Election 2012 - The Thread

Freyith said:
America's still trading on the (fallacious) idea that 'we saved the world from Hitler all by our lonesome, you pansies, respect us!', with very few people at home realizing that was 60 years ago, and whatever credit it earned the U.S. has long been spent, overdrawn, and bounced.
Click to expand...

I don't care what anyone says. Russia won WWII. We liberated the Jews from Auschwitz, we got to the Reichstag first, we seized the northern islands in Japan before the bombing, we weakened the German Armored divisions to make crossing the Rhine easier for the Brits and the Yanks and to top it off, eliminated fifteen times the amount of leader ship; thus, weakening the chain of command to a point that was irreparable. Don't get me wrong, America has some great accomplishments on their side. They completely f*cked over German artillery divisions in Europe and stomped out Rommel's detail in Africa(with help of the British).

But their is no need for America to take all the credit.

Oh yes...
Another thing.

Did you know that we're helping you in Afghanistan right now? Yes. We have soldiers helping your country. Yet America still continues to demonize us as terrible, baby eating warmongers. This upsets me so much.
 
You might want to re-read what I said, since I clearly implied America didn't win WWII by themselves. Let's not get into Afghanistan though; the Russian invasion there in the 1980s is partly why the place is so messed up today. I get that you're a Russian nationalist, but this is hardly the time/place...
 
Freyith said:
You might want to re-read what I said, since I clearly implied America didn't win WWII by themselves. Let's not get into Afghanistan though; the Russian invasion there in the 1980s is partly why the place is so messed up today. I get that you're a Russian nationalist, but this is hardly the time/place...
Click to expand...

Nah. I didn't miss read. I agree with what you say completely. Don't get me wrong, though. I'm a Russian nationalist to a point. I'm aware we have done wrong in many aspects. Our invasion of Afghanistan was a complete waste of time. I have no love the USSR, but I have love for the beneficial things they have accomplished.

None of what was said in my previous post was against you specifically. I was mainly trying to give strength to your point. I see I failed in the delivery. lol
 
Rick Santorum claims the 2008 recession was caused by gas prices, and not a huge collapse of both the housing market and banking system/ill-advised credit default swaps. This guy has got to be brain dead...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...008-recession/2012/02/27/gIQAzjRWeR_blog.html

Claims '$4 a gallon' gas caused the problem, but then turns around on the campaign trail and said that Bush left with $1.89/gallon gas prices and it's 'Obama's fault' gas is more expensive now. Regardless of the fact that gas prices categorically didn't cause the market collapse...which is it, Rick? $4 a gallon, or $1.89? (The fact of the matter IS that gasoline was $1.89 at the time, NOT $4/gallon).

The republicans really do deserve better than what this shmuck can offer.
 
Zoidberg747 said:
Obama has to deal with a Republican congress, he could be as bold as he wants and nothing will ever get done. He still gets my vote even though I disagree with some of the things he has/hasnt done. The republican party just has horrible candidates, and I really just cannot vote for any of them. Maybe Ron Paul if he would stop being so extremist.
Click to expand...

yeah lol out of the 4 people running only one of them has a budget plan that doesn't add more debt. They're such jokes.

Ron Paul is the only one with a budget plan that doesn't add Trillions of dollars of debt. Newt's plan would add more than 7 Trillion $ to our country's debt. just what we need ! but of course we don't see news channels talking about this because they're hoping that we are mindless drones.

 
Last edited:
Also you guys remember that thread about people being put in jail and how they are getting overcrowded? And if we had to let people out of jail who would we let out?

Ron Paul also has stated that he would Pardon all non-violent drug acts people from prison.

Just a bit of information I thought I should share.
 
Critical-Limit said:
Also you guys remember that thread about people being put in jail and how they are getting overcrowded? And if we had to let people out of jail who would we let out?

Ron Paul also has stated that he would Pardon all non-violent drug acts people from prison.

Just a bit of information I thought I should share.
Click to expand...

Thats the type of shit I want.
Sure they may be criminals, but they're (for the most part) harmless criminals in their own backyards.
 
n9195v said:
yeah lol out of the 4 people running only one of them has a budget plan that doesn't add more dept. They're such jokes.

Ron Paul is the only one with a budget plant that doesn't add Trillions of dollars of dept. Newt's plan would add more than 7 Trillion $ to our country's dept. just what we need ! but of course we don't see news channels talking about this because they're hoping that we are mindless drones.

Click to expand...

Maybe they say you're drones because you talk about budget plants and depts instead of plans and debts. Just a thought.
 
Freyith said:
Maybe they say you're drones because you talk about budget plants and depts instead of plans and debts. Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Jeez Freyith, saving money on plants that we spend can be used to cut the budget.

But really, I don't think his spelling errors hurt his overall message lol. That majority of republican party are a bunch of damn liars.
 
No, but it is funny. AND YES, I WANT TO SAVE MONEY ON MY PLANTS TOO. Grrr!

Yeah, they're liars alright. As far as Ron Paul goes by the way, you can't dismiss the fact that despite claiming to be an independent-at-heart, he's running on the Republican side because he knows he'd stand even less of a chance of winning otherwise. He's doing a lot to win, and showing he's not afraid to put his principles aside to do it, either. Not that it'll help him. This is a two-person primary already anyhow.
 
Freyith said:
No, but it is funny. AND YES, I WANT TO SAVE MONEY ON MY PLANTS TOO. Grrr!

Yeah, they're liars alright. As far as Ron Paul goes by the way, you can't dismiss the fact that despite claiming to be an independent-at-heart, he's running on the Republican side because he knows he'd stand even less of a chance of winning otherwise. He's doing a lot to win, and showing he's not afraid to put his principles aside to do it, either. Not that it'll help him. This is a two-person primary already anyhow.
Click to expand...

Yeah, when they asked him if he'd "run independant" he never gave a real answer he'd just say

"I don't want to" then say "I'm not gonna say no though I don't deal in absolutes"

He knows he needed to win the primaries, hence the "I don't want to". I mean... the guy running for the independant party never gets any real attention. enough to win an election anyways.
 
I think my biggest problems, 'principles-wise' with him is his stance on Gay Rights as well as budgetary earmarks. He'd put in earmarks for his state in bills he knew would by political necessity, pass with large margins. Then he'd vote against them in order to tell everyone he was against government largess. He's not the first and won't be the last to pull that crafty trick. I'm sorry but anyone who thinks Ron Paul isn't a lying, consummate politico is deceiving themselves.
 
Freyith said:
I think my biggest problems, 'principles-wise' with him is his stance on Gay Rights as well as budgetary earmarks. He'd put in earmarks for his state in bills he knew would by political necessity, pass with large margins. Then he'd vote against them in order to tell everyone he was against government largess. He's not the first and won't be the last to pull that crafty trick. I'm sorry but anyone who thinks Ron Paul isn't a lying, consummate politico is deceiving themselves.
Click to expand...

from what I understand is he was against it. But since it was there, he'd go ahead and get it back for his state.

sort of like, the government wants to give everyone a free car! you disagree because you know it's gonna sky rocket the national debt. But... to refuse your state from also acquiring free cars while everyone else will be getting them. Makes it a hard decision.

I know this is a retarded example but if he didn't do it, he'd also feel like he stabbed his own state in the back for not doing it. (Even though he is against it)

^^^ you're talking about this right?



Just so you know I'm with you on the gay rights thing. But the other stuff he wants to do, is what I wanted for a long time... so it's hard for me to swallow his standing on that matter.
 
Freyith said:
He's doing a lot to win, and showing he's not afraid to put his principles aside to do it, either.
Click to expand...

Name one key issue he flip flopped on and I'll be impressed. I'm pretty sure Ron Paul has stuck to his principles.

He may be a little extreme in some issues but I believe he's a man of his word with a track record to prove it that would try his hardest to stay true to his promises.

Ron Paul is not a liar he's the only person who isn't a complete puppet running.
 
Last edited:
Critical-Limit said:
from what I understand is he was against it. But since it was there, he'd go ahead and get it back for his state.

sort of like, the government wants to give everyone a free car! you disagree because you know it's gonna sky rocket the national debt. But... to refuse your state from also acquiring free cars while everyone else will be getting them. Makes it a hard decision.

I know this is a retarded example but if he didn't do it, he'd also feel like he stabbed his own state in the back for not doing it. (Even though he is against it)

^^^ you're talking about this right?



Just so you know I'm with you on the gay rights thing. But the other stuff he wants to do, is what I wanted for a long time... so it's hard for me to swallow his standing on that matter.
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be a hard decision if he actually believed in what he says he does. That's the difference in practicing what you preach and why Ron Paul is just as phony as the rest of them. I'm sorry but if you go to Washington saying "I'll be different!" but do the same things and your excuse was "But it was so tempting!", you're not any better. I don't understand why Ron Paul fans can't, won't or are otherwise unable to see the blatant contradictions on his stances. It's like they're so determined to latch onto anyone who doesn't immediately look to be like the rest that they'll fool themselves into thinking he isn't.

Ron Paul doesn't bother me or worry me though. He won't get elected to high office. I will, however, give him credit for basically saying the others are silly for trying to regulate contraception. I find the Republican party's fascination with my (and other women's) reproduction and sex organs to be pretty disturbing. I'm really hoping the eventual nominee doesn't pick the Virginia governor as their running mate. :laugh:
 
Freyith said:
It shouldn't be a hard decision if he actually believed in what he says he does. That's the difference in practicing what you preach and why Ron Paul is just as phony as the rest of them. I'm sorry but if you go to Washington saying "I'll be different!" but do the same things and your excuse was "But it was so tempting!", you're not any better. I don't understand why Ron Paul fans can't, won't or are otherwise unable to see the blatant contradictions on his stances. It's like they're so determined to latch onto anyone who doesn't immediately look to be like the rest that they'll fool themselves into thinking he isn't.

Ron Paul doesn't bother me or worry me though. He won't get elected to high office. I will, however, give him credit for basically saying the others are silly for trying to regulate contraception. I find the Republican party's fascination with my (and other women's) reproduction and sex organs to be pretty disturbing. I'm really hoping the eventual nominee doesn't pick the Virginia governor as their running mate. :laugh:
Click to expand...

It's not so much that. As I'll never get the chance to vote for someone who has 90% of my ideals in one package ever again.

He's no where near as "hypocritical" if you can even call it that. As the rest.

I kind of feel like you cherry pick 1-2 things and blow them up.

Earmark? a minor thing to me compared to the rest of what he wants to do.

Doesn't believe in evolution? Still a minor thing that I can overlook for 90% of the platform that I do like.


I'm not ignoring any "flaws"

But to act like he's "just as bad" you haven't been paying attention. Overall he's the most consistent, and MOST of his campaign money comes from donations meaning he isn't a puppet ans N9 said. He couldn't even afford a T.V. commercial to promote himself. Like the rest of them.

IMO he's the most honest guy I've seen go up there (Most honest), since I can remember.
 
You say I cherry pick, but I refute that with you view him through rose-tinted glasses.

Earmarks are a huge issue when one of the main tenets of your campaign platform is that you want budgetary reform. That's inescapable. I don't know how you can see past that and not realize it's a big flaw that he's tried (and seemingly with good success) to sweep under the rug. Is he a lunatic religious goober like Santorum? No. He's also genuinely not a plundering plutocrat like Romney. But the differences between him and his rivals do not add up to him being a good choice for the Presidency.

I understand how much you want to vote for someone you feel you can believe in, but it really does seem to me that you want that so much, you've put the blinders on and won't accept simple facts. You may as well say "I'm voting for him because he's likeable" (which he is, and funny too). That's actually a more legitimate reason than voting for him because you believe he's something that he isn't.
 
@Freyith So what your saying is that since you don't like Ron Paul anyone who does like him is ignorant or just acting on emotions and not logic?
 
n9195v said:
@Freyith So what your saying is that since you don't like Ron Paul anyone who does like him is ignorant or just acting on emotions and not logic?
Click to expand...

Nope. I said nothing of the sort. You may want to re-read what I've said more carefully. But your response certainly lends the idea some credence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top