|
Post by ghost on Mar 29, 2011 16:04:02 GMT -5
That is without basis, you're seeing him with a liberal bias. I've read what he has to say and he's talking from good economic sense, it's totally practical to say money will be squandered when government is in charge. We have enough examples of inefficiency when bureaucracy takes over, we've seen it slow down development for decades in India before a reversal brought changes we never thought would happen. Look to some of the scandinavian countries and Canada you'll hear the same story. I keep hearing from people there that no one likes to help.
And even if Ron Paul was the biggest misogynist ever he would still not be a mass murderer like Obama. And that's far more important than anything else now, if not for America then for the world. He would stop the wars. And both Kucinich and Nader are on his side as are many people who are former democrats.
|
|
|
Post by duranietillrcm on Mar 30, 2011 7:45:58 GMT -5
I respect other people's opinions and you have the right to them, but I would vote for Obama again in a heartbeat. Ron Paul is a racist, corporate owned nitwit who thinks if everyone smokes pot, they won't see how badly he'd let corporations screw us even more.
McLame, why are they putting his ugly face on CNN so much lately? I don't like us being involved in Libya, but I'd rather see us only bombing government buildings than supplying arms or our own soldiers to fight their war. Let the revolution be UN led, we don't need our men and women dying over there.
I still think there's a reason that Bin Laden hasn't been killed, and it's not because he's hiding in a cave. I think he's in a luxury hotel in Turkey or Saudi Arabia laughing at the morons who thought he would actually be in a cave.
|
|
|
Post by Klingoncelt on Apr 1, 2011 21:18:24 GMT -5
Ron Paul is all about Big Business, not the American people. Do I approve of what's going on in Libya? No, I don't. Either we go full force into EVERY oppressed country, or we stay home. Interesting that Dennis Kucinich and Rand Paul voted to go into Libya 2 weeks before Obama did it. Turns out he didn't really want to, his "people" nagged him into it. But seriously, there are countries far worse off that need our help, why aren't we there? They have to die just because they don't have oil or gold mines? About India, how are things coming along there? It's a huge country, I'm sure it's going to take some time. It's not becoming too western, is it? Are there any major inequality issues? Did the government enact strict housing codes? Ours didn't except for California's state government for earthquakes. That's not good.
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Apr 2, 2011 0:43:16 GMT -5
The US has been in Libya for weeks already long before Obama sought "approval" for them. Rand Paul wasn't there for the quick unanimous vote they had on the no fly zone. It doesn't count as a vote.
India is a little too western, and it takes the worst of both cultures.
|
|
|
Post by Klingoncelt on Apr 2, 2011 18:27:01 GMT -5
Rand Paul was there. He voted for it. It's on record. And the vote does count. Rand Paul is putting out false information to entertain the teabaggers. The vid gets going at around 1:25, there are some comments on the page that properly explain the unanimous vote procedure. thelastword.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/04/01/6393150-rand-pauls-lies-on-tapeThere's some weirdness going on with the suggested point of view Americans are supposed to be taking towards the mideast. There are two versions. One is that all the revolutionaries are Al Qaeda and they're gonna take over and destroy the entire mideast and start WW3. The other is that they're all poor little victims trying to make a better life for themselves and if they defeat their governments they'll create utopian democracies. I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Something else - twice recently I heard mention of India being a terrorist state. I know there are people are all bent that U.S. money is being sent there for some development, I think they're starting a propaganda war. I'll keep a watch out for more.
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Apr 3, 2011 2:59:58 GMT -5
India is a terrorist state very much so, and to their foolishness one that is in league with the Israeli's and the Americans. What context did you hear that in, because US sources are not going to call India terrorist for being anti-rebels. I'm not sure what development this might be, all I'm aware of is the US "giving" India more arms.
Unless Rand Paul has something to say about this, then it looks like the video might be true about him not objecting and therefore counting as a vote. I can't understand what he would have to gain if he let his vote be counted in favour of the no fly zone if he quickly went on to condemn Obama later. He's been consistently anti-war since after 2001.
However this guy and his approach is the most disturbing and Orwellian I've seen in memory. What I find funny is the anchor going on repeatedly through the 10 min mark about the 'lying' which he thinks is a certain fact. I'm not surprised since this is the msm but even by their standards this guy is a crooked schmuck. Ok, a senator is lying maybe even hypocritical, but there's nothing else for him to cover with this kind of fake anger. His mannerisms actually remind me of Fox presenters but then there's no difference now.
|
|
|
Post by Klingoncelt on Apr 3, 2011 18:41:42 GMT -5
The context I heard it in is like India is the next Al Qaeda base. I don't know what the hell is up with that, unless it's the right trying to trip up the left - the left is friendlier to India, it was Obama that made the trip there, so maybe it's a rightwing propaganda thing. Rand Paul is a target for other things, mainly in his appeasing the tea party masters. There's his opthamologist certifcation. He does have a license. But he didn't like the real certification board's rules so he invented his own board and certified himself. Yeah, O'Donnell gets wound up, that's his schtick. But Paul was not just lying about his vote, he was lying about the procedure and the validity of the measure. I like that MSNBC is far and away more honest and accurate than other U.S. media, but yeah, there are times... I've seen them all at MSNBC go overboard about they way someone said something - not what was said, but how it was said. Who gives a fuck, and why isn't a more important topic being covered, y'know? It doesn't happen every day, but it's often enough.
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Apr 4, 2011 2:11:39 GMT -5
I don't trust Rand Paul much and I don't know much about him either. He's not good enough to stand with the other anti-war people.
India could only be an Al Qaeda base if the authorities wanted them there. The idea of a predominantly Hindu country at war with Pakistan being controlled by Islamic terrorism is silly and the Muslims in India don't tend to go into radicalism. It's possible but not on a large organized scale.
|
|
|
Post by duranietillrcm on Apr 4, 2011 9:05:32 GMT -5
I just LOVE how Rand Paul didn't like the rules that should've applied to him, so he made up his own. Who fucking gets to do that? What made him think he was so above the rules that he could just make things up? That would be like me going into law school, and not liking how they do it, so I decide to make my own curriculum and my own license. It's just stupid, much like Paul.
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Apr 4, 2011 10:12:13 GMT -5
The problem apparently was that this board was hypocritical about needing younger opthalmologists to re-certify but not anyone else. Paul did originally have certification from the board so it isn't like he's unqualified. According to Rand he and 200 others were taking a stand against the double standard. What he did was sort of crooked but bold at the same time in being anti-authoritarian.
If a government prints paper money, then everyone should be allowed to mint their own money as they choose. Just because dumb rules exist doesn't mean one has to follow them.
|
|
|
Post by duranietillrcm on Apr 4, 2011 12:29:20 GMT -5
Great, then I can go on my computer, print my own currency, and expect that the banks and stores will take them (Rand's attitude about it).
Yeah, like THAT will happen. Bold? No. Arrogant and elitist, yes.
If you choose to follow a career path, there are standards to be followed. If you aren't willing to follow them, choose something else. Or better yet, be a Republican and complain that the rules shouldn't apply to you.
|
|
|
Post by ghost on Apr 4, 2011 12:52:40 GMT -5
But that was the attitude of that board, setting its own rules and enforcing selectively. As for the banks that's what they're doing. Lending money created out of thin air.
|
|
|
Post by duranietillrcm on Apr 4, 2011 15:24:39 GMT -5
Their money is backed by the US government, my fake printed money would only be backed by me. I think if someone wanted to take a risk, they'd rather deal with the Fed than me.
|
|
|
Post by Klingoncelt on Apr 4, 2011 21:08:13 GMT -5
Paul ran as a tea party candidate. The teabaggers aren't fond of the educated, and they have a total noob mentality. They know nothing about economics, yet they insist on a balanced budget. They know nothing about international issues, but want us to bomb the fuck out of every non-christian nation. They don't understand that our government works slowly, they want it all and they want it now. I don't like him to begin with, but I feel kinda sad for him, he has to do what his voters want. Otherwise he loses his job next election.
As for the money thing, the Bushreich Koch-suckers own the tea party, they feed them the propaganda and bus in the thugs. And they completely control Fuxx Noise.
Anyway, every reliable economist agrees on this (mostly FDR) format as the one to follow in depressed economies: Increase taxes on the very rich, create massive government infrastructure jobs programs, deeply discount or give away property for housing, direct more money to welfare programs. These create jobs, which increases the lower to middle income tax revenue, the infrastructure gets repaired, and the housing market stabilizes. Duh winning!
The teabaggers, under the tutelage of their masters, insist that the rich should be given massive tax breaks which would give the billionaires confidence to create jobs. They also insist that the budget should be balanced, starting by cutting education, welfare and other social programs, wages for public employees (except for government officials), and social security. Economists agree that the trickle down theory has never worked, the rich put their tax breaks in overseas accounts, and cutting social programs wil bankrupt the country, as in total and complete collapse. Many would die from starvation and curable medical conditions, most of the genocide victims would be children, the elderly, minorities, and women.
|
|
|
Post by duranietillrcm on Apr 5, 2011 6:07:42 GMT -5
Teabaggers have no idea how things actually work, that's true. They don't realize that the 50's are LONG gone, this is no longer a US based economy, it's a world economy. If it wasn't for their Republican buddies giving businesses tax breaks for locating overseas, we'd still have factory jobs here in the US, supporting families and pumping money into the local tax bases. The world changes, their mentality doesn't.
The rich don't use their money to create jobs anymore, they stash it away and keep it from being taxed. Anyone who's stupid enough not to see that deserves to work at a motel for subminimum wage cleaning rooms and taking out hotel garbage.
|
|