WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
I got Obama, no surprise.
you werent discouraged by him failing to deliver on his campaign promises? Specifically Healthcare. Now, no debate needed that the removal of the preexisting condition was a good thing, however mandating that everyone have to buy shitty healthcare insurance is a long ways away from making healthcare affordable to all. Really the insurance companies are like half of the problem with healthcare in the USA, and mandating that everyone has to buy into shitty coverage is really making the situation worse. If i had voted for Obama, that would have really pissed me off.
Although I'm libertarian I do think the healthcare industry is out of control and I do think health care should be affordable to all. Kind of like how it was when we first started out as a nation.
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
edited December 2011
Mandated coverage was one of the four I didn't select, including gay marriage.
That whole quiz thing was based on policy, not the actual candidate's qualities. Still, I do believe in Obama's ability to get more stuff done in his second term than in his first, because it's where presidents tend to grow balls.
The problem with this country extends far beyond any candidate though, it's the partisan rhetoric and activity of EVERYONE, not anyone's policy or methods. The 24 hr media coverage of politics also is an enormous problem. That's one of the reasons why Paul is so appealing, because of a massive failure to be anything in the middle, which represents the majority. People don't feel represented, so they'll vote Paul and effectively blow up modern government, which people will realize isn't what they want either. But for now, it is, because they know they don't want this.
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
Can't say I really disagree with anything you said. Although I might add that I do effectively want to blow up modern government. I agree the majority of people are probably as you have described.
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
I disagree a lot with a lot of the Paul supporters claiming he is the most derived from the founding fathers, because his desire to effectively eliminate the role of government from the everyday man's life isn't a far cry from what the Declaration of Independence opposed. With the removal of a large amount of government programs, there's going to be a lot of that slack picked up by private enterprise, which is a lot harder to control than government because we're a capitalist country. People will begin to blame the government for what seems like a decrease in quality of living, and you'll have a social issue on your hands. Unless Paul's cuts fix the economic crisis, (hint: they won't) you'll have a synthesized social problem in addition to the current economic climate.
Basically, we can't blow up government at a time right now. It's too important to keeping the social peace. Unfortunately, it has resulted in an economic struggle, to say the least, but you don't blow it all up because it didn't work. You use the same terms to fix the problem as the ones you used to fuck it up.
I think Ill alter my position right now. I believe in Obama's policies to the T minus a few, but I do not believe enough in American politics or the average voter to get us out of it.
At this point, I do not see how the "perfect" democracy gets out of this mess.
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
edited December 2011
I think you over-estimate what Paul could accomplish with a congress and senate that would oppose every thing he would attempt to do. Electing Ron Paul into office could have two positive effects
1. It could show congress and the senate that we are sick of their bullshit. That the days of robbing the American people are over and if they want to keep a little power then they need to stop supporting special interests and start working for the people.
2. Create 4-8 years of grid lock. No more shit like SOPA, Patriot act, DMCA, or new wars.
That is the best you can hope for with Ron Paul. Anything more then you dont understand how our government works.
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
I think you over-estimate what Paul could accomplish with a congress and senate that would oppose every thing he would attempt to do. Electing Ron Paul into office could have two positive effects
1. It could show congress and the senate that we are sick of their bullshit. That the days of robbing the American people are over and if they want to keep a little power then they need to stop supporting special interests and start working for the people.
2. Create 4-8 years of grid lock. No more shit like SOPA, Patriot act, DMCA, or new wars.
That is the best you can hope for with Ron Paul. Anything more then you dont understand how our government works.
I was voicing more of a problem with his policy, not necessarily what he is capable of as president. His policies enacted scare me as a citizen, but the actual ramifications of him being president aren't what I described above.
I think that the problem is a lot more rooted in the American voter than most people think it is. Sure, the incumbent congress and senate could see that we're sick of their bullshit, but that's asking a lot of people with a lot of power to give up a lot of power. The most powerful entity of America is a determined voter population, but because of the partisan politics there is no way out.
I think, however, that 4-8 years of grid lock would be nice. Let controversial legislation like SOPA, Patriot and DOMA exit the political stage for a while and a return to internal repair would be excellent.
Paul could could also shut down hundreds of our 900 overseas bases without congressional approval and slash executive cabinet level departments as well. major cornerstones of his campaign
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
I think that the problem is a lot more rooted in the American voter than most people think it is. Sure, the incumbent congress and senate could see that we're sick of their bullshit, but that's asking a lot of people with a lot of power to give up a lot of power. The most powerful entity of America is a determined voter population, but because of the partisan politics there is no way out.
what you wrote here reminded me of a book quote
"On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"
"What?"
"I said," said Ford, with an increasing air of urgency creeping into his voice, "have you got any gin?"
"I'll look. Tell me about the lizards."
Ford shrugged again.
"Some people say that the lizards are the best thing that ever happened to them," he said. "They're completely wrong of course, completely and utterly wrong, but someone's got to say it."
KIK He is a Politician. Lying is part of the job,... to get the job.
hes a statesman among politicians
you guys are in over your head
In American history a statesman represents an individual who after being elected to office holds firm to their oath to defend and uphold the US Constitution within their duty as an elected official.
No one in congress takes that oath more serious than Ron Paul, nobody
Ron Paul Suddenly Doesn't Want to Talk to Reporters About His Racist Newsletters:
Ron Paul furrowed his eyebrows before storming off completely during a CNN interview addressing allegations that he made money and won fame with the help of a sometimes racist series of newsletters back in the 1990s. Paul is the same candidate that many have said has been ignored by the media -- some would say, though, he's not -- but since he's been climbing in the polls and suddenly appears to be a real contender in the Republican primary race, the media's turned up the heat. CNN's Gloria Berger was just starting to grill Paul about the details of how involved he was in the racist newsletters, when the candidate stonewalled her. "Why don't you go back and look at what I said yesterday on CNN and what I’ve said for 20 something years. 22 years ago?" Paul said right at the outset. "I didn't write them, I disavow them, that's it." Related: Ron Paul Raised $1 Million Overnight
Borger, like a good journalist, pressed on for a few seconds before urging Paul to react to what people are saying about the two decade old allegations. "These things are pretty incendiary," Borger said. "Because of people like you," Paul snapped back, just before he pulled of his microphone and headed for the door. "I appreciate your answering the questions, and you understand it's our job to ask them," the reporter said, almost apologetically as Paul was leaving. Related: Perry's Finger-Wagging Was All Part of Ron Paul's Clever Plan
Later, when talking about the incident on air, Situation Room host Wolf Blizter suggested that Paul "got tired of talking about" the corruption allegations. "He clearly thinks its irrelevant," Borger told Blitzer. "It’s clearly a question he’d rather not be asked."
Comments
Although I'm libertarian I do think the healthcare industry is out of control and I do think health care should be affordable to all. Kind of like how it was when we first started out as a nation.
That whole quiz thing was based on policy, not the actual candidate's qualities. Still, I do believe in Obama's ability to get more stuff done in his second term than in his first, because it's where presidents tend to grow balls.
The problem with this country extends far beyond any candidate though, it's the partisan rhetoric and activity of EVERYONE, not anyone's policy or methods. The 24 hr media coverage of politics also is an enormous problem. That's one of the reasons why Paul is so appealing, because of a massive failure to be anything in the middle, which represents the majority. People don't feel represented, so they'll vote Paul and effectively blow up modern government, which people will realize isn't what they want either. But for now, it is, because they know they don't want this.
Basically, we can't blow up government at a time right now. It's too important to keeping the social peace. Unfortunately, it has resulted in an economic struggle, to say the least, but you don't blow it all up because it didn't work. You use the same terms to fix the problem as the ones you used to fuck it up.
I think Ill alter my position right now. I believe in Obama's policies to the T minus a few, but I do not believe enough in American politics or the average voter to get us out of it.
At this point, I do not see how the "perfect" democracy gets out of this mess.
1. It could show congress and the senate that we are sick of their bullshit. That the days of robbing the American people are over and if they want to keep a little power then they need to stop supporting special interests and start working for the people.
2. Create 4-8 years of grid lock. No more shit like SOPA, Patriot act, DMCA, or new wars.
That is the best you can hope for with Ron Paul. Anything more then you dont understand how our government works.
I think that the problem is a lot more rooted in the American voter than most people think it is. Sure, the incumbent congress and senate could see that we're sick of their bullshit, but that's asking a lot of people with a lot of power to give up a lot of power. The most powerful entity of America is a determined voter population, but because of the partisan politics there is no way out.
I think, however, that 4-8 years of grid lock would be nice. Let controversial legislation like SOPA, Patriot and DOMA exit the political stage for a while and a return to internal repair would be excellent.
"On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"
"What?"
"I said," said Ford, with an increasing air of urgency creeping into his voice, "have you got any gin?"
"I'll look. Tell me about the lizards."
Ford shrugged again.
"Some people say that the lizards are the best thing that ever happened to them," he said. "They're completely wrong of course, completely and utterly wrong, but someone's got to say it."
No one in congress takes that oath more serious than Ron Paul, nobody
Ron Paul furrowed his eyebrows before storming off completely during a CNN interview addressing allegations that he made money and won fame with the help of a sometimes racist series of newsletters back in the 1990s. Paul is the same candidate that many have said has been ignored by the media -- some would say, though, he's not -- but since he's been climbing in the polls and suddenly appears to be a real contender in the Republican primary race, the media's turned up the heat. CNN's Gloria Berger was just starting to grill Paul about the details of how involved he was in the racist newsletters, when the candidate stonewalled her. "Why don't you go back and look at what I said yesterday on CNN and what I’ve said for 20 something years. 22 years ago?" Paul said right at the outset. "I didn't write them, I disavow them, that's it."
Related: Ron Paul Raised $1 Million Overnight
Borger, like a good journalist, pressed on for a few seconds before urging Paul to react to what people are saying about the two decade old allegations. "These things are pretty incendiary," Borger said. "Because of people like you," Paul snapped back, just before he pulled of his microphone and headed for the door. "I appreciate your answering the questions, and you understand it's our job to ask them," the reporter said, almost apologetically as Paul was leaving.
Related: Perry's Finger-Wagging Was All Part of Ron Paul's Clever Plan
Later, when talking about the incident on air, Situation Room host Wolf Blizter suggested that Paul "got tired of talking about" the corruption allegations. "He clearly thinks its irrelevant," Borger told Blitzer. "It’s clearly a question he’d rather not be asked."
the establishment is at defcon 4 full panic mode, they are hysterical at the fact he could win Iowa and gain even more traction
of coarse hes gonna stonewall them, they are being typical shitty biased news media trying to ruin his image