, I don't think any of the candidates are shaping up to be too good. If I [i]had[/i] to choose, it'd be Ron Paul though. (or Stephen Colbert's main man, RICK PARRY. WITH AN "A" FOR AMERICA.)
I could have explained myself beter than that, but I do not take it back! He wants to restrict abortions, or at least would rather have it not exist. It does not matter what made him think this, just that he wants to end something that saves lives.
[QUOTE=Chilean;32062153]Correct me if I'm wrong but there are practically no LGBT rights on a federal scale.
States do it however. Yeah, states are so horrible and oppressive, not like the federal government at all. You know, the federal government that cracks down on medical marijuana in California? Yeah, total freedom.
I mean Christ, look how much flak Arizona got for giving police the power to investigate if they thought someone was an illegal immigrant. Now imagine what would happen if a state tried to bring back segregation.[/QUOTE]
I meant as in any chance.
[editline]1st September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Chilean;32062153]Correct me if I'm wrong but there are practically no LGBT rights on a federal scale.
States do it however. Yeah, states are so horrible and oppressive, not like the federal government at all. You know, the federal government that cracks down on medical marijuana in California? Yeah, total freedom.
I mean Christ, look how much flak Arizona got for giving police the power to investigate if they thought someone was an illegal immigrant. Now imagine what would happen if a state tried to bring back segregation.[/QUOTE]
Yes, meanwhile Texas tried to outlaw anal sex.
I'm not saying States would all go back but the vast majority of mainly empty states with massive rural communities would become even more backwards than they already are.
You're using states that on a case by case basis have had a left lean. New York is the oddball in this because once you get past New York City, you get Syracuse and that's a small city. The rest is very rural, very right, very religious counties.
[QUOTE=GoodStuff;32068862]How is it oppression if the people of the state got what they wanted? Most gays are oppressed [B]right now[/B]. LGBT rights being thrown out the window when you let states decide? If you're following the news, most social progress has come from [B]states that have legalized same sex marriage[/B]. Why are you against that? I don't see Obama now, or in the future, creating any amendment to the Constitution allowing same sex marriage.
And we wouldn't be in this economic situation (or at least it wouldn't be so bad) if we listened to Ron Paul back in 2002-03 when he predicted the housing bubble that would be caused by federal government interference which began this economic recession: [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnuoHx9BINc"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnuoHx9BINc[/URL] & [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04B3Wl2qouw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04B3Wl2qouw[/URL]
Ron Paul is pro-life, but it isn't because of religious beliefs. When he was studying to become a gynecologist, one of his instructors performed an abortion and it deeply disturbed him. Also Ron Paul is actually pro porn and is cool with people watching it: [URL="http://www2.tbo.com/news/politics/2011/may/13/3/tea-party-godfather-ron-paul-running-for-president-ar-207073/"]http://www2.tbo.com/news/politics/2011/may/13/3/tea-party-godfather-ron-paul-running-for-president-ar-207073/[/URL]. There are even strippers who support Ron Paul: [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPfPnF4Mbog"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPfPnF4Mbog[/URL]. As for Ron Paul being anti gay, how? He's totally cool with states legalizing gay marriage. Ron Paul doesn't go around like the other Republican candidates and say being gay goes against God and all that other crap. Listen to what a gay guy says on Ron Paul: [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2yIxMtQLZU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2yIxMtQLZU[/URL][/QUOTE]
This.
[QUOTE=Falstad007;32069338]This.[/QUOTE]
Ummm what? The Federal government didn't get involved with the housing bubble until AFTER it popped.
And the guy is really cool until you realize that not every state will actually represent its people or it just may represent the majority. Wisconsin for instance...
[QUOTE=Swilly;32069390]
And the guy is really cool until you realize that not every state will actually represent its people [b]or it just may represent the majority.[/b] Wisconsin for instance...[/QUOTE]
Isn't that what the majority elected them for? To represent the people that voted for them?
[QUOTE=Keegs;32052577]Ron Paul is okay however his idea that civil rights should be left up to the states is insane.[/QUOTE]
The Civil War was the most gruesome war in American history and could have been prevented, though. If State's Rights were respected it'd never happen. State's Rights were probably not included to protect slavery because slavery wasn't as vital to the cotton industry until the cotton gin was invented, therefore the founding fathers probably included State's Rights to [i]prevent civil war[/i].
[QUOTE=DuCT;32069484]Isn't that what the majority elected them for? To represent the people that voted for them?[/QUOTE]
Ever hear about Majority votes, Minority rights?
[QUOTE=GoodStuff;32068946]Oh my gawd, you sound like some redneck: "I do not care why he is [B][I]black[/I][/B]! [/QUOTE]
why he is black?
[QUOTE=Chilean;32065236]president is executive branch how could this even happen[/QUOTE]
President finds a congressman to introduce legislation. That's how they do it.
[QUOTE=cqbcat;32071071]President finds a congressman to introduce legislation. That's how they do it.[/QUOTE]
Still unlikely to pass by everyone else.
Oh, I forgot to mention this, did anyone say that Ron Paul is taking us all of us for a ride yet? It should be said very loudly and clearly.
[QUOTE=person11;32137570]Oh, I forgot to mention this, did anyone say that Ron Paul is taking us all of us for a ride yet? It should be said very loudly and clearly.[/QUOTE]
Someone disagrees with me so he's taking you all for a ride! He eats babies! He hates abortion! He'd put gays in a pit! Ron Paul is evil omg.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32138654]Someone disagrees with me so he's taking you all for a ride! He eats babies! He hates abortion! He'd put gays in a pit! Ron Paul is evil omg.[/QUOTE]
You were being sarcastic, but basically yeah. He is progressive in some areas, but I do not like that he is associated to the Constitution party, the Christian Reconstructionists and the John Birch Society...
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32138654]Someone disagrees with me so he's taking you all for a ride! He eats babies! He hates abortion! He'd put gays in a pit! Ron Paul is evil omg.[/QUOTE]
He has too many ideals I disagree with for me to support him.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;32052989]Good points, but that doesn't make up for the fact that he wants to ban anal sex and gay rights.[/QUOTE]
Ban anal sex? Fuck that! I'm not voting for him.
[QUOTE=JumJum;32138913]Ban anal sex? Fuck that! I'm not voting for him.[/QUOTE]
I'm more against his total "deregulate everything" stance.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32138853]He has too many ideals I disagree with for me to support him.[/QUOTE]
For me, he's the most logical and his intentions the most transparent. I value that over any ideals.
[editline]5th September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32138956]I'm more against his total "deregulate everything" stance.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I agree slightly, but I do like that he wants the government to keep it's hands off your life, personally, and economically.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32138961]For me, he's the most logical and his intentions the most transparent. I value that over any ideals.[/QUOTE]
And that's where I'd disagree. The most logical, definitely not.
He wants to get rid of the income tax and things like the Department of Education. Stances like that, I cannot abide.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32139000]And that's where I'd disagree. The most logical, definitely not.
He wants to get rid of the income tax and things like the Department of Education. Stances like that, I cannot abide.[/QUOTE]
Well when you begin to tread that territory it more comes down to personal belief not logic. Is education and healthcare the responsibility of society or the government etc. There's no clear right or wrong there, and if you would research a little literacy rates weren't terrible even without federal education.
The weird thing about Ron Paul, and I think this is why he gets a lot of support, even though some of his ideas are batshit, is that he is aware of all of the shit that is wrong with the United States. A lot of politicians THINK they know, but have no idea in reality.
The problem arises when he starts discussing solutions to said problems. In some cases he is quite reasonable, in others his solutions are completely off the deep end.
So at the end of the day, I don't think I can support him, but I can't dislike the guy either.
One thing you can be sure of though, he would be an interesting president. Not necessarily a good president, or even necessarily a bad president, but certainly an interesting one.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32139032]Well when you begin to tread that territory it more comes down to personal belief not logic. Is education and healthcare the responsibility of society or the government etc. There's no clear right or wrong there, and if you would research a little literacy rates weren't terrible even without federal education.[/QUOTE]
Two things:
1. What areas are you saying he's "the most logical" in if not economics and social policy?
2. It's not wise to judge how good education was without regulation on just literacy rate.
[editline]5th September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=GunFox;32139069]The weird thing about Ron Paul, and I think this is why he gets a lot of support, even though some of his ideas are batshit, is that he is aware of all of the shit that is wrong with the United States. A lot of politicians THINK they know, but have no idea in reality.
The problem arises when he starts discussing solutions to said problems. In some cases he is quite reasonable, in others his solutions are completely off the deep end.
So at the end of the day, I don't think I can support him, but I can't dislike the guy either.
One thing you can be sure of though, he would be an interesting president. Not necessarily a good president, or even necessarily a bad president, but certainly an interesting one.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I don't necessarily [I]dislike[/I] him, I just think his ideas are not the right way to go.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32139087]
Yeah, I don't necessarily [I]dislike[/I] him, I just think his ideas are not the right way to go.[/QUOTE]
Exactly.
Though I remain amused at some of his solutions.
Issuing letters of marque to capture pirates remains my favorite :D
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32139087]Two things:
1. What areas are you saying he's "the most logical" in if not economics and social policy?
2. It's not wise to judge how good education was without regulation on just literacy rate.[/QUOTE]
1. In general I mean, he uses reason when analyzing problems and deciding what to do, some of his solutions are a bit extreme, but they are not "LOL GOD SAID SO."
2. I could use that exact statement in return, you have no proof giving education to the states would be detrimental.
And regardless the point still stands that it is not a matter of right and wrong whether healthcare and education are a federal or civic duty. It's a matter of opinion, the idea that education is the responsibility of society is a defendable position just as the inverse is.
I love how he wants to cut costs during slow growth. It's like he wants another recession! The last person to cut spending was Hoover when the Great Depression started...
[QUOTE=person11;32139195]I love how he wants to cut costs during slow growth. It's like he wants another recession! The last person to cut spending was Hoover when the Great Depression started...[/QUOTE]
Actually he wants to cut costs to get rid of our insane debt we owe, that makes sense.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.