With that comment I rest my case on liberal intelligence.....

haaa

the 'liberal card' is very popular in these threads

to explain my 'liberal' logic

bills most often have any number of issues and pages attached to them, and congresses vote on hundreds of them per session

meaning, that there isn't any bill as 'simple' that those who vote for it agree with every part, or those who vote against it don't agree with any part

and there is no bill so 'all inclusive' that it is the only bill relevant to determine what candidate a person should support,,

I don't support abortion or death penalty, I do support healthcare,,

so should I support someone who votes yes on healthcare even though they vote yes on abortion too?

or should I vote no because they support abortion, even though they also support healthcare?


BILLS and picking candidates are not as simplistic as to come down to any one issue

at least not for me an 'my kind',,,

PAULTARDS UNITE!!!!

Gee, I don't know..... you voted for Obozo but abortion is covered in his healthcare mandate...... so you tell me..... us

Brilliant Neo-Con Argument Against Ron Paul

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeP2SU6ah6Q

LOVED IT!

Yep.



He is the true president.

A much better standpoint than "Doing anything is better than nothing".

Metaphoric example: A house is on fire. Throwing gasoline on it is "doing something". It won't exactly put the fire out though...

Perhaps we need to think things through. Have more constructive debates. Allow people to take more responsibility in their communities...

What i liked most about Dr. Paul was his information. He wouldn't speak in slogans like 90% of other politicians. Obama and Clinton sounded nice when they spoke, but they gave little to no information. GW didn't even sound intelligent... Ron Paul had information he was giving. This is something, it seems, the mainstream doesn't actually want.

Anyhow, I believe Ron Paul wanted to encourage the desire for independence and free thought, which are seldom bad qualities..

Exactly. Ron Paul is a breath of fresh air. I actually understand what he is saying.

The guy was an ineffective Congressman. He only had very few bills passed, I believe only one and his foreign policy ideas are a disaster.

I will give him this at least he actually voted on bills instead of just voting present, where Obama voted present more then any member of Congress and missed votes to further his own personal agenda.

C'mon man, you know better then that you can't use the words Liberal and intelligence in the same sentence.

Actually, the word "liberal" used to be (during the enlightenment) considered a mark of intelligent thinking. Over the course of time, with the dumbing down of society to little more than an electorate of gibbering baboons, propaganda has degraded the word and given it a severely negative connotation. This was aggravated by many many people claiming to be liberals who weren't.

Today we make our choices by the "brand" and both the "liberal" and "conservative" brands have tarred each other with the same brush and essentially have become the same product marketed under a different brand-name...neither brand is worth a $hit!...Demand a refund!!

In this current corrupt system, Ron Paul is a fish out of water.

That is why he seems ineffective. His ideas are so real and so practical they can't work in the current corrupt system. And what is so good about passing a bill? There are so many really bad bills passed by jerks who are just trying to "do" something and justify their jobs, they just manage to screw things up more.



Ron Paul is too good for this political system. I don't know why he dirty's his hands with any of it.

I know few support him. But why is there little to no argument against his ideas? Instead other politicians throw slogans at him or call him a loon, but there is nothing constructive from the side of his opposition, nothing intellectual.

I guess what I am asking is, what is wrong with the notion of ceasing our payments to foreign countries and using the money on America instead? Does the president of Pakistan(Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and 170 other countries) need a billions o dollars a year from us? We end up fighting enemies that we fund, with weapons we gave them, using rules of engagement that are ridiculous and merely extend the fight...

Anyhow, I'm not saying there is no argument against Ron Paul's policy or there is no answer, but you can't say the whole idea is disastrous...

Couldn't have said it better...

lol.......as the op stated all the predictions came true, he tried to do many things, hard to do when you keep being voted down by the establishment. Even harder when you have people blocking you at every turn.

People call him crazy and a loon, but they present no justifiable reasons as to why! I would think that if I were to call someone names, I would at least be able to give a few (or one) reason as to why and not this, "I don't like him" bunk.

He firmly believes in the constitution and rule of law. That is something other big money politicians like your hero Romney do not want to be bothered with and the reason why he seems ineffective.