Paul campaign believes GOP cheating cost Paul a win in Arizona

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by empireoflizards

 

Id say your missing the big picture.If we followed Ron Paul first we would get a repeat of the robber barrons such as rockafeller and getty

Looks like we're already there:

Man Loses $22,000 In New 'Policing For Profit' Case

Google Search - government extortion

reply to post by TsukiLunar


Dude Im done talking to you, its like conversing with a brick wall. I just stated in two different ways why I said another poster would be an anti-abolitionist if this was the 1850's and for some reason you are not understanding logic and I cant be any more clear. please dont but in next time if you dont even understand the subject. Maybe if you re-read the previous posts maybe you'll have an understanding epiphany but Im not going to repeat myself again because you cant understand a very simple and clear comparison

Originally posted by TsukiLunar

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by syrinx high priest

 

(considering the quality of your post that should be sufficient response)

Says the guy whose post is half emoticons.

Haha I guess that one went RIGHT over your head huh? Oh wow that must be embarrassing for you (or I guess would be if you got the joke).

Ask another poster here to explain my above joke to you. Seriously man.. how are maxing out your levels of "not getting it" with this one.

reply to post by TsukiLunar


Don't laugh at a joke when you don't know what part was the punchline, it will make you look like a fool.

You have no idea what you are talking about and that is very clear so why do you want to get involved in a conversation about it? Ron Paul would level the playing field by taking on central banks. Corporations would have to adhere to something worse than regulations, they would have to adhere to unfettered competition.

If there are several peoplethat obviously know a bit about what they are talking about and they are telling you that you don't understand something, rather than being so arrogant that you think you are correct and they are wrong, maybe you should consider the possibility that you actually don't understand it and brush up rather than embracing total ignorance and looking even more ignorant for doing so.

Like that beach music song says,,cheaters,,cheaters, never win.........

Originally posted by Skerrako
reply to post by TsukiLunar

 

Dude Im done talking to you, its like conversing with a brick wall. I just stated in two different ways why I said another poster would be an anti-abolitionist if this was the 1850's and for some reason you are not understanding logic and I cant be any more clear. please dont but in next time if you dont even understand the subject. Maybe if you re-read the previous posts maybe you'll have an understanding epiphany but Im not going to repeat myself again because you cant understand a very simple and clear comparison

No, It is not a fair comparison.


ETA: I am sorry I made you mad by asking you to explain yourself. In the future, please dont post on this site if you cant take someone asking questions. And practice expressing your opinion more clearly.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

You have no idea what you are talking about and that is very clear so why do you want to get involved in a conversation about it? Ron Paul would level the playing field by taking on central banks. Corporations would have to adhere to something worse than regulations, they would have to adhere to unfettered competition.

It seems like you have no idea what you are talking about because that makes no sense. You cant assert something like that and expect anyone to take you seriously.

If there are several peoplethat obviously know a bit about what they are talking about and they are telling you that you don't understand something, rather than being so arrogant that you think you are correct and they are wrong, maybe you should consider the possibility that you actually don't understand it and brush up rather than embracing total ignorance and looking even more ignorant for doing so.

Okay, Answer me then. What have I said that is ignorant? Rather, aren't you the one making ridiculous claims? Paul supporters just have no clue.

Also, don't get on to me for being "arrogant" and then proceed to be "holier than thou" yourself. It makes you a hypocrite.
"

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by TsukiLunar

 

Don't laugh at a joke when you don't know what part was the punchline, it will make you look like a fool.

You have no idea what you are talking about and that is very clear so why do you want to get involved in a conversation about it? Ron Paul would level the playing field by taking on central banks. Corporations would have to adhere to something worse than regulations, they would have to adhere to unfettered competition.

If there are several peoplethat obviously know a bit about what they are talking about and they are telling you that you don't understand something, rather than being so arrogant that you think you are correct and they are wrong, maybe you should consider the possibility that you actually don't understand it and brush up rather than embracing total ignorance and looking even more ignorant for doing so.

edit on 23-5-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

You really know nothing of history do you?Have you ever read the grapes of wrath by any chance? This book goes into alot of detail about what happens with no central bank and well no regulations. It was called the great depression perhaps you heard of it. Well let me tell you what really happened and why i guess. First American business was dominated by a few select individuals im sure you heard of then such as the Andrew Carnegie,John D. Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan,Charles M. Schwab and my favorite Cornelius Vanderbilt.What did all these guys have in common they lived in a time where Ron Paul capitalism existed

Now what made them unique is they used questionable practices to amass their wealth. Allegedly, their "questionable practices" usually included setting the product at extremely low prices (and paying their workers very poorly in order to do so), buying out the competitors that couldn't keep up, and once there was no competition, they would hike prices far above the original level. So in other words they could dominate entire entire sectors of the economy or create whats called a monopoly(and now you know where the board came from).The object of creating a monopoly is to so dominate a sector of business such as steel or railroads for example.Buy controlling these sectors they were able to control other industries as well need steel you made a deal or your company went under we call this extortion now.So lets go ahead and put Austrian economics in to play but as they say you know not what you ask for.

This is how Ron Paul suckers people he talks of freedoms this draws people in freedom is good right everyone likes that.But take the time to listen to what he actually advocates think about the logical conclusion if we did things his way. Are world where there would be no government assistance so people starving in the streets.You would have a job if you had a job that payed very little because the person who owned the company destroyed his competitors. You being payed penies probably living on a work farm where the company lets you stay there for most of your paycheck you get.Just dont get fired or your out on the street too relying on charity of others who dont have anything themselves.But thats ok according to Ron Paul churches could take care of you but that didnt work out in the depression because well they didnt have much either.

reply to post by TsukiLunar

No, It is not a fair comparison.

Why not? I've made two extensive posts is there anything specific you disagree on in either? If you want to foster an honest and open dialogue on this site you should try to make your case.

In other word, please explain yourself futher. you should have no trouble with that based on that little speech you just gave

reply to post by dragonridr


...the great depression wasn't just a natural occurence. Just as this depression isn't a natural occurence.
There is more to it than what you believe and yes I have read the grapes of wrath. Things are so incompareably different now that it is not even a valid argument to bring in the great depression.

So try not to be so condescending, I know what I am talking about, you have obviously had your eyes closed. Take a look around, the U.S., the whole world for that matter. The wars we are in.

You are the one that needs to listen to what he says. There would be no one starving in the street that is absurd if you actually believe that. He doesn't advocate getting rid of all government programs, he doesn't believe the FEDERAL government should promote and provide these programs. They are giant wastes of money that aren't very efficient in the first place. Let states tackle their individual problems they know what they need, where and when they need it, and how to handle it.

This is the problem with people that can't understand Paul's policies, they have these great delusions about what getting rid of these programs will cause. They think it will be some dystopia when in reality it will be a step towards the dream we were progressing to in the 50's and 60's had powers not already initiated systems that would bring the US to it's current state.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Yeah he wants to return us right back to the guilded age where a few people controlled the entire economy.He would so set the door open he even wants to do away with minimum wage so that companies can pay you a dollor an hour if they so choose.Then you would loose healthcare because companies wont want to provide that to expensive.Government wont have any for the poor either but thats ok Ron Paul has a solution for that doesnt he.What did this idiot say well doctors can just treat them for charity and they could get assistance from the churches.Yeah theres a truly compassionate person allow companies to screw you over make you homeless and then hopefully youll find help.But if you dont well thats your fault and eventually youll die and problem solved.And this is why no one takes Ron Paul seriously except some backwoods survivalists.

reply to post by dragonridr


Wait.. who do you think controlls the entire economy now?

I can promise you, it is a far fewer number now than it was then!

Everything you have said will be a problem if Ron Paul is elected is literally what is going on already so I think you are very confused. People are already losing their houses and getting absolutely no help or compensation.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Wait.. who do you think controlls the entire economy now?

I can promise you, it is a far fewer number now than it was then!

Everything you have said will be a problem if Ron Paul is elected is literally what is going on already so I think you are very confused. People are already losing their houses and getting absolutely no help or compensation.

edit on 25-5-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

No its not the same monopolies dont exist at least not yet. However if the justice department doesnt get off its butt and start prosecuting for financial fraud instead of taking donations from the bankers you may be right.This is one reason i am considering changing my vote from Obama to Romney actually. Hes decided campaign donations are more important the financial fraud.Im just not entirely convinced Romney wouldnt look the other way either. However i can tell you Ron Paul is planning on removing the DOJ so then what not only do we get no enforcement but we also get no rules in the first place.

Now you can say whats the diffrence well there is if the rules are there it still gives people the right to sue even if the DOJ doesnt press charges.Good example of that is the facebook IPO debacle they will be sued and they will loose because of investment fraud. Under Ron Paul the investors ripped off so what that is capitalism right? Ron Paul doesnt have a financial plan in fact quite the opposite he has no plan because he thinks capitolism runs fine without rules.Which makes him dangerous and well at best naive and worst stupid.

reply to post by dragonridr


I came to the conclusion long ago that there are a lot of Ron Paul fanatics who simply hate America and want the absolute worse to happen. Ron Paul is a way to stick it to their most hated country.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


You could not be anymore wrong.

The Worst is GOING to happen if we dont listen to people like Ron Paul and his supporters! We are the ones trying to limit these insane wars before the inevitable blowback, and limit our reckless spending before the devaluation of our entire monetary system goes off of a cliff. How is that "sticking it" to anyone who want to actually live in a fair stable country.

No, The only people we are sticking it to are the very wealthiest and most powerful in this world, the sociopaths that tell our children to fight wars with no end and add to the corruptive bureaucratic government .

There is no argument, either you will see this inevitable truth now, or when it comes to fruition I hope for your sake it will be the former.

Look into it

Originally posted by Skerrako
reply to post by TinfoilTP

 

You could not be anymore wrong.

The Worst is GOING to happen if we dont listen to people like Ron Paul and his supporters! We are the ones trying to limit these insane wars before the inevitable blowback, and limit our reckless spending before the devaluation of our entire monetary system goes off of a cliff. How is that "sticking it" to anyone who want to actually live in a fair stable country.

No, The only people we are sticking it to are the very wealthiest and most powerful in this world, the sociopaths that tell our children to fight wars with no end and add to the corruptive bureaucratic government .

There is no argument, either you will see this inevitable truth now, or when it comes to fruition I hope for your sake it will be the former.

Look into it

The rich and powerful would love Ron Paul no rules regulations an they have the freedom to do anything they desire.Dont buy into Ron Paul hes a snake oil salesman nothing more.If your goal is to turn the United States into a third world country hes your man.His policies are from the 1800s and unfortunately he doesn't realize things have changed since then.

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
reply to post by dragonridr

 

I came to the conclusion long ago that there are a lot of Ron Paul fanatics who simply hate America and want the absolute worse to happen. Ron Paul is a way to stick it to their most hated country.

I came to the conclusion that many people, like this one, hate everything America was founded upon. Their ilk will try again and again to push their agenda onto the people, disguised that is "FOR THE PEOPLE" but really you will just be removing one set of masters for another.

Originally posted by MidnightTide

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
reply to post by dragonridr

 

I came to the conclusion long ago that there are a lot of Ron Paul fanatics who simply hate America and want the absolute worse to happen. Ron Paul is a way to stick it to their most hated country.

I came to the conclusion that many people, like this one, hate everything America was founded upon. Their ilk will try again and again to push their agenda onto the people, disguised that is "FOR THE PEOPLE" but really you will just be removing one set of masters for another.

Most of the founding fathers dispised tyranny but hated anarchy even more. They believe the greatest challenge was to balance government and the right of the people. They knew there was a fine balance of goverment to insure order and justice the job of any functioning governmant. Ron Paul believes government has no place in out lives unfortuanately this just leads to anarchy and injustice.He would create a world using the worst of humanity namely greed and and self intrest in the name of liberty.

Luckily our founding fathers were smarter and knew to maintain a balance between the two. I could go into federal ist papers to prove they understood government needs to make laws to be effective but i think ill let you hear it straight from them.

Jefferson: "We are now vibrating between too much and too little government, and the pendulum will rest finally in the middle"

Hamilton: "It was a thing hardly to be expected that in a popular revolution the minds of men should stop at the happy mean which marks the salutary boundary between power and privilege, and combines the energy of government with the security of private rights."

Wilson: "Liberty and happiness have a powerful enemy on each hand; on the one hand tyranny, on the other licentiousness(anarchy). To guard against the latter, it is necessary to give the proper powers to government; and to guard against the former, it is necessary that those powers should properly distributed."arks the salutary boundary between power and privilege, and combines the energy of government with the security of private rights."

And heres one for you that shows they didnt mind government helping with general welfare of its people, infact thought it was vital to our government .
Adams: "Laws for the liberal education of the youth, especially of the lower class of the people, are so extremely wise and useful, that, to a humane and generous mind, no expense for this purpose would be thought extravagant."

You misunderstand our founding fathers they fought tyranny however they didnt believe mankind could better itself without government they simply tried to limit government to prevent tyranny.Ron Paul effectively believes the Government has only 2 roles defense which he wants to cut back and providing a common currency.Everything else he sees as an intrusion on his rights.So basically hes an anarchist which effectively destroys a country.Why do you think most people reject Ron Paul and the ones that dont either know very little about history or do believe in anarchy.