It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by syrinx high priest
I disagree. I think he represents the majority of the population a lot of people are just unaware. What percentage would Romney represent if he had gotten the same biased treatment as Paul? How about Santorum and so on.
Paul has persisted and won his votes the hard way practically through word of mouth while the media (owned by clear channel com which is owned by Bain which is the company Romney advises for and would likely represent in office) ignores you and picks one candidate from the beginning. From the BEGINNING Romney was chosen and everyone knew that. Why? Have you ever asked why on Earth people would have it in their mind he would be the candidate over a year ago?
Ron Paul's ideas are more in line with the public. He is the ONLY anti war candidate. If that isn't enough on it's own there are plenty of other attributes. They have been selling us a new war alongside a new candidate and idiots are taking it in.
I would say whatever percentage of Americans are antiwar and don't want further war.. that is more like the number of people that would support Ron Paul if he were promoted equally like the other candidates..
We all know this is true. Have we ever had one of these pundits on t.v. (pundits not their guests) give a fair breakdown including RP and say he is the only candidate that expresses that he will not take us into further war? No. That is for a reason. In reality the real number of people that are represented on Paul is much much higher than shown in corrupt polls, and biased media (something that has to go by the way). How can people make an informed decision without a real channel to inform them. Syrinx, look at you, you have it all at your fingertips but you are still buying the bias.
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by jjf3rd77
It's so ironic that YOU sir are a liberal. You don't even know it either. You support Romney (or Santorum, or Gingrich) and you are a liberal. People don't even know what the difference between conservative and liberal is anymore.
Romney and Obama are both LIBERALS.
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by jjf3rd77
So.. you.. vote for liberal republicans.. yet.. think you're conservative?
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by jjf3rd77
Do you think being liberal means you are a pro choice, marriage equality, envoronmental hippie? It doesn't it means you are in favor of big government.
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by jjf3rd77
You are a fool in regards to the media as well. They shape the publics opinions of the candidates.
Tell me if not for the media where would the public hear of the candidates? That's right.. no where. So when the media is bias showing favor to some candidates while ignoring and dismissing some they are manipulating the public and they are involving themselves in the story as opposed to just reporting it.
This "last place" candidate has won a popular vote and won several states in delegate counts and has one of the largest grass root movements in US history backing him and working within the party. He has changed history like no president in 60 years. He has doen all this against the will of the corporations and biased media (media that has conflicts of interest with Romney).
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by jjf3rd77
No. Wrong.
See what you don't understand is that those things don't have to have anything to do with liberal or conservative.
I am pro choice and pro marriage equality, but I am a conservative. That is because even though I support those things I don't think it is the governments job to make decisions on those issues and spend money on them.
Those things have nothing to do with liberal or conservative unless someone is creating bigger government or spending money to try to control them either way.
They use those issues to confuse people so they think that conservative some how means religious. People think Santorum is conservative because he's pro life, and wants cameras in your bedroom. He's not he is a liberal religious nut. I can't explain it for you, you need to go look it up.
If you want to support Romney because you like big corporations having their hands in the government and you like humans being regulated by governments based on religious institutions, fine, vote Romeny, but don't incorrectly call yourself a conservative. This election that honor goes solely to Dr. Paul.
Originally posted by Nite_wing
Originally posted by watchitburn
reply to post by jjf3rd77
What is your take on Romney's constant flip-flopping on practically every single issue?
reply to post by Nite_wing
And why do you try to paint everyone who says anything against Romney as an Obama supporter?
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Seriously, I would like to know.
What is your take on all of Obama's lies? They are posted all over the place. Seriously, I would like to know how anyone can continue to support a proven liar. If you are a Ron Paul supporter, then you will end up being an Obama voter. Paul can't win. Voting for Paul is what Obama is hoping for. A vote for Paul is a vote for Obama.edit on 6-5-2012 by Nite_wing because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by jjf3rd77
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by jjf3rd77
No. Wrong.
See what you don't understand is that those things don't have to have anything to do with liberal or conservative.
I am pro choice and pro marriage equality, but I am a conservative. That is because even though I support those things I don't think it is the governments job to make decisions on those issues and spend money on them.
Those things have nothing to do with liberal or conservative unless someone is creating bigger government or spending money to try to control them either way.
They use those issues to confuse people so they think that conservative some how means religious. People think Santorum is conservative because he's pro life, and wants cameras in your bedroom. He's not he is a liberal religious nut. I can't explain it for you, you need to go look it up.
If you want to support Romney because you like big corporations having their hands in the government and you like humans being regulated by governments based on religious institutions, fine, vote Romeny, but don't incorrectly call yourself a conservative. This election that honor goes solely to Dr. Paul.
You sir are wrong. Being for smart legislation is NOT being liberal. It's being conservative. Weather you like it or not we need government policies! We need government policies just to tell people what the government policies are. Like it or not people are stupid and greedy and they will take advantage of your do what you want policies.... Which will STILL have to be policies or mandates or executive orders written by President Ron Paul. Its the same stuff. RP is not going to change the world. Sorry!
Originally posted by libertytoall
Reread the explanation that was given to you and then reread it again until the definitions sink in.. You have refused to listen to someone explaining the definitions of both parties and continue to spew nonsense as your understanding of conservatism. Smart legislation has nothing to do with being a conservative or liberal. The only conservative candidate in the presidential race is Paul. All the rest are progressives wearing conservative and liberal uniforms. And for the record Ron Paul would change the world. No longer would we be in a debt crisis. No longer would we be manipulated by the few at the top of the financial system. No longer would the troops overseas have to continue to fight an unjust war that's doing nobody any good. No longer would the child or their parents in the middle east have to fear American planes and bombs or the random gunfire that litters the streets. No longer would we be so highly regulated and taxed. No longer would we go to war without a declaration by congress. No longer would the united nations decide what's best for the united states. I could go on and on..
Mitt Romney believes that it is unacceptable for Iran to possess a nuclear weapon.
Believes in a strong military offensive as well as defensive.
Originally posted by macaronicaesar
reply to post by jjf3rd77
You are so lost my friend. He is the most conservative of the bunch. Nothing about going to war is conservative, he is the most fiscally conservative politician not just running for president, but of the entire Congress.
Social conservatives aren't conservatives at all. They are big government liberals.
You don't even know the difference in the two and you are somehow going to lecture others.edit on 6-5-2012 by macaronicaesar because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by KonquestAbySS
Mitt Romney believes that it is unacceptable for Iran to possess a nuclear weapon.
Believes in a strong military offensive as well as defensive.
I'm going to point out the obvious which others above have as well...
So how is having a defensive, and offensive military different from Obama?
What business do we have telling other countries, what they can have and cannot have?
It is clear you're still voting for the warmonger. I honestly think you don't have a clue on who you want to vote for...