Thread: What's the dealio with GOP candidate Ron Paul?

I am not really into it, but Ron Paul sounds like one of the few people running for office that knows what he is talking about. But probably some ignorant fool that will keep on ignoring America's problems will get elected, plunging America into an even deeper abyss they are never coming out of.

At the very least, Ron Paul proves that republican doesn't always equal moron. The morons just took over the party.

Honestly, if a Democrat is going to be elected, I want it to be Mr. Obama. I disagree with him on a lot of his stances, but he seems more level headed and less fanatical than people like Hillary Clinton.

He says he will take action against Iran, if necessary. Unfortunately I think conflict with Iran is a strong possibility.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

Honestly, if a Democrat is going to be elected, I want it to be Mr. Obama. I disagree with him on a lot of his stances, but he seems more level headed and less fanatical than people like Hillary Clinton.

He says he will take action against Iran, if necessary. Unfortunately I think conflict with Iran is a strong possibility.

Really? If he wants to invade Iran, that's a plus for him because I think that government has got to go. But Obama said some crazy things a few days ago. He said we should invade Pakistan. I think that would really screw things up for us. He also said he rules out using nukes, and that is something that should never be stated even when it is true. I like Obama a lot more than the other Democratic candidates, but I think he has a lot to learn about foreign policy. But so do all of the other Democrats running.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I like Obama a lot more than the other Democratic candidates

Exactly. He seems so much less fanatical. But, he said we might have to invade Pakistan? Iran is much more dangerous.

What's worring me right now is Hillary Clinton. I don't know if she would be a bad president, because she would have to set an example as the first female president. Nevertheless, she is absolutely crazy. Just look.

Any sane person is going to rule out nukes. And it probably should be said. When you say stuff like, "We reserve the right to nuke people." You come across as crazy.

Originally Posted by Alric

Any sane person is going to rule out nukes. And it probably should be said. When you say stuff like, "We reserve the right to nuke people." You come across as crazy.

Appearing "crazy" can be an advantage. No president is going to nuke terrorists, but he/it should never directly say he/it won't use nukes. He/it should say nothing about nukes at all, especially with Iran trying to get a nuke.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

Appearing "crazy" can be an advantage. No president is going to nuke terrorists, but he/it should never directly say he/it won't use nukes. He/it should say nothing about nukes at all, especially with Iran trying to get a nuke.

Yes, appearing crazy can be a very good strategy. I want the government Iran to worry that we might nuke them back to the stone age.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Yes, appearing crazy can be a very good strategy. I want the government Iran to worry that we might nuke them back to the stone age.

Thats the same line of thinking Iran use, and look where it got them. Its very unlikely they are ever going to nuke but everyone now thinks they are crazy and might actually do it. And now people want to attack them. We don't want to put ourself in the same position.

Except Iran has the entire world looking at them right now. They wouldnt dare use any nukes. They will, however give them to terrorists for free to use against Israel.

Originally Posted by Alric

Thats the same line of thinking Iran use, and look where it got them. Its very unlikely they are ever going to nuke but everyone now thinks they are crazy and might actually do it. And now people want to attack them. We don't want to put ourself in the same position.

The difference is that we would overthrow the government of Iran in a matter of days. They fear that we will overthrow them. We don't fear that they will overthrow our government. They know they can't.

Edit: I often am to lazy to read more than 5 words to form and opinion about someone's posts, and flame them based solely on that opinion.

HMMM KAY.

Sorry.

Still.

Just because she is a Democrat, silly, Blond and against the war---, actually, forget the rest, just because she is against the war doesn't make anyone a bad president or political leader.

It was a joke, jackass. It is a funny picture, though, right?

Read my post. I said "I don't know if she would be a bad president, because she would have to set an example as the first female president". I know everything about her policies, and she doesn't deserve to see the inside of the White House again. She is wishy washy, and supported action against Saddam Hussein, then DENOUCED IT. She is a liar, and conducts her politics in a shaky, unethical way. She fights dirty. She uses her husband to gain popularity. She is a sick, twisted woman.

I still think your rants about Fox News are fucking fantastic. Its funny you never mention the fanatical left news channels. Do you know their names?

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

It was a joke, jackass. It is a funny picture, though, right?

Actually, it would be pretty cool if they matched it with a picture of Bush (I am pretty sure Bush has a face like that on some pic too), and than say: "still fucked" above the picure. Would be a great bumpersticker if you are an Anarchist or something.

Read my post. I said "I don't know if she would be a bad president, because she would have to set an example as the first female president". I know everything about her policies, and she doesn't deserve to see the inside of the White House again. She is wishy washy, and supported action against Saddam Hussein, then DENOUCED IT. She is a liar, and conducts her politics in a shaky, unethical way. She fights dirty. She uses her husband to gain popularity. She is a sick, twisted woman.

Okay, I don't know why I edited my post. You actually do have a fucked up, biased idea about any democrat.

A liar? jesus tittyfucking christ H/D... you never cared ONCE about the literally hundreds of lies of the current administration. I never heard you ONCE about that. Isn't that biased? Why don't you care as much about lies of the guys on your side? Why don't you have such negative ideas about anyone pro-war (or do you?)? I can assure you there are dozens of pro-war people that are FAR more Wishy Washy and dirty than her, that are in power right now.

Question your own opinions, for once. You might like it.

I still think your rants about Fox News are fucking fantastic. Its funny you never mention the fanatical left news channels. Do you know their names?

I am certain that no channel that truly can be called 'fanatical left' draws more than 5% of American viewers. While Fox News, politically biased, sensationalistic and fanatically right and racists, is the biggest channel in America. I personally care more about a clearly biased, powerful political tool being used to dumb down and fear people so they will accept a war, than about some 'fanatical left' news channels, that might get some people to -oh my god- try to form unions or even do something silly as trying to save monkeys or whatever leftists do.

But, now you bring it up, Why don't you give me a video of some horribly biased fanatical left news channel. (despite what fox news tells you, CNN and such don't count, they still are pretty far on the right comparing to objective journalism). But do, try, find me a evil 'fanatical left news channel' video that will be as full of shit, racism and lies as an abstract of Fox News.

When has George W. Bush "lied"? I'm not saying it never happened, but please give me some examples.

We are talking about the next administraton, not the current one. The people there aren't going anywhere, so the best we can do is prevent more wishy washy people from getting in. Think about it like that.

You won't shut up about Fox, will you? "Despite what Fox tells me". Grow up, young man. I would also like you to bring up one instance where Fox is "racist".

http://youtube.com/watch?v=U98l7HuVc4M

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

When has George W. Bush "lied"? I'm not saying it never happened, but please give me some examples.

I really wonder, and I hope you honestly wonder about this too:

Are you actually capable of ignoring the dozens of lies Bush had told, by ignoring the probably dozens of videos posted on dreamviews that depict Bush telling a lie. Or are you actually abstaining from every source of news that seems 'liberal' to you, what would make you a complete biggot, close-minded retard. Or is your memory bad. I don't see how you can actually ask "give me an example where bush has lied". I hope , for your humanity, your memory is bad. No, Horrible even. Wake up. Look critically upon your government, or you are risking your own democracy.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=cv1DuKDi8...elated&search=
Keith Olbermann must be so jealous of Bill O'reileys intelligence. Ha.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=x7xyd_IRg...elated&search=
This one is pretty good.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=bNws6IG69...elated&search=
Anyhow, this one is pretty good. It's even better than just Bush' lies. Do you even understand what they are saying? They are saying exactly what you wanted to hear. "We know saddam has WMDs". However, if you just accept that it's fine if the government lies to you, then you are undermining democracy in every way. They lie, because they can. Because you fail miserably in holding your leaders responsible for what they say, for what they lie.


http://youtube.com/watch?v=AatT2v1XdTM
Some Rumpsfelt lies.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ygb5uyPZB...elated&search=
I wonder if you can see objectively how much Bush just draws people into mass-retardation on a very basic level.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Sm73wOuPL60
May be just due to Bush his Alzheimer or whatever the poor bloke has. But it does seem strange to be so wrong about how he got to knew about 9/11. To quote Lincoln if I am not mistaken: "No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar"


I am sure you are going to do a great job at not getting the importance of the last line of the following:

-----------

The Bush Administration's Public Statements on Iraq President George W. Bush on Al-Qaeda:

"The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 -- and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men -- the shock troops of a hateful ideology -- gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the 'beginning of the end of America.' By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve, and force our retreat from the world. They have failed." Source: President Bush Announces Major Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended, White House (5/1/2003).

Explanation This statement was misleading because by referencing the September 11 attacks in conjunction with discussion of the war on terror in Iraq, it left the impression that Iraq was connected to September 11. In fact, President Bush himself in September 2003 acknowledged that "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th."------------
Source, pretty good site: http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/20...%2F&frame=true

We are talking about the next administraton, not the current one. The people there aren't going anywhere, so the best we can do is prevent more wishy washy people from getting in. Think about it like that.

Yeah. History shows that people in power gone corrupt always tidy up after a while. Sure. Keep believing.

You won't shut up about Fox, will you? "Despite what Fox tells me". Grow up, young man. I would also like you to bring up one instance where Fox is "racist".

http://youtube.com/watch?v=IVgbppRVRXc

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lkdDNNkRD3Y
Sure, it is fine to do racial profiling. Why not just spy on all Muslims 24/7, they are at least 0,5% more dangerous than average. And cutting mikes. That's a mature lesson.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=P4xiv6EyMsk
haha, found some funny O'reily footage. Yes. Shutting up, that is what they founded democracy on, right?!

-

Now. Give me ONE SINGLE video where you see 'left wing media' you dispise doing something bad. One single video. I spend quite some time trying to get some objective information in your lap, I would like it if you shared your view aswel.

-------

I do hope you will honestly think about this. You seem extremely delusional. The irony is that 'leftists media' doesn't need to push their opinion, all they need to do is show the facts, the crimes, the footage of poker-faced lying. Even someone with down syndrome could then see what's wrong with the current administration.

The ball is in your court.

Neruo, I have told you before that if you and I sat down and talked this out face to face, you would see that I am not delusional at all. Let me know if you want to go into the chat, which could work.

I never said conservatives are skip dandy. I have almost as many problems with conservatives as I do with liberals. American politics are ridiculus. I just don't believe the democrats' theory of "talk first, talk second, get mad later" policy with terrorism is going to solve anything. Fuck 9/11. Forget about it. It barely even matters anymore.

Also, I hate Fox news. I never said they are not bias. But they are not more right-bias than CNN is left-bias. Still, they all suck.

Weed=WMD
Child=Saddam
Parent=USA

If you smell like weed, and you dont empty your pockets, then parents know whats going on. The only difference between Saddam showing his bunkers, and NOT showing his bunkers, is that we feared he had worse things than what we thought.

Refusing entry to inspectors is a guilty action, and theres now way around that. In my opinion, he stalled so long so he could get rid of the chemicals.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The difference is that we would overthrow the government of Iran in a matter of days. They fear that we will overthrow them. We don't fear that they will overthrow our government. They know they can't.

So basicly you think its important for the US to play the part of the bully?

Originally Posted by Alric

So basicly you think its important for the US to play the part of the bully?

Of course we appear to be bullies. We are the only country that actively pursues world affairs. Everyone else seems to just stand by, accept credit when things go well, and point fingers when things go bad.

I'm perfectly happy with having to do the dirty work. Afterall, we are the most technologically advanced country in the world. World affairs should be left up to the best.

Originally Posted by Alric

So basicly you think its important for the US to play the part of the bully?

No. We're the guy on the playground who stands up to the bullies.

No, no we are not. We are the bully, you said it yourself. Threatening people with nuclear attacks is horrible. You put it nicely when you basicly described that we do whatever we want because we don't believe anyone can actually invade us.

Originally Posted by Alric

No, no we are not. We are the bully, you said it yourself. Threatening people with nuclear attacks is horrible. You put it nicely when you basicly described that we do whatever we want because we don't believe anyone can actually invade us.

You need to read more carefully. I never said we should threaten anybody with nuclear attacks. I said we should not tell the terrorists we will NOT engage in them. I said we are not afraid Iran will invade us, not that we can do whatever we want. You're hearing things.

Iran is a bully. Somebody has to stand up to a bully. Tell me about the countries Iran has liberated and how much they give in foreign aid every year. Then I'll tell you what the government Iran has said they want to do to Israel, what terrorist groups they fund and support, and what they are doing to support Iraqi insurgents who stand against Iraqi freedom. THAT is bullying. Try to deny that. When you see that you can't, you can see why we need to stand up to them. Standing up to a bully is not bullying. It is justifiable retaliation.

My point is that we are doing the same thing, we are threatening people all the time, and here you are saying, we should drop a hint that a nuclear attack is possible. Thats not something you play word games with, and it comes across just as bad as threatening them.

Originally Posted by Alric

My point is that we are doing the same thing, we are threatening people all the time, and here you are saying, we should drop a hint that a nuclear attack is possible. Thats not something you play word games with, and it comes across just as bad as threatening them.

I am not talking about dropping a hint. I am talking about not taking away a worry. There is a difference between threating to kill somebody and just refraining from saying you won't kill him.

That works untill someone asks about it.