By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Ron Paul 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mr Khan on 27 April 2011
mrstickball said:
kirby007 said:

to be fair, it doesn't matter who runs... same crap different face no?


Look at Paul/Johnson's political ideology versus everyone else. There is a big difference. Johnson has proven he will use veto's at a moments notice on both parties if they are expanding government.

The problem is that we've had a string of presidents and congresses that just want to expand government. This has been the case since approximately 1998 through 2010 (with 94-98 being about the only reprieve).

かれぇｓｓヴぇとえｓをうｌｄぇあｄとあこっぁï½Âã›ã„んごヴぇｒんめんｔ。　ようかん’ï½”é‡Âï½“ｔとｓｓてょせあろうんｄ

EDIT: whoops, i was still in Japanese input mode when i wrote that. Anyway, carelessly throwing around vetoes is not leadership. It should be used very strategically, but when used ideologically, the whole system would grind to a halt, as someone else in this thread indicated



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
mrstickball on 27 April 2011
Mr Khan said:
mrstickball said:
kirby007 said:

to be fair, it doesn't matter who runs... same crap different face no?


Look at Paul/Johnson's political ideology versus everyone else. There is a big difference. Johnson has proven he will use veto's at a moments notice on both parties if they are expanding government.

The problem is that we've had a string of presidents and congresses that just want to expand government. This has been the case since approximately 1998 through 2010 (with 94-98 being about the only reprieve).

かれぇｓｓヴぇとえｓをうｌｄぇあｄとあこっぁï½Âã›ã„んごヴぇｒんめんｔ。　ようかん’ï½”é‡Âｓｔとｓｓてょせあろうんｄ

EDIT: whoops, i was still in Japanese input mode when i wrote that. Anyway, carelessly throwing around vetoes is not leadership. It should be used very strategically, but when used ideologically, the whole system would grind to a halt, as someone else in this thread indicated

He used it strategically. He vetoed everything that would increase government inefficiencies. He didn't make the system grind to a halt. He got a lot done as governor of New Mexico. The difference is, he was able to fix a lot of things by vetoing bad legislation, which made the legislatures move in a different direction, which greatly aided the state. It wasn't a matter of him wanting to hold the process up, but making sure that the intention of the bills were going to help everyone.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

FaRmLaNd on 28 April 2011

Will Paul and this Johnson guy fix america? Who knows?

But what I do know is that staying the course isn't going to solve your countries problems in regards to creating a surplus for example. Beyond that I really shouldn't speculate because I don't know enough about the US political system to have a clue.

But doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome has never worked.



mrstickball on 28 April 2011
FaRmLaNd said:

Will Paul and this Johnson guy fix america? Who knows?

But what I do know is that staying the course isn't going to solve your countries problems in regards to creating a surplus for example. Beyond that I really shouldn't speculate because I don't know enough about the US political system to have a clue.

But doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome has never worked.

Fixing America is going to take a decade or two of very motivated people willing to sacrifice dearly and live contently to get us to where we need to be.

However, I think that Paul, Johnson or anyone willing to do the right things can at least start the process. Or, we can always implode on ourselves, and fix it the old fashion way via revolution (not saying armed, but in a general sense of political upheval)



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

ssj12 on 28 April 2011
mrstickball said:
FaRmLaNd said:

Will Paul and this Johnson guy fix america? Who knows?

But what I do know is that staying the course isn't going to solve your countries problems in regards to creating a surplus for example. Beyond that I really shouldn't speculate because I don't know enough about the US political system to have a clue.

But doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome has never worked.

Fixing America is going to take a decade or two of very motivated people willing to sacrifice dearly and live contently to get us to where we need to be.

However, I think that Paul, Johnson or anyone willing to do the right things can at least start the process. Or, we can always implode on ourselves, and fix it the old fashion way via revolution (not saying armed, but in a general sense of political upheval)

That will most likely happen sadly. We will probably get Trump in the white house based off our country's luck as of the last 10 or so presidents (how ever many since Eisenhower, i think he was the one before shit started rolling down hill).



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 
Around the Network
FaRmLaNd on 28 April 2011
mrstickball said:
FaRmLaNd said:

Will Paul and this Johnson guy fix america? Who knows?

But what I do know is that staying the course isn't going to solve your countries problems in regards to creating a surplus for example. Beyond that I really shouldn't speculate because I don't know enough about the US political system to have a clue.

But doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome has never worked.

Fixing America is going to take a decade or two of very motivated people willing to sacrifice dearly and live contently to get us to where we need to be.

However, I think that Paul, Johnson or anyone willing to do the right things can at least start the process. Or, we can always implode on ourselves, and fix it the old fashion way via revolution (not saying armed, but in a general sense of political upheval)

Aren't your terms around 4 years? If they can win 2 elections thats close to a decade already. Its certainly doable.



evolution_1ne on 28 April 2011

not a fucking chance he'd run the country further into the ground like republicans have been doing for the past 10 years

what we need to elect is non-pussy ass democrats that aint afraid to pass a damn bill, learn that the American public for the most part is fucking retarded and has no idea what's best for them and get shit fucking done, that way when things get better you idiots won't be scratching your heads trying to find some shit to get you re-elected

Obama can do shit by himself even though I wish he could but unfortunately  he NEEDS the Senate and Congress



mrstickball on 28 April 2011
evolution_1ne said:

not a fucking chance he'd run the country further into the ground like republicans have been doing for the past 10 years

what we need to elect is non-pussy ass democrats that aint afraid to pass a damn bill, learn that the American public for the most part is fucking retarded and has no idea what's best for them and get shit fucking done, that way when things get better you idiots won't be scratching your heads trying to find some shit to get you re-elected

Obama can do shit by himself even though I wish he could but unfortunately  he NEEDS the Senate and Congress

You know, Obama had 2 years that he had a significant majority in the senate and a majority in congress. Why didn't he use that time to do the things you wanted?



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Mr Khan on 28 April 2011
ssj12 said:
mrstickball said:
FaRmLaNd said:

Will Paul and this Johnson guy fix america? Who knows?

But what I do know is that staying the course isn't going to solve your countries problems in regards to creating a surplus for example. Beyond that I really shouldn't speculate because I don't know enough about the US political system to have a clue.

But doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome has never worked.

Fixing America is going to take a decade or two of very motivated people willing to sacrifice dearly and live contently to get us to where we need to be.

However, I think that Paul, Johnson or anyone willing to do the right things can at least start the process. Or, we can always implode on ourselves, and fix it the old fashion way via revolution (not saying armed, but in a general sense of political upheval)

That will most likely happen sadly. We will probably get Trump in the white house based off our country's luck as of the last 10 or so presidents (how ever many since Eisenhower, i think he was the one before shit started rolling down hill).

Eisenhower's day, debt was low, the economy was mostly booming (cyclical stop-start issues throughout the late 50's, but the general trend was upward) the middle class was growing, unions were powerful and pervasive, and the tax rates on the wealthy were 70%

Almost utopian, if not for all the racism, sexism, anti-communist paranoia, and pervasive smoking



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

mrstickball on 28 April 2011
Mr Khan said:
ssj12 said:
mrstickball said:
FaRmLaNd said:

Will Paul and this Johnson guy fix america? Who knows?

But what I do know is that staying the course isn't going to solve your countries problems in regards to creating a surplus for example. Beyond that I really shouldn't speculate because I don't know enough about the US political system to have a clue.

But doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome has never worked.

Fixing America is going to take a decade or two of very motivated people willing to sacrifice dearly and live contently to get us to where we need to be.

However, I think that Paul, Johnson or anyone willing to do the right things can at least start the process. Or, we can always implode on ourselves, and fix it the old fashion way via revolution (not saying armed, but in a general sense of political upheval)

That will most likely happen sadly. We will probably get Trump in the white house based off our country's luck as of the last 10 or so presidents (how ever many since Eisenhower, i think he was the one before shit started rolling down hill).

Eisenhower's day, debt was low, the economy was mostly booming (cyclical stop-start issues throughout the late 50's, but the general trend was upward) the middle class was growing, unions were powerful and pervasive, and the tax rates on the wealthy were 70%

Almost utopian, if not for all the racism, sexism, anti-communist paranoia, and pervasive smoking

Sad thing is, much of what made the 50's successful also doomed the times after it to failure.

The 50's saw the baby boom, which brought a lot of tranformation when those youth grew up, which made our crime rates rise about 4 fold over a 15 year period. We haven't even recovered from it entirely, and we lost (IMO) a bit of freedom in combating the criminals.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.