20 Reasons to NOT vote for Ron Paul

Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:28 pm » by **Noentry**

savvymalloy wrote:Thats the claims laid by the author of the link in the OP noentry.

I believe that was just Mr Bregts rebuttle

Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:32 pm » by **Tehunit**

mhillebregt wrote:Don't worry just my opinion...i just believe in self responsebility...but in this system you can't. Everything is decided for us. So therefore i'm not happy with my life. We have today so much technologies that we can make the world self sustaining and everybody in it.

You hear a lot on depopulation for example, but they don't tell you that richer families have less children than poor families.
Because poor families make more kids so that when they can't provide for themselves there's always a chance that one of their kids can...
Rich people buy help.

Just saying...

Bravo,

Seriously thank you for spending the time to fill the numbers out. What you have filled out there is 100% the same as my mind, and there are a few things I didnt think of, like the rich having less children than poor. Interesting to say, because I know many parents that have kids, and then hope their child is the ticket out of the ghetto. Which of course is very normal minded when money is scarcity. I wish we could live in a society where people run out of their way to help someone thats hurt, but since we have so many consequences and repercussions of being late to work, or something of that nature, we live and care for mostly only our selves and our loved one/s.

Please keep them coming people! That was a great read!

Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:22 am » by **Bettyboolean**

savvymalloy wrote:
bettyboolean wrote:

Upload to Disclose.tv

From your past posts I'm assuming you tried to post this video to show Mr Paul in a negative light

When if you'd actually payed attention to what he's saying it's merely a commentary on political philosophy. But you'll probably just remain indignant simply because he was in front of a confederate flag at the time.

Fail!

Happy to let that video speak for itself

Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:11 am » by **Jet17**

phaeton wrote:

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein, (attributed)
US (German-born) physicist (1879 - 1955)

yes except, this has worked before, and did for the first 5 presidents, and a kennedy (in my book)

The quote is truth, but it has to have a consistent comparison for it to be true.

Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:10 am » by **Phaeton**

jet17 wrote:
phaeton wrote:

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein, (attributed)
US (German-born) physicist (1879 - 1955)

yes except, this has worked before, and did for the first 5 presidents, and a kennedy (in my book)

The quote is truth, but it has to have a consistent comparison for it to be true.

And the definition of consistent comparison is what? You dont think 49 years of lies and deceit is 'consistent comparison'? Kennedy might have been an exception to the rule, but I think we can all agree on the fact post Kennedy, or from the self- appointing of Lyndon B. Johnson, you - or we - were 'structurally' screwed in the fanny.

I see no reason to expect anything different from mr. Ron Paul. Imho, that would be irrational.. quite literally insane even.

and lets not kid ourselves, the Kennedy's were from ' the pedigree', JFK just didnt agree with some aspects he was expected to carry out. Thought he had more power than he actually had. He was no saint.

Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:21 pm » by **Freedoom**

I've never voted in a presidential election and I'm 58 yrs old. I will vote for Ron Paul because there's an obvious media conspiracy against him. That's all I need to know.

Fri Jan 27, 2012 9:40 pm » by **Jet17**

phaeton wrote:
jet17 wrote:
phaeton wrote:

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein, (attributed)
US (German-born) physicist (1879 - 1955)

yes except, this has worked before, and did for the first 5 presidents, and a kennedy (in my book)

The quote is truth, but it has to have a consistent comparison for it to be true.

And the definition of consistent comparison is what? You dont think 49 years of lies and deceit is 'consistent comparison'? Kennedy might have been an exception to the rule, but I think we can all agree on the fact post Kennedy, or from the self- appointing of Lyndon B. Johnson, you - or we - were 'structurally' screwed in the fanny.

I see no reason to expect anything different from mr. Ron Paul. Imho, that would be irrational.. quite literally insane even.

and lets not kid ourselves, the Kennedy's were from ' the pedigree', JFK just didnt agree with some aspects he was expected to carry out. Thought he had more power than he actually had. He was no saint.

Thank you for your opinion.

The fact still remains we had at the very least 7 good presidents. so it's isn't entirely inconsistent.

Yes, Kennedy didn't agree with what he was told, so, therefore; he was going to implement some great constitutional aspect to his presidency. Unfortunately we didn't see those come to fruition.

If you don't vote or feel that it is worthless, please by all means don't do it. but remember it was a vast majority that voted for Obama and he won the presidency, so it's who you are stuck with in the end.

You can feel how you want about Ron Paul, but to ignore what he is saying, is ignoring the truth about what is wrong with this world, regardless about how you feel about him.

A vote is still a vote, it is still a signature of approval, and others like me, do extra-curricular work to better their worlds, so voting isn't the end of improving this world, at least not for me.

so even if voting doesn't work... Oh well it's an hour out of my day to go there and drop something into a box, I have my entire life to fix problems myself.

Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:11 pm » by **Phaeton**

You can feel how you want about Ron Paul, but to ignore what he is saying, is ignoring the truth about what is wrong with this world, regardless about how you feel about him.

Ive have said to you before, I agree with everything RP has said until this day, but words are just that. Remember what Obama said before he got elected? I can still hear him say it: "and you can take that to the bank!".. It doesnt mean anything. Thats what Im saying. And even if he is actually willing to make good on his promises, his words.. He still needs to get a lot of that through congress. You see that happening? I sure as hell dont.

Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:41 pm » by **Evemedusa2**

You can assign those '20 reason's' to ANY candiate.

The election of a U.S. 'mouthpiece' is a farce - BIG money elects them, and FOR big money they work, most American's do not realise they lost the right to elect their leaders in 1963 with the death of JFK - The current one is no different, except his black.

But he has been bought and paid for, he will mouth what BIG money has to say.

And who ever is offered up at the next farce of an election, will work for big money.

The American constituion allowed the 'people' to remove tyrants - it's about time they did.

Eve.

Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:50 pm » by **Jet17**

phaeton wrote:
You can feel how you want about Ron Paul, but to ignore what he is saying, is ignoring the truth about what is wrong with this world, regardless about how you feel about him.

Ive have said to you before, I agree with everything RP has said until this day, but words are just that. Remember what Obama said before he got elected? I can still hear him say it: "and you can take that to the bank!".. It doesnt mean anything. Thats what Im saying. And even if he is actually willing to make good on his promises, his words..

He still needs to get a lot of that through congress. You see that happening? I sure as hell dont.[/quote]

Yep, and Obama had nothing of a track record. So it is not the same again, you can't compare consistency against non-consistency.

would you bet on a horse that has never won a race? Millions of others might (Obama) but I wouldn't.

[/quote]He still needs to get a lot of that through congress. You see that happening? I sure as hell dont.[/quote]

yep, so we might as well just take it in the ass huh? instead of trying to implement a good standard in the white house.... I think that is your paradigm, that mixed with the fact that you don't believe official avenues work... Which I am sorry to say, they do at times, just not very often.