Sign in to follow this  
Yohan Roux

Ron Paul For President

Recommended Posts

You weren't worried in the 1930's either were you?  We have a very friendly neighbor north of us an ocean on both the east and west of us and a somewhat friendly neighbor to the south.  So I guess my worry is unwarranted.......oh wait we don't have someone to call if our world suddenly goes upside down.  It would be nice to not have to worry..........and to not have to pay for for that luxury of a care free life.

Utopia is only an imaginary place.  Sad but true.

I said I was done............I lied :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

You weren't worried in the 1930's either were you?  We have a very friendly neighbor north of us an ocean on both the east and west of us and a somewhat friendly neighbor to the south.  So I guess my worry is unwarranted.......oh wait we don't have someone to call if our world suddenly goes upside down.  It would be nice to not have to worry..........and to not have to pay for for that luxury of a care free life.

Utopia is only an imaginary place.  Sad but true.

I said I was done............I lied
:)

You guys are paranoid over nothing....no country militarily are in a position to attack US Mainland.(isolated Terrorist acts don't count!)

Well done Mr Bush in feeding off people's insecurities and selling them the Patriot's Act -lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

You weren't worried in the 1930's either were you? 

__________________________________________________________________________

 

I
t's irrelevant, that was a conflict between numerous countries who mostly now all belong to the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question:

When did the European Union become a country?  Isn't that a little like saying the Middle East is a country?  How many countries make up the European Union?  The United States is a single country.......so is the United Kingdom.  It takes a goup of countries to edge out the United States?  Typical stats.........sort of decieving to say the least.  One of the countries in the European Union collaspes and the entire Union goes down (what do you think the EU is so worried about Greece, Italy and Spain for?).  Country to country we are 7 times the United Kingdom's economy.  Who is going to fail first?  Us or you? 

If Ron Paul gets elected President you should rethink your smugness.  You just might have to spend some of that economy on your own defense.......oops, I almost forgot you don't worry about defense because you are in a good place (like you were in the 1930's). 

Nice try though.  :)

I got to go watch a movie on TV......have a nice night over there on that side of the pond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very tangled web has been woven. 

A game is being played along side two parties. The two parties lean upon one and the other to form a pyramid during times of adversity. Neither party will fall as they are one.

Any candidate who may disrupt how the few administer to the many will be ridiculed and attacked. I will vote for that person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

Question:

When did the European Union become a country?  Isn't that a little like saying the Middle East is a country?  How many countries make up the European Union?  The United States is a single country.......so is the United Kingdom.  It takes a goup of countries to edge out the United States?  Typical stats.........sort of decieving to say the least.  One of the countries in the European Union collaspes and the entire Union goes down (what do you think the EU is so worried about Greece, Italy and Spain for?).  Country to country we are 7 times the United Kingdom's economy.  Who is going to fail first?  Us or you? 

If Ron Paul gets elected President you should rethink your smugness.  You just might have to spend some of that economy on your own defense.......oops, I almost forgot you don't worry about defense because you are in a good place (like you were in the 1930's). 

Nice try though. 
:)

I got to go watch a movie on TV......have a nice night over there on that side of the pond.

EU is a union of 27 European countries, a trading block, no borders, free movement...shares a common currency. They wanted to take it a step further, but that would mean giving up sovereignty.

No the Union doesn't go down...if a single country goes down, especially not a country the size of Greece. It's the other 26 countries that are trying to help her.

it would be easy to sell you an Insurance policy....as easy as you swallow all the nonsense your media feeds you now. At least read up on the European Union before commenting. Technically the U.S are already a bankrupt state.....they won't be able to repay that 15 trillion debt .....well not in your lifetime! The future economic powerhouses will be China and the Far East.....you might as well get use to it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

Someone implied I was a racist because I happen to be a registered Republican (the link was that Republicans are full of racists so, therefore, I was one too).

I dropped out of this chat awhile back and I'm not going to go back and read it now, call me lazy, whatever... but Peggy, if you are talking about my post with this "implication," this is like the famous telephone game. I never mentioned Republicans, ever. I never said any particular group was full of racists. I never said you were a racist. I said anyone who wants President Obama to fail (in his present capacity, as leader of our country, not in the upcoming election)  due to his race is a racist, and that I am suprised by how many of those there is. I thought as humans we had evolved more than that, but I was wrong. You chose to take my words and twist them around and get all offended for no reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I'm not offended in any way.  I know myself quite well.  I know that I'm not a racist.  I know that minorities are the exact same as everyone else (especially the black race sine I was born, raised and lived most of my life right in the middle of what was supposed to be the "racist" part of the country.......funny thing though I've since moved to the "land of enlightenment" and have seen and witnessed more racism in the 13 years I've lived here than the 23 years I lived in "bigot land").  I'm not a racist and I did not get offended. 

What I did was a purposeful  turning someone's words which were said in all sincerity against them............something that is done often to people like me who are from a section of the country that fought on the wrong side of the Civil War.  I get accused of saying racist things all the time.......and, like you, I did not say any such thing.  I feel pretty sure you are a supporter of Barrack Obama.  I am not (but it's not a race thing.......it's all about his politics.  But I get accused of being a racist anyway simply because of my southern accent).  It sort of irks, doesn't it?  The Obama people (which I believe you probably fit that mold) find little things like you said and run with it.  I did it to you.  Maybe you will think next time you say silly things like "I said anyone who wants President Obama to fail (in his present capacity, as leader of our country, not in the upcoming election)  due to his race is a racist, and that I am suprised by how many of those there is."  That's absolutely not true.  I want the man to fail and he's giving me what I want.......he's failing.  That single sentence is what is known as race baiting.....and it's racist in context.  I actually want him to fail as President so that he won't get re-elected.  I don't want him to fail because he's black.........I want him to fail because of his politics (and that I think he should fail because of that..........he's doing a pretty good job of too).  I can't say to you that I want him to fail because you are going to label me a racist.

I completely understood what you were saying but I hammered my game back to you............doesn't feel very good, does it?

Now I'm backing out of the thread again.  Also wondering why my text is bolded after I intalized and changed the color of the text for the quote I did of you post.  Take care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

Ron Paul scares me because I really think he would just walk away from Iran's threat and pull the US behind a wall. 

thats the real danger from my perspective. pax americana, for better or worse, is the umbrella under which the free world shelters. without this we will all suffer, at least our way of life would. is why many of us that not are us citizens are vitally interested in the us elections. not only presidential, but senate and congress as well

is popular in other countries sometimes to slag off the usa, but is like slagging off the police, until someone breaks into your house and starts to do bad stuff to you, then u scream for the police bc will not be good for u unless they come

must be hard sometimes to be an american. can understand when they get weary of having to be the police all the time, specially when sometimes the people they are helping complain and even attack them instead of the bad guys who actual doing the stuff to them, quite often their own ppl

just want to say that i am grateful to america for what they have done for us all in the democratic countries for nearly 100 years now. america always been like a big brother to us really. can be a bit bossy sometimes like all big brothers can be. and sometimes like little brothers and sisters we get annoyed and try push him away, but when chips are down then he always steps up. he knows that and so do we. so just wnat to say thanks bro  (:

who america votes for is their choice tho, is not ours, and thats how it should be. i will be happy for them whoever they choose as their president, and i wish whoever that is all the best

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Ron Paul is the only candidate for many reasons, but the main one is that he wants to reintroduce the Glass–Steagall Act, this has so many implications, don't know if he has thought them through, he probably has from the USA's point of view, but it will make the NWO a goal unachievable, it will also allow the US to write of a lot of the debt as being illegal, this will have a huge knock on affects that the banks don't dare talk about, so much so that if he was elected they are sure to have him killed before he can reintroduce it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Yohan Roux wrote:

I think Ron Paul is the only candidate for many reasons, but the main one is that he wants to reintroduce the Glass–Steagall Act, this has so many implications, don't know if he has thought them through, he probably has from the USA's point of view, but it will make the NWO a goal unachievable, it will also allow the US to write of a lot of the debt as being illegal, this will have a huge knock on affects that the banks don't dare talk about, so much so that if he was elected they are sure to have him killed before he can reintroduce it.

 

 

Not really big news.  John McCain advocated it's return, Obama is already preparing a form of it and the UK and many European countries are enacting very similar systems of splitting a bank's investment arm off from it's commercial and public savings and lending operations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I gotta jump back into this conversation. Just for sec. I think Rene is doing a stellar job, but I just want to add some things. Who the heck does every1 think they are? I'm talking about countries. Who can say who can do what? Does the US or the UN get to run the world? I certainly hope not. Every1 in the world can speculate what other countries might do with a nuke. All, or most of those speculations will be completely wrong, but the conversation goes on without any logical acknowledgement that it is all just speculation.

Specifically, Iran has stated, clearly, a number of times, they are not looking to make high grade uranium. There is no proof at all, not 1 shread of proof, that they are producing high grade uranium. And.... inspectors can still inspect the facilities. Any attack on Iran without being attacked by them, is immoral. Saying that this or that might happen if you do not attack another country is a clinically insane stand point, which is without any reason or proof. Yet, this is the arguement put forth in our news media, which inturn, spreads to the populace.

The Libertarian philosophy, which should be the inherit american philosophy, is the only completely moral societal philosophy there is. All other societies create legal authorities to steal from and injure it's populace without just cause. In a truely libertarian society, there would be no wars, there would be no bubbles, and there would be no reason to assault any1. Free markets and voluntary exchanges are the rule, not the exception. These are like the notion of karma, which is an unseen force regulated by the interaction of others. Free markets are also a force, which can not be easily swayed or manipulated. Eventually, it will raise it's head and correct that which has gone wrong. This is just nature, and to go against it is like trying to swim upstream.

I will leave you with this video from this year's LibertyFest, which is going on right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with you 16.....I can't speak for the general views or opinions held by Americans, but I do know that generally across Europe,  we're tired and grow weary of Wars being fought in some far distant part of the world.

What exactly has Afghanistan yielded? ....a cost of a Trillion dollars to the U.S economy (not sure how much it's cost the remaining Nato countries), an unwinnable conflict in it's 11th year, our 1000's of dead soldiers....all for Osama Bin Laden (the initial excuse and his training camps).....and we're still there. Why?

Why are we still there? Aside from committing mass genocide on the scale of the Na$is.....we'll never be able to fully supress the Taliban or any associated Tribes. Read the history of Afghanistan.......it's a totally lost adventure"

Mission complete...Osama is dead! Is there an ultriamotive?.....protecting the Opium trade? the Poppy fields?

From Wikipedia :

"Opium production in Afghanistan has been on the rise since U.S. occupation started there . Based on UNODC data, there has been more opium poppy cultivation in each of the past four growing seasons (2004–2007) than in any one year during Taliban rule.
In addition to opiates, Afghanistan is also the largest producer of  hashish in the world."



The Taliban had banned growth of Opium!!

"However, in July 2000, Taliban leader Mullah  Mohammed Omar, collaborating with the United Nations to eradicate heroin production in Afghanistan, declared that growing poppies was un-Islamic, resulting in one of the world's most successful anti-drug campaigns. As a result of this ban, opium poppy cultivation was reduced by 91% from the previous year's estimate of 82,172 hectares. The ban was so effective that Helmand Province, which had accounted for more than half of this area, recorded no poppy cultivation during the 2001"

Isn't the trafficking of drugs one of our biggest social problems that we have in out society?

...or is it all about Gas pipeines? You be the judge and do the research!

"The pipeline will transport Caspian Sea natural gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan into Pakistan and then to India. "

The roots of this project lie in the involvement of international oil companies in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan beginning of 1990s. As Russia, who controlled all export pipelines of these countries, consistently refusing to allow the use of its pipeline network, these companies needed an independent export route avoiding both Iran and Russia "

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/sardi7.html

http://911review.org/brad.com/archives/oil/Pipeline.html

If Ron Paul is advocating a pull out of Afghanistan.....then he gets my approval

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

will be romney i think unless another candidate enters, which i think unlikely. of all republican candidates, in head to head with obama, romney have the best chance of winning

i dont think will be easy to beat obama tho, no matter who is the republican candidate. to win any election u have to get out ur core supporters in big numbers.  if they not come out then u cant win, no matter who wins the middle. am not sure that the republican party is going to be able to that bc of their divisions on quite deep philosophical grounds about each of the main candidates

when core supporters not come out then is usual that they say to themselfs well cant win anyways so not bother. even worse when they say the other guy suxs but our guy suxs even more so am staying home. that last one the big danger for republican party i think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...

when core supporters not come out then is usual that they say to themselfs well cant win anyways so not bother. even worse when they say the other guy suxs but our guy suxs even more so am staying home. that last one the big danger for republican party i think"

-----------------------------------------------------------

That's the conventional wisdom.  But, conventional wisdom goes out the window when you are dealing with an unconventional Presidential election.  You seem to have missed that Obama is running as fast as he can to the right......tearing apart a rather large core constituency within his party.  Sure some of the Republicans will stay at home (that happens every election) but Obama has the same problem when many of his party's faithful will do the same.  Unemployment, huge deficits (his budget porposal adds anonther 1.5 tillion), his insistance on financing "green energy" when the technology is not quite where it needs to be in order for "green energy" to be feasible (you can't suddenly find technology just because you want it.....it needs to be developed first.  Incentives to produce the technology, yes, but funding companies like Solandra goes way beyond that), his mandating everyone purchase health care insurance or face a fine, and his recent mandate that religous non-profit health facilities provide constrasceptives even when a mandate violates the tenants of the Church's beliefs (clearly a violation of the First Ammendment to the Constitution of the United States....he backed off that somewhat but the idea that a President of the United States attempts to mandate a rule or law in direct violation of  the Constitution that he vowed to uphold will not be forgotten).

Obama's got problems....big ones.  The Republican's are having issues figuring out who they want to be their nominee.  That will be resolved when all the primaries are run or when everyone but one concedes and we have one person running against one other person.  Whoever the Republican nominee winds up being the vast majority of the Republican party will rally behind that single candidate.  Independants will have to look at what has happened in the preceeding 3 1/2 years and decide if they want to take a chance again......this time they have a history where they did not last election.  I believe Obama will have a hard time convincing them again that he is who he says he is.  He lied to them 3 years ago and many won't forget.  Whoever the Republican nominee is only has to keep reminding the public of what kind of President Obama has been (as recently as this week and it's only Monday) and that he has not changed one bit on his policies.  Not to mention sometime late this spring or early summer the Supreme Court is going to rule on his mandate for everyone to purchase health insurance.......the smart money says that mandate is going down in flames (but we'll have wait and see).

My choice at the moment is Rick Santorum.  He's no slough when I comes to politics.  He's consistant in his message and he's the only proven conservative (whatever that definition is) in the field.  A good compromise between Romney and Paul.  He has little baggage to have to explain away (unlike Romney and Gingrich).  I think he can beat Obama in a head to head campaign......much more so than Mit Romney.  However, campaigns cost money (lots of money) and Mit clearly has the advantage there.........we'll see how it all pans out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when core supporters from both sides stay home then is even harder for the challenger to win. in campaigns where this happens then the middle goes for the dog they know

if look at when a sitting usa president has been defeated then jimmy carter and george bush snr. both them ran into extraordinary opponents. ronald reagan and bill clinton. in both cases incumbent president not only had deep problems but also extraordinary opponent

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


PudgyPaddy wrote:


Rene Erlanger wrote:

Nice twist....Iran has nothing to gain by closing the Straits of Hormuz.....
sorry i'm not inclined to believe the State Dept propaganda machine.....it's as credible as the WMD stories used to attack Iraq the 2nd time around.

 
Europe buy their Oil from a variety different Oil Producing countries including a lot from war-torn Libya. We're not paranoid over Iran as the Republicans are. Again, Iran is not an aggressor State....
I see the U.S more of a threat to world peace, by throwing it's weight around in the Middle East when it really isn't needed. They need to stay out of that region
...which has already witnessed 4 wars in the last 20 years.

 

 

Saddam Hussein told an FBI interviewer before he was hanged that he allowed the world to believe he had weapons of mass destruction because he was worried about appearing weak to Iran. 
Hussein, in fact, said he felt so vulnerable to the perceived threat from "fanatic" leaders in Tehran that he would have been prepared to seek a "security agreement with the United States to protect [iraq] from threats in the region."

So much for US State Department propaganda, huh?

 

The US is throwing its weight around cleaning up the mess left by the British and French after their attempts at colonization failed subsequent to the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

 

 


It's fairly ridiculous to truly believe that Iraq's next door neighbor, with millions of people sharing a common religion and groups/tribes spanning the border, could not find even one person to help them see the truth behind such claims. I wouldn't put so much weight behind the words of a man condemned to death who frankly would say anything to earn himself even one more day of life. Especially when the source of such quotes is the FBI. ESPECIALLY when such quotes conveniently provide another excuse to get thousands more of our kids killed on foreign soil.

These two are part of one of the oldest cultures on the planet and any bickering has been the direct result of tribal philosophical and religious differences. Something each has dealt with without nuclear missiles since inception. Such absurd claims are about as believable as some kid running around a playground suddenly claiming to have a gun for protection against another kid he has been arm-wrestling to a standstill for the last five school years, because the other kid "isn't right in the head". It's poppycock.

Sorry, but there is a point at which the refusal of a populace to admit the truth about what a blight its country has become to the rest of the world approaches closely enough to criminal that they can no longer expect to be seen as separate from the regime they've elected repeatedly into power. The American public has reached that point.

It is true after all. People really do get the government they deserve. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


PudgyPaddy wrote:


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

Someone implied I was a racist because I happen to be a registered Republican (the link was that Republicans are full of racists so, therefore, I was one too).  But isn't your venom a little Anti Semite?  That's about as close to being as racist as one can get without being an actual racist.

Think about it.

This ^^

Who didn't see it coming.  

People who have no reason to force criticism to be synonymous with hatred perhaps? I dunno.

I personally feel no need whatsoever to defend calling Israel out for the bullying hypocrites that they are. They have become what they claim to despise. An oppressive rogue warlike regime practicing racial cleansing while crying victim to the rest of the world and expecting everyone else to send their children to die for their regional imperialism. A pompous world power that thumbs its nose at the same world organizations that it is running to begging for crackdowns on other countries that it fears are doing the same nose thumbing they do. And the US is right there in hypocrisy with them.

And for the record, I will also call the anti-semite label out for what everyone else seems to be scared to call it. A race card. Just like the one that tons of these same Western warmongers accuse blacks of throwing out for complaining about the exact same thing the Jews are. Oppression, racism, villification, and antagonism. 

Ironically the best thing blacks could do to help themselves is convert en masse to Judaism. What a show that would be. How many heads in this world would literally explode as their owners tried to figure out whether blacks should be called out for playing victim or supported no questions asked by NATO bombing runs on "The Man"?

As to the other point, party affiliation has nothing to do with racism. That's not even worth the effort of debating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Kascha Matova wrote:


PudgyPaddy wrote:


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

Someone implied I was a racist because I happen to be a registered Republican (the link was that Republicans are full of racists so, therefore, I was one too).  But isn't your venom a little Anti Semite?  That's about as close to being as racist as one can get without being an actual racist.

Think about it.

This ^^

Who didn't see it coming.  

People who have no reason to force criticism to be synonymous with hatred perhaps? I dunno.

I personally feel no need whatsoever to defend calling Israel out for the bullying hypocrites that they are. They have become what they claim to despise. An oppressive rogue warlike regime practicing racial cleansing while crying victim to the rest of the world and expecting everyone else to send their children to die for their regional imperialism. A pompous world power that thumbs its nose at the same world organizations that it is running to begging for crackdowns on other countries that it fears are doing the same nose thumbing they do. And the US is right there in hypocrisy with them.

And for the record, I will also call the anti-semite label out for what everyone else seems to be scared to call it. A race card. Just like the one that tons of these same Western warmongers accuse blacks of throwing out for complaining about the exact same thing the Jews are. Oppression, racism, villification, and antagonism. 

Ironically the best thing blacks could do to help themselves is convert en masse to Judaism. What a show that would be. How many heads in this world would literally explode as their owners tried to figure out whether blacks should be called out for playing victim or supported no questions asked by NATO bombing runs on "The Man"?

As to the other point, party affiliation has nothing to do with racism. That's not even worth the effort of debating.

 

I see you doing a preemptive strike against anyone who might see "antisemitism" in your many comments.   Isn't that interesting. 

On page six of this thread, you've re-written the history of Israel.  Your comment on page six, reverses reality, and has Israel as the aggressor which illuminates your views, rather than the truth.   What actually happened is that, one day after Israel is declared an independent state in 1948,  Arab nations invaded and attacked.   There has been aggression towards Israel non-stop since that time. 

Ironically, the initial attack upon Israel was because the Untied Nations and United Kingdom (UK) had proposed a partition of land areas for Jewish and Arab peoples in that area.  Independent states for Israel and Palestine were the original proposal.  This was proposed to reduce conflict in the area.

So, the very type of proposal that was rejected by Arab nations in 1948, is now what they seek.    Of course, back then it was rejected because the only solution for the Arab nations in that area, was to eradicate Israel.   Which has been their goal ever since Israel was invaded in 1948.  

Surrounding Arab nations would not allow Palestinian refugees to become citizens of their neighboring nations, because the Palestinian people were being used as a tool, for the continuing attacks upon Israel.  Neighboring Arab nations, felt it better to keep Palestinians fresh in their hatred, rather than give them refuge.

Now, after all this time, death and destruction, this past year, in 2011, Palestinian president Mahmound Abbas stated that the Arab rejection of the partition plan was a mistake, and that he intends to rectify that mistake. 

Oh, and if you want to tell me how some of your best friends are Jewish and live in Israel, I'm all ears.  *smiling* 

Shalom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Yohan Roux wrote:

I agree with both of you, in the UK Ron Paul is an inspiration, we are becoming more vocal now and calling for someone like him here.

Behave! Ron Paul is not an inspiration in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Ciaran Laval wrote:


Yohan Roux wrote:

I agree with both of you, in the UK Ron Paul is an inspiration, we are becoming more vocal now and calling for someone like him here.

Behave! Ron Paul is not an inspiration in the UK.

I'll come out of hiding just to second that!

Why the heck would we be calling for someone like him here? Quite the opposite. We are calling for our own psycho, prejudiced idiots who love their rhetoric to be removed!

Ron Paul is clever. I'll give him that. He fools people into thinking he is 'for the people' with his fight against corrution, lobbying etc. A worthy fight, absolutely, and it's the type of fight that is needed in global politics. Ron Paul certainly isn't the man to lead that fight though. He's still a massively prejudiced typical conservative though who doesn't care for equality on the grounds of race, gender, religious beliefs or sexual orientation one iota. He set America (and the world) back decades in terms of isolation and localised and legalised prejudices.

Don't be fooled by Ron Pauls rhetoric. Do your reseach. Once you wade through all the Ron Paul happy-clapping, you'll soon realise what this man actually stands for.

Anyway - enjoy the debate. I'm off to shout at a few more Tory scum!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Suella Ember wrote:


Ciaran Laval wrote:


Yohan Roux wrote:

I agree with both of you, in the UK Ron Paul is an inspiration, we are becoming more vocal now and calling for someone like him here.

Behave! Ron Paul is not an inspiration in the UK.

I'll come out of hiding just to second that!

Why the heck would we be calling for someone like him here? Quite the opposite. We are calling for our own psycho, prejudiced idiots who love their rhetoric to be removed!

Ron Paul is clever. I'll give him that. He fools people into thinking he is 'for the people' with his fight against corrution, lobbying etc. A worthy fight, absolutely, and it's the type of fight that is needed in global politics. Ron Paul certainly isn't the man to lead that fight though. He's still a massively prejudiced typical conservative though who doesn't care for equality on the grounds of race, gender, religious beliefs or sexual orientation one iota. He set America (and the world) back decades in terms of isolation and localised and legalised prejudices.

Don't be fooled by Ron Pauls rhetoric. Do your reseach. Once you wade through all the Ron Paul happy-clapping, you'll soon realise what this man actually stands for.

Anyway - enjoy the debate. I'm off to shout at a few more Tory scum!

 

It appears that YOU are the prejudiced one Suella.   You've just tossed out, a typical cliched diatribe about someone, with which know very little.     *rolls eyes*

I supposed it irked you to know that there are people in the UK that think Ron Paul is an inspiration, so you had to post here.      *laughing* 

 

Check out some of these links: 

http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/

http://www.facebook.com/pages/UK-Supporters-of-Ron-Paul/215601155171188

 

Your tag line here shows your hate.  Enjoy the rest of your day...doing what you do.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stictly speaking, my signature highlights Aneurin Bevan's prejudices, but yeah, I hate people who hate just like he did. It's a pervesely twisted irony that also implies I hate myself. I'm a complicated individual who would never dream of claiming to be perfect.

Congratulations on finding a small blog that hasn't been updated since Feb 2010 and a Facebook page with 203 likes. I take it back. Ron Paul is a huge inspiration in the UK.

Anyway. Back to joining my 145,000 and growing comrades defending our free health care and fighting our own Conservative attempts to privatise it as they persue their campaign to demonize the poor and dislabled I go. I'd love to stay and 'debate' but it's so bad over here I must dedicate my time to fighting what even the most right-wing paper in the UK are comparing to Nazis! :o (Blimey! Even conservatives will be abandoning Conservatives next!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok time for a tension breaker hehehe

i decided to look up the definition of a politician just to see what was out there..

i ended up with some pretty good results..here goes:

Word:  politician

n. One who shakes your hand before elections and your confidence thereafter.

n. An eel in the fundamental mud upon which organized society is erected.

n. Profession held by intellectual prostitutes.

 

there were some good quotes there..thought i would share them

Sharing:

Probably the most distinctive characteristic of the successful politician is selective cowardice.

— Richard Harris


Politicians and diapers both need to be changed often, and for the same reason.

— Bumper Sticker


Is a politician boinking a prostitute redundant, or a quid pro quo?

— Guy Smith


It is fast approaching the point where I don't want to elect anyone stupid enough to want the job.

— Erma Bombeck


Aristotle believed that the brain existed merely to cool blood and was not involved in with thinking, which has proven true for certain persons, mainly politicians.

— Derived from Will Cuppy


What this country needs are more unemployed politicians.

— Edward Langley


Today, wanting someone else's money is called "need", wanting to keep your own money is called "greed", and "compassion" is when politicians arrange the transfer.

— Joseph Sobran



I have always felt that a politician is to be judged by the animosities he excites among his opponents.

— Winston Churchill


Instead of giving a politician the keys to the city, it might be better to change the locks.

— Doug Larson



It is dangerous for a national candidate to say things that people might remember.

— Eugene McCarthy


An honest politician is one who, when he is bought, will stay bought.

— Simon Cameron


Now I know what a statesman is; he's a dead politician. We need more statesmen.

— Bob Edwards


Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river.

— Nikita Khrushchev


The reason there are so few female politicians is that it is too much trouble to put makeup on two faces.

— Maureen Murphy


When the politicians complain that TV turns the proceedings into a circus, it should be made clear that the circus was already there, and that TV has merely demonstrated that not all the performers are well trained.

— Edward R. Murrow


I have come to the conclusion that politics are too serious a matter to be left to the politicians.

— Charles De Gaulle



Ninety-eight percent of the adults in this country are decent, hard-working, honest Americans. It's the other lousy two percent that get all the publicity. But then--we elected them.

— Lily Tomlin


A politician under oath is a bit like a tumor under chemotherapy.

— William Ferraiolo


An honest politician appears on the scene as often as a celibate whore.

— William Ferraiolo


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this