What's ignorant about it? He's the least insane, plain and simple. Give me a choice between a live nuke and a live hand grenade, I'll take the grenade.
Perhaps. But 90% of anyone's supporters don't seem very mentally stable. So meh....
You are correct with that assessment.
I guess vague copy and paste rhetoric doesn't all come from supporters of one candidate. It just seems that Congressman Paul has the most vocal cookie cutter crowd this time. I agree with a great deal of what he says and stands for. I disagree with much of the doom and gloom rhetoric, half truths, youtube rants and crazed conspiracies that his supporters seem to be infecting the internet with on an hourly basis.
I guess vague copy and paste rhetoric doesn't all come from supporters of one candidate. It just seems that Congressman Paul has the most vocal cookie cutter crowd this time.
Really? I've seen Paul supporters of all types, ranging from typically liberal people to crazy 9/11 conspiracy nuts.
I agree with a great deal of what he says and stands for. I disagree with much of the doom and gloom rhetoric, half truths, youtube rants and crazed conspiracies that his supporters seem to be infecting the internet with on an hourly basis.
Most of the "doom and gloom" rhetoric comes from his supporters who think they understand economics, not from him. But that's certainly a vocal crowd, and the recent economic problems in this country have only made them louder.
Ron Paul is a good, honest, and most of all intelligent guy. Lousy speaker though. That said, I'll definitely get behind the former without worrying about the latter. I hope to see him run as a Libertarian.
Really? I've seen Paul supporters of all types, ranging from typically liberal people to crazy 9/11 conspiracy nuts.
Most of the "doom and gloom" rhetoric comes from his supporters who think they understand economics, not from him. But that's certainly a vocal crowd, and the recent economic problems in this country have only made them louder.
Ron Paul is a good, honest, and most of all intelligent guy. Lousy speaker though. That said, I'll definitely get behind the former without worrying about the latter. I hope to see him run as a Libertarian.
Well said. This is why I have supported him in the past. I may not be voting for him when the voting reaches me but, if all of his supporters were more like you, he may get a little bit more of a look from the American public. Instead, he has many doing him a disservice by going around the internet and out in public insulting the intelligence of people whose vote they think they are hoping to sway.
What's ignorant about it? He's the least insane, plain and simple. Give me a choice between a live nuke and a live hand grenade, I'll take the grenade.
Well said. This is why I have supported him in the past. I may not be voting for him when the voting reaches me but, if all of his supporters were more like you, he may get a little bit more of a look from the American public. Instead, he has many doing him a disservice by going around the internet and out in public insulting the intelligence of people whose vote they think they are hoping to sway.
This is certainly fair. All I can say is that, in the end, you're voting for a candidate, not their supporters. This is particularly true in the case of the very independent-minded Ron Paul. I suspect he's a bit embarrassed by his typical supporter. Regardless, happy voting....
You know, while ROn Paul says some very good things, his supporters are such assholes that they do more harm then good.
That is why he'll never climb above that 9-10%...it amazes me that people think insults are the way to create dialogue and get things done.
Hehe...but it's worked so well for those in power today, and those who will be in power tomorrow. The secret is to never insult your target audience. Rather, insult everyone but your target audience.
Taxes are just tyranny of the masses where those who contribute the most are not appreciated and are villanized.
The parents of a kid who plays soccer with my son are both very successful lawyers. They own a five bedroom apartment overlooking Central Park in the Upper West Side of New York, a couple of blocks from Lincoln Center. They have three kids.
Making them pay more taxes is not to "not appreciate" them, or "villanize" them. They are appreciated by the people who pay them handsomely, and don't need Uncle Sam to do that.
Even if taxes had the effect Jlew mentioned of "not making you want to work" (which they don't), I don't think their relenting on the pursuit of money would be detrimental to their economic situation. Even less to their kids, who would get to spend more time with them.
I would gladly pay more, especially if I knew the money went to universal healthcare and good education, instead of senseless wars.
... and the will to show I will always be better than before.
Making them pay more taxes is not to "not appreciate" them, or "villanize" them.
You're right. It's to victimize them.
I would gladly pay more, especially if I knew the money went to universal healthcare and good education, instead of senseless wars.
Why would you ever expect your tax dollars to reflect your values when the very forced nature of taxation precludes this? Theft always reflects the values of the theif, not his or her target.
The parents of a kid who plays soccer with my son are both very successful lawyers. They own a five bedroom apartment overlooking Central Park in the Upper West Side of New York, a couple of blocks from Lincoln Center. They have three kids.
Making them pay more taxes is not to "not appreciate" them, or "villanize" them. They are appreciated by the people who pay them handsomely, and don't need Uncle Sam to do that.
Even if taxes had the effect Jlew mentioned of "not making you want to work" (which they don't), I don't think their relenting on the pursuit of money would be detrimental to their economic situation. Even less to their kids, who would get to spend more time with them.
I would gladly pay more, especially if I knew the money went to universal healthcare and good education, instead of senseless wars.
What is the dollar threshold for "wealthier class?" What is the salary cutoff that would get their taxes raised?
Why would you ever expect your tax dollars to reflect your values when the very forced nature of taxation precludes this? Theft always reflects the values of the theif, not his or her target.
Victimize them? Victims for me are the people who, for one reason or another, don't have food, shelter, medicine. We obviously disagree.
Taxes are not theft.
Even if they were, in a democratic system the thief is all of us. And we don't keep the money. We use it to guarantee certain rights to everyone.
... and the will to show I will always be better than before.
Victimize them? Victims for me are the people who, for one reason or another, don't have food, shelter, medicine. We obviously disagree.
We don't disagree. I also believe that people who have had food, shelter, and medicine stolen from them are also victims.
Taxes are not theft.
Of course they are. Saying they're not doesn't change their nature. You're forcibly taking people's property without considering the value you'll provide in return.
Even if they were, in a democratic system the thief is all of us.
No, it's not. Giving me the choice between an electric chair and a noose wouldn't make you any less of a murderer.
And we don't keep the money.
That's true. For the most part, you waste it.
We use it to guarantee certain rights to everyone.
No. Typically you use it to destroy people (warfare), or create anti-rights (welfare). Your means themselves preclude rights when you suggest that a right is anything you can extract from someone using violence.
I come from a country, Italy, where taxes are much higher than here in the US to begin with, and I would be fine with that.
Before moving to New York City I would have told you that 100,000+ per year was wealthy, but now I know better
That's good. I agree with you that $100,000 is too low. Even saying that though puts you miles ahead of any candidate for office who promises to raise taxes on the "wealthy."
I believe in social programs that make life possible for people who can't make it on their own. I believe those social programs guarantee rights rather than infringing upon them.
I believe that sustanance for the many is more important than luxury for the few.
... and the will to show I will always be better than before.
Comments
Probably. But out of any of the Democrats, I'd take him.
so far he's placed 2nd in Nevada and he won Louisiana
bet you didn't see that on your idiot box did you?
everytime you turn it on your IQ slips another 10 points
so now its around 50, if that
idiot
PEARL JAM~San Antonio, TX. 4~5~03
INCUBUS~Houston, TX. 1~19~07
INCUBUS~Denver, CO. 2~8~07
Lollapalooza~Chicago, IL. 8~5~07
INCUBUS~Austin, TX. 9~3~07
Bonnaroo~Manchester, TN 6~14~08
at least you admit YOUR ignorance.....
PEARL JAM~San Antonio, TX. 4~5~03
INCUBUS~Houston, TX. 1~19~07
INCUBUS~Denver, CO. 2~8~07
Lollapalooza~Chicago, IL. 8~5~07
INCUBUS~Austin, TX. 9~3~07
Bonnaroo~Manchester, TN 6~14~08
What's ignorant about it? He's the least insane, plain and simple. Give me a choice between a live nuke and a live hand grenade, I'll take the grenade.
You are correct with that assessment.
I guess vague copy and paste rhetoric doesn't all come from supporters of one candidate. It just seems that Congressman Paul has the most vocal cookie cutter crowd this time. I agree with a great deal of what he says and stands for. I disagree with much of the doom and gloom rhetoric, half truths, youtube rants and crazed conspiracies that his supporters seem to be infecting the internet with on an hourly basis.
Really? I've seen Paul supporters of all types, ranging from typically liberal people to crazy 9/11 conspiracy nuts.
Most of the "doom and gloom" rhetoric comes from his supporters who think they understand economics, not from him. But that's certainly a vocal crowd, and the recent economic problems in this country have only made them louder.
Ron Paul is a good, honest, and most of all intelligent guy. Lousy speaker though. That said, I'll definitely get behind the former without worrying about the latter. I hope to see him run as a Libertarian.
That is why he'll never climb above that 9-10%...it amazes me that people think insults are the way to create dialogue and get things done.
Well said. This is why I have supported him in the past. I may not be voting for him when the voting reaches me but, if all of his supporters were more like you, he may get a little bit more of a look from the American public. Instead, he has many doing him a disservice by going around the internet and out in public insulting the intelligence of people whose vote they think they are hoping to sway.
This time, you beat me to it.
Ron Paul is the best choice........ bar none.....
PEARL JAM~San Antonio, TX. 4~5~03
INCUBUS~Houston, TX. 1~19~07
INCUBUS~Denver, CO. 2~8~07
Lollapalooza~Chicago, IL. 8~5~07
INCUBUS~Austin, TX. 9~3~07
Bonnaroo~Manchester, TN 6~14~08
This is certainly fair. All I can say is that, in the end, you're voting for a candidate, not their supporters. This is particularly true in the case of the very independent-minded Ron Paul. I suspect he's a bit embarrassed by his typical supporter. Regardless, happy voting....
Hehe...but it's worked so well for those in power today, and those who will be in power tomorrow. The secret is to never insult your target audience. Rather, insult everyone but your target audience.
The parents of a kid who plays soccer with my son are both very successful lawyers. They own a five bedroom apartment overlooking Central Park in the Upper West Side of New York, a couple of blocks from Lincoln Center. They have three kids.
Making them pay more taxes is not to "not appreciate" them, or "villanize" them. They are appreciated by the people who pay them handsomely, and don't need Uncle Sam to do that.
Even if taxes had the effect Jlew mentioned of "not making you want to work" (which they don't), I don't think their relenting on the pursuit of money would be detrimental to their economic situation. Even less to their kids, who would get to spend more time with them.
I would gladly pay more, especially if I knew the money went to universal healthcare and good education, instead of senseless wars.
Why?
You're right. It's to victimize them.
Why would you ever expect your tax dollars to reflect your values when the very forced nature of taxation precludes this? Theft always reflects the values of the theif, not his or her target.
What is the dollar threshold for "wealthier class?" What is the salary cutoff that would get their taxes raised?
Victimize them? Victims for me are the people who, for one reason or another, don't have food, shelter, medicine. We obviously disagree.
Taxes are not theft.
Even if they were, in a democratic system the thief is all of us. And we don't keep the money. We use it to guarantee certain rights to everyone.
Are you asking me what I think the threshold should be, or what it is in the platforms of the candidates?
We don't disagree. I also believe that people who have had food, shelter, and medicine stolen from them are also victims.
Of course they are. Saying they're not doesn't change their nature. You're forcibly taking people's property without considering the value you'll provide in return.
No, it's not. Giving me the choice between an electric chair and a noose wouldn't make you any less of a murderer.
That's true. For the most part, you waste it.
No. Typically you use it to destroy people (warfare), or create anti-rights (welfare). Your means themselves preclude rights when you suggest that a right is anything you can extract from someone using violence.
What would your threshold be?
Hi didn't win Louisiana
keep tellin yourself that, maybe you'll start believing it
PEARL JAM~San Antonio, TX. 4~5~03
INCUBUS~Houston, TX. 1~19~07
INCUBUS~Denver, CO. 2~8~07
Lollapalooza~Chicago, IL. 8~5~07
INCUBUS~Austin, TX. 9~3~07
Bonnaroo~Manchester, TN 6~14~08
Many of his supporters claim to be forward thinking. I didn't realize that meant seeing the future.
Ron Paul is sueing the Louisiana GOP
We won that State, not McCain.......
PEARL JAM~San Antonio, TX. 4~5~03
INCUBUS~Houston, TX. 1~19~07
INCUBUS~Denver, CO. 2~8~07
Lollapalooza~Chicago, IL. 8~5~07
INCUBUS~Austin, TX. 9~3~07
Bonnaroo~Manchester, TN 6~14~08
So, because he says he won it - then he won it. I see. Who needs official results?
I come from a country, Italy, where taxes are much higher than here in the US to begin with, and I would be fine with that.
Before moving to New York City I would have told you that 100,000+ per year was wealthy, but now I know better
On top of that, who needs votes to be cast?
That's good. I agree with you that $100,000 is too low. Even saying that though puts you miles ahead of any candidate for office who promises to raise taxes on the "wealthy."
Yes, yes we do
I believe in social programs that make life possible for people who can't make it on their own. I believe those social programs guarantee rights rather than infringing upon them.
I believe that sustanance for the many is more important than luxury for the few.
Yes, since this is the way things work - I proclaim myself the winner of the Republican primary in CA! Yea for me!