Go Ron ...

Voting for RON Paul is voting for Mc Cain...

thats just how the system works...

sorry buddy...

ganjagoddess said:

Voting for RON Paul is voting for Mc Cain...

thats just how the system works...

sorry buddy...

Click to expand...

Unless you can back up what you claim than STFU.. What the hell do you know that i don't know? Huh?

Ohh, wait, the bogyman is going to get you, thats right. So therefor we should to take what you say as fact, because your some special person but you can't disclose your sources otherwise they are going to get you..

"If I told you I would be killed, and possible many who read this forum as well.
I have said too much all ready..

I apoligize I cannot provide you with proof.. ."

Brother man like I said in the other forum I am just trying to lighten the mood..

Breath....

Sorry again my sarcasm can be a little blunt and hard to read...

its cool...

Thanks everyone. My son and I are very close and I love him dearly.

ganjagoddess said:

Brother man like I said in the other forum I am just trying to lighten the mood..

Breath....

Sorry again my sarcasm can be a little blunt and hard to read...

its cool...

Click to expand...

Whooooosaaaaaaaa........ Whooooosaaaaaaaaaa...... (you know like they say from Bad Boys 2 YouTube - Bad Boys 2)

10........ 9......... 8.......... Ok, my blood pressure is down (jk, im not old and fat, hehe, no offense to anyone)...

Ya, i just read the other thread than i came to this one... Its all good dude, sorry about the STFU now knowing you were jk.

We Tarded gets a little excited about Ron Paul (in more ways than one). Don't take it personal

... That just put me in mind of someone getting an erection while thinking about Ron Paul.

My brain won't ever recover from that. XD

Wow Dave. That was the most honest post I've ever seen on this site. Having lost my brother to Viet Nam and experienced that shithole myself, I have extreme empathy for anyone in your situation. Not trying to be arguementative on the subject, but Obama has said he will end all combat operations in 16 Months starting with a true phased withdrawel. I would also suppose that would mean that there wouldn't be any need for more fresh troops and the troops still there would be kept out of harms way.
My wifes best friends son is in the Air Force and is sceduled for Iraq in the near future. She is a cancer survivor and very weak, that could probably kill her. They are as you said, using AF and Navy personel for cannon fodder, driving convoy, and that is probably where my wifes friends son would be put.
I actually believe Obama will hold good on his promise. I've been fooled before, but I have a gut feeling on this one. I hope for your sons sake and all of our brave men and women that I'm right.
I have probably been the most avid anti-war member on this site from day one. I will always believe there is a better way.

Y'know what, medcineman? We may have our disagreements ... but we DO have some common ground.

I'm supporting Obama this year, too. His promise to end the war in Iraq is one of the main reasons I'm voting for him.

medicineman said:

Wow Dave. That was the most honest post I've ever seen on this site. Having lost my brother to Viet Nam and experienced that shithole myself, I have extreme empathy for anyone in your situation. Not trying to be arguementative on the subject, but Obama has said he will end all combat operations in 16 Months starting with a true phased withdrawel. I would also suppose that would mean that there wouldn't be any need for more fresh troops and the troops still there would be kept out of harms way.
My wifes best friends son is in the Air Force and is sceduled for Iraq in the near future. She is a cancer survivor and very weak, that could probably kill her. They are as you said, using AF and Navy personel for cannon fodder, driving convoy, and that is probably where my wifes friends son would be put.
I actually believe Obama will hold good on his promise. I've been fooled before, but I have a gut feeling on this one. I hope for your sons sake and all of our brave men and women that I'm right.
I have probably been the most avid anti-war member on this site from day one. I will always believe there is a better way.

Click to expand...

medicineman said:

Wow Dave. That was the most honest post I've ever seen on this site. Having lost my brother to Viet Nam and experienced that shithole myself, I have extreme empathy for anyone in your situation. Not trying to be arguementative on the subject, but Obama has said he will end all combat operations in 16 Months starting with a true phased withdrawel. I would also suppose that would mean that there wouldn't be any need for more fresh troops and the troops still there would be kept out of harms way.
My wifes best friends son is in the Air Force and is sceduled for Iraq in the near future. She is a cancer survivor and very weak, that could probably kill her. They are as you said, using AF and Navy personel for cannon fodder, driving convoy, and that is probably where my wifes friends son would be put.
I actually believe Obama will hold good on his promise. I've been fooled before, but I have a gut feeling on this one. I hope for your sons sake and all of our brave men and women that I'm right.
I have probably been the most avid anti-war member on this site from day one. I will always believe there is a better way.

Click to expand...

Thanks MM, and please convey my most heartfelt empathy to your wife's best friend if you get a chance.

VTXDave said:

I feel much more than just remorse MM. I feel betrayed, angry, and fearful. I do feel responsible for what has transpired in Iraq, but not because I voted for Bush (although that's part of it), but because I also voted for Congressmen who allowed it to happen as well. As I sit in my son's home here on the naval base in Guam getting ready to drive him to his ship, I fear everyday dreading if he's going to tell me one day that he's got orders for Iraq. The military is now sending Navy personnel to Iraq for convoy and roadside inspection duty. Two very dangerous jobs in Iraq. He's my only child...my only son...and I helped place him in this predicament. The loss of my only child due to a war that I helped perpetuate is a difficult thing for me to bear....and I bear that burden every time I think of him. I live with that guilt everyday.

Perhaps you now can understand, or at least appreciate, my vehemence toward refusing to vote for any candidate (Rep or Dem) that will only perpetuate this fiasco. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Click to expand...

Ron Paul was one of the few who read the CIA report and knew who the US of A should go after. Wise men see fools rush in. Watching the debates got me interested in Ron Paul. He knows the issues. It was funny to watch McCain stammer when he tried, unsuccessfully, to answer Ron Pauls question during one of the debates.

medicineman said:

I actually believe Obama will hold good on his promise. I've been fooled before, but I have a gut feeling on this one. I hope for your sons sake and all of our brave men and women that I'm right.
I have probably been the most avid anti-war member on this site from day one. I will always believe there is a better way.

Click to expand...

My number one issue with the election is to get the US out of the war in the Middle East. I'm voting for Ron Paul because of this. I know he'll get the US out.

I say "I know" and not phrases like "I believe" or "gut feeling". Not hacking on you for using these words. Many Americans have used these same words because we just don't know what a politician will do. Too often their words don't follow their actions. Bush ran on a platform of non intervention and we all know how that turned out.

Words like integrity and honesty define Ron Paul. I can think of no other politician more qualified and knowledgeable to run this country than Ron Paul. No stain on his record, none on his dress!

I know people who have never heard of him and like posters here don't know his issues or have been confused by what they read about him.

Utube has some very good clips from the debates for anyone interested.

ceestyle said:

oh yeah. this isn't 'obama vs. paul', first of all, so I'm not here to defend or compare. Ron Paul should give back the money from Don Black unless he is a racist. Period. If I were to defend Obama, it would be to say that the NBPP does not stand for racism or intolerance, even if members of it undoubtedly are. Therefore, taking money from them is not principally wrong, unless there is a history of the organization perpetrating racism and violence. If that is the case, then it is every bit as foul.

I must profess that I do not care enough about the Libertarian party to discuss the semantics of Ron Paul's policy differences. The reason is that I think the Libertarians and Ron Paul are off the deep end in terms of what they believe in. And the few saving graces of the platform - sexual freedom applied to homosexuality and the right to safe, legal abortion - are not included in Ron Paul's agenda! I could not possibly support such a ludicrous platform. The right to life BS would be enough in itself. Even if you don't believe in abortion - for whatever reason - it is a public health issue, as it was when Roe v. Wade was decided ...

Click to expand...

Hi ceestyle,
What don't you like about Ron Pauls stances?

Ron Paul on abortion- It's not a federal issues. Each state should vote on it. He believes in life at conception, based on a scientific statement. "Protecting the life of the unborn is protecting liberty"

Ron Paul on sexual freedom applied to homosexuals - The State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards. But rather than applying the real Constitution and declining jurisdiction over a properly state matter, the Court decided to apply the imaginary Constitution and impose its vision on the people of Texas.

We get our rights from our Creator as individuals. So every individual should be treated the same way. So if there is homosexual behavior in the military that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. But if there's heterosexual behavior that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. So it isn't the issue of homosexuality. It's the concept and the understanding of individual rights. If we understood that, we would not be dealing with this very important problem."

On gay marriage - Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, has voted against a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage on the federal level. He believe s that marriage is a church function, not a state function.

Hi Parker.. I'd like to clarify RP's stance on homosexual marriage along with what you've written here because I think that some may misinterpret your usage of the term "state" here (I see you using the word 'state' to also mean 'government'). He has been very clear on this subject, he feels that the government has NO business defining marriage AT ALL.
He goes back to the inception of marriage licenses that were ostensibly meant to protect peoples' health as the beginning of governmental interference. I agree with him, if we're talking about consenting adults, let whoever shall marry, marry, whom they wish, however many they wish.

Parker said:

Hi ceestyle,
What don't you like about Ron Pauls stances?

Ron Paul on abortion- It's not a federal issues. Each state should vote on it. He believes in life at conception, based on a scientific statement. "Protecting the life of the unborn is protecting liberty"

Ron Paul on sexual freedom applied to homosexuals - The State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards. But rather than applying the real Constitution and declining jurisdiction over a properly state matter, the Court decided to apply the imaginary Constitution and impose its vision on the people of Texas.

We get our rights from our Creator as individuals. So every individual should be treated the same way. So if there is homosexual behavior in the military that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. But if there's heterosexual behavior that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. So it isn't the issue of homosexuality. It's the concept and the understanding of individual rights. If we understood that, we would not be dealing with this very important problem."

On gay marriage - Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, has voted against a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage on the federal level. He believe s that marriage is a church function, not a state function.

Click to expand...

I don't believe in defining life as beginning at conception, and doing so opens the door for arguments defining it as murder. I believe the mandate should be for the right to choose. Besides that, I could not in good conscience vote for someone who states that they are an "unshakable foe of abortion". Outlawing abortion is simply being blind to the public health issue that pushed Roe v. Wade to fruition in the first place.

It's fine and good to oppose the recognition of same-sex unions as marriages on the principle that it's not the government's place to do so, but the point is that if the government defines particular rights based on such unions, you can't have it both ways.

Oh, and did I mention gun control?

ceestyle said:

Outlawing abortion is simply being blind to the public health issue that pushed Roe v. Wade to fruition in the first place.

Click to expand...

By health if you mean having an abortion to save the mothers life Ron Paul supports this.

ceestyle said:

Oh, and did I mention gun control?

Click to expand...

I don't own a gun. Someday I will. The statistics tell us that violent crime rises in places of gun control. Maybe some day in the future there will be no need for guns but I don't see it happening in the near future. That mindset is far off imo.

In case people don't know Ron Pauls issues with gun control lie with the reasoning guns need to be in the hands of the people in order to stop tyranny by their government. "Unarmed citizens cannot be secure in their freedoms."

Like I said earlier I don't own a gun and I'm not one of those guys who does weekends in the boonies to do Survival Camp. But I don't trust my government to do what they were elected to do. The fat cats in Washington don't know what's good for the people in my state. Most are too far removed or have their own agenda $$$. And being middle class I feel the pain of our inept government way too much.

Your viewpoints on these issues are obviously different than mine. Good chatting with you ceestyle.

Parker said:

By health if you mean having an abortion to save the mothers life Ron Paul supports this.



I don't own a gun. Someday I will. The statistics tell us that violent crime rises in places of gun control. Maybe some day in the future there will be no need for guns but I don't see it happening in the near future. That mindset is far off imo.

In case people don't know Ron Pauls issues with gun control lie with the reasoning guns need to be in the hands of the people in order to stop tyranny by their government. "Unarmed citizens cannot be secure in their freedoms."

Like I said earlier I don't own a gun and I'm not one of those guys who does weekends in the boonies to do Survival Camp. But I don't trust my government to do what they were elected to do. The fat cats in Washington don't know what's good for the people in my state. Most are too far removed or have their own agenda $$$. And being middle class I feel the pain of our inept government way too much.

Your viewpoints on these issues are obviously different than mine. Good chatting with you ceestyle.

Click to expand...

What I meant is that people will have abortions illegally if it is outlawed, and women will die because of them. That issue is what pushed Roe v. Wade. If abortion is legal in even a minority of states, it will simply mean that one must travel to have one if it is necessary.

I'd like to see those statistics, and cannot imagine that there are not third variables involved.

The point you've made is one of two - the other being protection from wildlife - that I recognize justifying the need for guns. In the context of our country's military and national guard, however, I believe the former is moot. The latter is regional, and if I lived in Montana I would own a gun for protecting my children animals. I wouldn't be able to contribute to urban crime, however.

Thank you for respectfully expressing your views. It's a rarity in a political forum.

Cee, hypothetically speaking what if the gov't wanted to join into the North American Union, change our currency to amero-dollars, and implant us with a Vchip.(watch this clip YouTube - NORTH AMERICAN UNION & VCHIP TRUTH )How would you defend yourself and your family from ppl with authority, guns and brute force? Hypothetically, if someone tried to implant a chip in me I would feel safer knowing I have guns and I know how to use them

I'm sure if you did a little research you would find that aprox 95%(or maybe more) of gun crimes come from people with illegal guns!! How would we have had the Revolutionary War if the Brits didn't allow us to bear arms?

RON PAUL IS THE MAN!!! WHOOOOHOOOOO..... I gave you a + rep Parker for being informed of RON PAUL!

Wait a minute here am I reading this right???

Ron Paul is anti Pro choice???
Ron Paul is Anti making same sex marriages Constitutionaly legal???

??? For real???

Ceestyle and other Paul haters. Just read the thread. I would implore you to read RP's new book. Not because I expect to sway your opinion to vote for him, but rather to gain an understanding of why he believes what he does, backed with research. It's short, if you are a slow reader, and it is very well written.

As far as the abortion issue, you are saying that you don't like a man because he believes based on his scientific and religious views that abortion is wrong, and yet he is willing to admit that the constitution givens the US gov no right to regulate it. I mean come on this guy should be your best ally on that issue. Why doesn't he believe the dept of education should exist? One the constitution doesn't provide for it, two because like every other gov run institution it is extremely inefficient. Check out how many school administrators it takes to run the NYC school system, then look at the catholic schools and how many they have. It is embarrasing. Obviously you were educated in a public school, based soully on your understanding of the civil war (mine you can tell from the poor spelling), perhaps read the People's History of the Civil War, it is available at your local library. Lincoln did not come to free the slaves he came to collect on debts owed (if we are not care China might do the same to us, yeah laugh, and then learn history it has happened over and over again) Not to mention that the history we are told to swallow doesn't require you to learn anything about the Native American's and their genocide, no really you can look up learning requirements by grade k-12. The requirements can all be stated in a 2 minute speech, which I have done before.

Now to further your understanding you should start at the begging of the book (The Revolution). This is where we learn how f***ed up our current gov is. Basically to make a long story short, your income is not yours. The gov takes what it demands and if you don't pay their demands they come for everything you own. Doesn't it seemed f***ed up to you that because I don't want to fund a housing project or contribute to gov aid to Africa (which messes up their economies) that the gov can come and take what I own (these being some of the most reasonable things our tax dollars fund). So why would I want to add to more inefficient programs that are basically contributing to the gov holding me up at gun point??????

It doesn't sound like you have ventured into his monetary policy beliefs, this is the next to last chapter, perhaps if you were to only read 1 chapter this should be it. I know this is a lot to ask, but hey maybe it will even help you refine your arguments. No one else is talking about it, and few have a better understanding of it. McCain looks F*c*ing dumbfounded by Paul's monetary statements during the debates. Haven't heard Obama talk about it either, it is too much of a real issue, at least he is for getting out of Iraq.

By the way I have figured out the liberal media's obsession with McCain during the early primaries. It geinous actually, get the dumbest most Bush like Rep selected. This way come november we will definately elect a Dem President.

My rant is over for the moment. Let me know if you need clarification on anything.
Peace