That's true, but the electorate, according to the polls, seems more than willing to gloss over such a position, since it is held by a Democratic candidate. I hope that changes, but I'm not optimistic.
Printable View
That's true, but the electorate, according to the polls, seems more than willing to gloss over such a position, since it is held by a Democratic candidate. I hope that changes, but I'm not optimistic.
That is true. Democrats are not nearly as anti-war when a Democrat is in charge of it. I don't recall too many of them complaining about Bill Clinton's Operation Desert Fox in Iraq or how he blew up an aspirin factory in Sudan. Imagine what their reaction would have been if Bush had bombed an aspirin factory in Sudan.Quote:
Originally Posted by R.D.735
On a side note, anyone who wants Ron Paul to win can just register republican and then go out and vote in the primaries. So even if you don't think he has a chance of winning with just republicans, democrates can even vote for him. Of course they cant vote in both primaries, but if you feel as strongly as a lot of ron paul supporters do, theres nothing stopping you.
Where did you get that 2/3 are against the war? I don't doubt it, but I would like to know where that source is.Quote:
Originally Posted by R.D.735
That was on CNN this morning. It's slightly more than 2/3s, at 65%.
The economy has passed the war as the most important issue. (source; flipping thru the channels.)
....I just saw that video. I live in a intense liberal bubble so I'ts hard for me to figure out what the rest of the country thinks. I'm not really surprised. I'll still stick by my vote though...Quote:
Originally Posted by Omnius Deus
I have to agree with Moonbeam that the economy is a hot topic right now. If there's a recession, though, both parties can use worsening conditions to their advantage. The Republicans can argue that the economy only began to tumble after the Democrats won the House and Senate, and the Democrats can blame it on the war and the tax cuts. The Republicans can argue that economic turmoil is a great reason to elect a stronger executive, while the Democrats can use it to rally support for their reform agenda.
The great thing about these money bombs is that Ron Paul has said that November 5th got him about 10 million worth of advertising for free, on top of receiving his 4.3 million to advertise! LETS GO DECEMBER 16TH!
On December 16th, 1773, American colonists dumped tea into the Boston Harbor
to protest an oppressive tax. This December 16th American citizens will dump
millions of dollars into the Ron Paul presidential campaign to
protest the oppressive inflation tax.
Please join us this December 16th for the largest one-day political donation event in
history. Our goal is to bring together 100,000 people to donate $100 each,
creating a one day donation total of $10,000,000.
http://teaparty07.com/
http://ronpaulgraphs.com/thumb_teaparty_members.png
Please elaborate why that statement sounds ignorant. He's been the only candidate to actually have the balls to stand up against the patriot acts, the national id card, and the illegally implemented federal reserve system and their self-imposed inflation tax, and income tax. All the other candidates on both sides are simply puppets in the federal reserve's back pockets. Pretending to have differing views on unimportant issues ever-so-slightly, when their ultimate goals are the same. Establishment of a New World Order, and a one world government. People are beginning to see through that veil, because of their lack of taking a firm stance on anything important. They seem more worried about their numbers and obfuscating the truth rather than actually taking a stance enough to make real changes to the real blunders that exist because of Bush.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasenganxxchidori
The federal reserve has been using a simple rule of power which a large portion are just now starting to wake up to, with the availability and access to information on the internet. And, that rule is, Control the options: Get others to play the cards you deal. Such is the power of giving people a choice, or rather the illusion of one, for they are playing with cards you have dealt them. Give people options, allowing them to think they have a choice. When in actuality they fall right into a trap of your making. Most, if not all primary candidates of both the Democrats and the Republicans, are simply two sides of the same coin. Kerry and Bush both ADMIT they are in the same skull and bones secret society, and that doesn't even seem odd to most people. For people who are choosing between alternatives find it hard to believe they are being manipulated or deceived; they cannot see that you are allowing them a small amount of free will in exchange for a much more powerful imposition of your will. Simple rules of power...
How is what Ron Paul stands for a bad thing? He stands for upholding the constitution and freedom, and has taken a firm stance against the war and our now facist-like aggressive 'preemptive' foreign policies. The war was a mistake, and it's time we take responsibility for our mistakes instead of blindly choosing to ignore them any further.
You do actually realize we've been getting closer and closer to a communist and facist state than anything else, right?
Still don't think so?
Maybe it would actually help Ron Paul.Quote:
Originally Posted by R.D.735
Wait, what?Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
Are you trying to say that the only important issues are about some new world order conspiracy?
How are the issues differing in the political parties unimportant? Guliani wants pro choice abortion, most other rebulican canidates do not. Please tell me how a very important issue like this is unimportant.
The democrats are generally for pulling out of Iraq, while the hardcore republicans are generally for staying in. i. e. McCain. I'm also confused here how this is a slightly differing opionion and unimportant.
Dems generally gun control, while generally. republicans no control (with the exception of Guliani) I don't see how this is a slightly differing opinion. It's one way, or the other.
Ron Paul
- He wants to change our money to gold.... What the fuck. That's not going to work, even if he gets re-elected, and he has 8 years.
- I heard his foriegn policy is trading with any country... no matter what human rights violation has been commited
- He wants to pull out of Iraq. I hate the war, but pulling out now would make everything done pointless, and their government doesn't really work yet.
please excuse all of my typos I'm doing this in a rush.
You do know the US dollar was based on gold for a 100 years right? Also historically, gold as always been seen as money. Sorry but your showing your total lack of education, when you try to down play the seriousness of the issues.
The federal reserve, and how our money works is directly related to this issue. If we have a recession or a depression, its because of the governments mandate that everyone has to accept paper dollars which are not based on anything of real value. All of our inflation, is also based on what should probably be illegal money manipulation.
As for the new world order conspiracy, its not a conspiracy but actual fact. Everyone has heard of the european union, it a large governmental body that has much say over the countries of europe. Most people don't seem to notice what our government is currently doing, to create a north american union. This is all well known facts. There are many treaties and laws on the books, trying to merge our country with canada and mexico to form the north american union. Most have to do with trading, which is the same way the european union started out as. There are also plans to create a large highway from mexico to canada, which they are going to allow people to freely cross over from country to country.
Ever wonder why the government refuses to do anything about illegal immigrants? Its because with the new open boarder policies the government is trying to put into place, people will be able to freely travel throughout all of north america, without worry of country boarders. When this happens mexicans will be allowed to come and go as they please, so theres no reason to worry about kicking them out.
Ever look at what the UN does? They are always trying to impose their will on other countries. They have their own army. And they strongly want all countries to submit to an international court. They also want international laws to override countries own laws.
This is all very real, and well known facts. No offence but abortion rights are hardly a real issue compared to national sovereignty, and UN law overring our constitution. Its a very serious issue as other countries are not as free as we are, and we do not want them dictacting what we do on our own soil.
Luckily, neither the Democrats nor the Republicans will ever actually do anything about abortion or guns, because they need those votes--if they get rid of those issues, they lose half of their supporters.
That's a very important problem in politics. The current political strategies guarantee a thin margin of victory. The fragility of political victories makes politicians extremely risk-averse, and they abandon solutions out of the fear that they will fail or be blamed for new problems if they succeed. Each party relies upon the president to take the blame for situations that they refuse to solve, and are more than willing to give the president enough authority to cover their own reluctance to act, and presidents are more than willing to oblige.
It does seem like presidents get blamed for all kinds of things that they have limited control over (like the economy). Of course, they promise all kinds of things they can't deliver, so maybe that's why.
I guess the president can take the blame because they're only going to be in office for a limited time no matter what, while the others have their whole career to think about.
Maybe term limits are a good idea after all.
Of course its a good idea. We don't need someone to be president for 10+ years like in some countries. I am fairly sure we would have a dictatorship by now, if it wasn't for that law.
I current monetary system allows the government to just create money when they need it. This causes inflation which is a tax. It's the governments way of saying "We don't have the current money from taxes to fund this, so we will just make more money." And what it does is drive the value of our dollar down, hence where we are at today. Our dollar is loosing on all fronts. The money you save is loosing value. And people laugh at the gold standard, because they like having money with no fixed value?
Front page news on the BBC today..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7092053.stm
Everything we do drives the value of the dollar down. If money had a fixed rate, and our government would stop going in debt, then they wouldn't be able to finance our huge military industrial complex and our wars. We pay to demolish the buildings in Iraq and then pay to rebuilt them. Not to mention all the wellfare we spend taxes on. Which is taking the money out of your pocket and giving it to someone else.
Ok, cool. If you pm me, I'll give you my Paypal account username, and I can take all of that worthless green paper off your hands.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alric
Yes, I know we already have term limits for presidents, duh. I was talking about congressman, some of whom make a life time career out of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alric
One term would be enough for president tho; that way they wouldn't waste so much time in the first on trying to get re-elected in the second. They could split the difference and make it 6 years.
Why do that? I can just take my worthless green paper and buy something of real value. Infact I actually own silver and gold. Just because everyone else is losing money on their dollars doesn't mean I have to. I just trade out of them. Anyone smart enough to transfer their dollars into foreign currencies or real hard assets, will be spared much when the dollar collapses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasenganxxchidori
Though I am sure you never even thought of either possiblities, which is why you made such a lame reply. Its unfortunate for you, since not only will you lose everything you own if the markets collapses, you will probably be one of the people begging the government to bail them out. Of course any educated person knows that when the government acts it always makes things worse.
They just print more and more money causing hyper inflation, then they try to fix prices. Both fail and you end up far worse than you even thought possible. I am sure you won't believe me though, its only history, and has only happened hundreds of times to other countries. Infact it even happened to this country, when we first started. Infact the founders of this country put it into the constitution that only gold and silver would be currency because they faced this exact problem. It totally blew up in their face then, and it will now as well. Or maybe you think the US will be the first country out of the thousands before us to overcome the limits of printing fake money?
Chill out.... Huge overreaction. People like you keep saying how the money is worthless now... then why buy things? You keep saying it's worthless. I'll take it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alric
It really shows how little you know about me when you tell me what I have and have not done. About half of my money is in Euros. I found out this would be a really good idea to do when I went to Europe a few months back, and I realized how much their currency is going up compared to ours... Even the Euro is gaining a little bit, but our dollar is drastically sinking.
Yes, of course I think the US will be able to get out of printing fake money. I never went to school, so I'm not smart enough, as you keep telling me. I'm uneducated. You really know about me, much better than I do.
</sarcasm>
Ok, so you're saying the government shouldn't act. Thus, no gov't. Anarchy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alric
Brilliant! Let's have no government! Thanks for informing me here too. Everyone knows anarchy is the best solution to any problem. You're right too, I'm sure our founding fathers were morons when they set up our branches of government. If only Alric had been around!
Money is worthless, which is why people buy thing which have value. Theres really no reason to save dollars when its value is dropping like a rock.
Talk about an overreaction. I never said we should have anarchy. What I want is free markets, that are not controlled by the government. Governments have proven themself to only make the markets worse when they mess around with the value of money. If you actually look how our country is set up, our government is doing stuff it isn't allowed to do. The federal reserve system is illegal by the consitution.
I am not saying our founding fathers are morons, I said they were smart and we should listen to them. You the one saying we should ignore their advice and warnings on paper money that has no value. They were all totally against it. Which is why for the first 100 years of our country our money was based on gold and silver.
Are you being sarcastic? I can't tell.... But true for the second part anyways. I'm glad a good percentage of my money is in Euros....Quote:
Originally Posted by Alric
I just don't see how the president [Ron Paul] can do this in four years.... I mean, we have a war to worry about. I do agree with you though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alric
I never said that.... This is a bit of a misunderstanding... I didn't really mean to say that basing money on gold is a bad idea, sorry about the confusion. I meant to say that I don't think he'll be able to do that, in four years. The war I imagine will take first presidence. Well, actually, Ron Paul is not really like any candidate I have seen before so I have no idea what he'll do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alric
The main reason I wouldn't vote for Ron Paul is he's for pulling out of Iraq.... unfortunately Bush fucked up Iraq so much we can't just pull out. We have to set up a working government for them.
The reasons I'd vote for Giulani is because he's a somewhat liberal Republican.... as in he has good views (for me at least) and he doesn't want to get out of Iraq as soon as possible. If not for his views on the war Ron Paul would be the next choice... I don't blame him, 2/3 of the country are against the war.
I'm not sure about the gold standard. It sounds good, but without eliminating fractional reserve banking, bank runs are inevitable. Fractional reserve banking, though, is the core of the banking system. I've probably got something wrong here, but this is what I've been thinking:
Without fractional reserve banking, the availability of loans would drastically decrease, since the banks could no longer use the money deposited in bank accounts. The availability of loans would decrease, and the economy would be severely bogged down and it would take years to recover.
Does that make sense at all, or is it a half-baked nightmare scenario?