I've come to the conclusion you're really fucking wierd...
But I mean that in a nice way...
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I am watching the news in the a.m. and hear about the Republican gathering in Michigan...I notice that there is no mention of Ron Paul as a prospect. If the Repubs are keeping him out of the debates, then how is the rest of Amerika supposed to familiarize with him. Not everyone reads the internet for information purposes...Should one become a "troll" and infiltrate "mom and Pops" websites to make the voting population more familiar (whether it be about ron paul or information concerning vaccinations)...I have tried this once before--going to places to put out information where it was not welcomed...(i feel like it's disturbing other's peace, these days..)
Most people spend all their time watching mainstream media, and if info is not fed concerning Mr. Paul, then how will these people have an exposure when their options are being withheld..
I did notice flyers posted around my community promoting him...but will this be enough?...
How does this work, if a person is not recognized "officially" by their party and yet wants to run in an election. I hope I am making sense.
there is no place for new ideas in this system when it is ruled by the mega rich....why would they want change? the candidates taking money from corporations care about one thing and one thing only....staying in a position of power... and they willlll doooo anything to obtain it and sustain it...
Ron Paul is not a whore,he isn't in Israel's back pocket,he isn't on any global corporations/military industrial complexes payroll.he isn't controlled by the globalists.
this sham election process bullshit is totally manipulated by these same people and is nothing but theater.
then the public (sheeple) opinion is crafted by soulless lying media douche bags feeding you dis-information.
so even though he may be "republican" he is a bird of a different feather,that's why they don't wanna give him any air time for fear he may break the trance they worked so hard to put you in.
and THAT is the real answer to your question.
"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot". Mark Twain
"I would rather die on my feet than to live on my knees."
Emiliano Zapata
jeez, you ron paul folks sounds like such conspiracy theorists. most americans believe they aren't controlled, so they don't want to listen to that kind of stuff. and when someone hears that someone like you is condescending enough to tell them they are just pawns being played in the game, and that you alone have the answer of truth...well, it just seems trite.
paul gets - about - as much coverage on CNN as richardson did, as thompson does. and that = very little cause people don't really support them.
one final thought of mine - i don't vote/support a politician because i agree with everything they say. just like the smartest person in the office shouldn't necessarily be the manager. it's about who can lead. who can bring people together, create some positive vibes, some change, and not fuck up. it's called the american deliberative system. it's why, though i support much of what kucinich stands for, i don't support him. he can do great things, but not as chief executive.
jeez, you ron paul folks sounds like such conspiracy theorists. most americans believe they aren't controlled
Most average people in general have no idea how things really work around them, or who owns and controls what.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Most average people in general have no idea how things really work around them, or who owns and controls what.
what about me? i consider myself pretty well informed and realistic. but you consider me an average american who just falls for the latest schtick government commercial. i understand you aren't *necessarily* addressing me explicitly in your post, but you are arguing the point i made before, which includes people like me.
i mean, condescending is a polite word for these attitudes.
what about me? i consider myself pretty well informed and realistic. but you consider me an average american who just falls for the latest schtick government commercial. i understand you aren't *necessarily* addressing me explicitly in your post, but you are arguing the point i made before, which includes people like me.
i mean, condescending is a polite word for these attitudes.
I'm just looking at who owns what, and how they're connected, and who's making the money, and where it's all coming from....and who it's all going to.
Pretty standard stuff.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I'm just looking at who owns what, and how they're connected, and who's making the money, and where it's all coming from....and who it's all going to.
Pretty standard stuff.
i definitately appreciate the questioning, and the challenge to the authoritative structure that the people with the money have set in place.
however, what if i happen to agree, fundamentally, with a candidate, whether it be clinton or obama, regardless of the money spent. do you accept that i could have an opinion that was not bought by the omniprescent, all-knowing, media?"
jeez, you ron paul folks sounds like such conspiracy theorists. most americans believe they aren't controlled, so they don't want to listen to that kind of stuff. and when someone hears that someone like you is condescending enough to tell them they are just pawns being played in the game, and that you alone have the answer of truth...well, it just seems trite.
paul gets - about - as much coverage on CNN as richardson did, as thompson does. and that = very little cause people don't really support them.
one final thought of mine - i don't vote/support a politician because i agree with everything they say. just like the smartest person in the office shouldn't necessarily be the manager. it's about who can lead. who can bring people together, create some positive vibes, some change, and not fuck up. it's called the american deliberative system. it's why, though i support much of what kucinich stands for, i don't support him. he can do great things, but not as chief executive.
i don't think i'm alone here.
omy gosh, hi granpa...i would say that people forget their business theory when it concerns a political office.
it's not too far in the distant pass to bring up schwarzneiger's campaign that gave him califiornia...
honestly, i wish that mr. paul will be nominated for the repub party. i do think this man could make changes...i also don't understand why the republican party wouldn't want to side with a candidate that appeals to all parties.
mr. paul seems to have gained alot of favor from many of the communities i visit. i hope he does get a nomination, for the sake of our people...
i truly pray that our leaders of our localities, states, and countries have guidance by our Spirit Guide and start doing what is right as opposed to what makes $ and opens doors at the bank..
when it all boils down, the power that Be will have the final say...
i have not really decided if i am gonna make that stroll to the ballot box...(i usually do though, even though i resist.)
i can only hope that people will truly read and research each measure and each candidate's voting record...
for instance find out if your candidates support or discount principles that make a difference in your life...
macgyver: i used to think that many of my countrypeople are sheep thinkers and yes there is a large portion of people who like to be milk fed, information; but the interaction here and at many other message boards has brought me to eat my words and humble my closed and premise based mindset. i have always thought if we could take out the corporate influence in voting, that the people would be represented...
unfortunately, capitalizm is our king and the united states is set up a bit like old rome...it's not a matter of if the system falls apart, but more so when...
thanks for your time and energy, MT community...xox
all insanity:
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
a thought i had about ron paul.
He has railed against the president essentially violating the constitution by sending troops without a decleration of war/congressional approval for a decleration....
as president, wouldnt he need congressional support and approval to remove all the troops FROM Iraq? Assuming he didnt get the approval to do so, wouldnt he be left with 2 options... Going against his campaign promise (and main point of his platform) and Not bringing them back immediately, or just doing it without approval- which would be the same violation that bothered him so much about Bush?
The fact is, even if Paul manages to pull out a victory, he will need to work within the system to bring the troops home, or dismantle the federal reserve- and with more "standard" politicians in the house and senate, there is absolutely no way he will be able to accomplish the things he has promised.
a thought i had about ron paul.
He has railed against the president essentially violating the constitution by sending troops without a decleration of war/congressional approval for a decleration....
as president, wouldnt he need congressional support and approval to remove all the troops FROM Iraq? Assuming he didnt get the approval to do so, wouldnt he be left with 2 options... Going against his campaign promise (and main point of his platform) and Not bringing them back immediately, or just doing it without approval- which would be the same violation that bothered him so much about Bush?
The fact is, even if Paul manages to pull out a victory, he will need to work within the system to bring the troops home, or dismantle the federal reserve- and with more "standard" politicians in the house and senate, there is absolutely no way he will be able to accomplish the things he has promised.
My understanding, and I'm sure someone will be more than kind enough to point out if I'm wrong, is that if the troops are over there unconstitutionally (meaning never receiving a congressional declaration of war) then there is nothing really stopping them from coming home other than the President. The congress never gave their support to begin with. So, in order for there to be a requirement for congressional support to bring the troops home, Congress would first have to support the troops being there with a declaration of war; which, to my knowledge, hasn't happened yet.
As for your other points, he would obviously have to work with the system to dismantle things such as the federal reserve.
Adding to that,
congress has the sole authority to issue a "declaration of war", meaning that it is the sole government entity capable of starting a war ... per the constitution.
What happens when we violate that fundamental tenant of the constitution? (rhetorical)
HOWEVER,
EVEN ASSUMING CONGRESS DECLARED WAR,
as Commander-In-Chief, the president is basicaly the highest general in the army, and is therefore capable (so far as i understand) of positioning the troops as he\she sees fit.
Congress gets to declare and FUND the war, not draw the battle plans.
If congress disagrees with the president on how the war is being fought, it has the right to re-position or withhold funding.
Got it?
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
He's fucking annoying. He's equivalent to Chris Dodd on the Dem card.....getting just enough votes to be annoying, but still no chance in hell of getting the nom.
He's fucking annoying. He's equivalent to Chris Dodd on the Dem card.....getting just enough votes to be annoying, but still no chance in hell of getting the nom.
If he annoys you so much, why do you keep talking about him?
seems kinda odd doesn't it?
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
you bring him up, I just laugh at him. He's got about the same shot of being president as you or I.
You have to look at the past 100 years out of the last several thousand to really understand what RP is trying to accomplish. This is why his message is getting a ton of international attention. It's bigger then the US as a country itself.
The alternative is to start killing a whole lot of people, and soon.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
You have to look at the past 100 years out of the last several thousand to really understand what RP is trying to accomplish. This is why his message is getting a ton of international attention. It's bigger then the US as a country itself.
The alternative is to start killing a whole lot of people, and soon.
So you think he can reverse the last 100 years in a 4 year term? Or an optimistic 8 year term? You're not realistic....not even somewhat reasonable!
So you think he can reverse the last 100 years in a 4 year term? Or an optimistic 8 year term? You're not realistic....not even somewhat reasonable!
So don't even bother is your solution?
nice solution...think often do you?
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
You gotta start small....and work up to the big picture. We're in pretty bad shape right now and your main concern is dismantling the government......WTF....the government needs to finish a few things before we start taking it down a notch.
You gotta start small....and work up to the big picture. We're in pretty bad shape right now and your main concern is dismantling the government......WTF....the government needs to finish a few things before we start taking it down a notch.
In bad shape for a specific reason.
Finish something?
Finish what?!
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Comments
I've come to the conclusion you're really fucking wierd...
But I mean that in a nice way...
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
there is no place for new ideas in this system when it is ruled by the mega rich....why would they want change? the candidates taking money from corporations care about one thing and one thing only....staying in a position of power... and they willlll doooo anything to obtain it and sustain it...
this sham election process bullshit is totally manipulated by these same people and is nothing but theater.
then the public (sheeple) opinion is crafted by soulless lying media douche bags feeding you dis-information.
so even though he may be "republican" he is a bird of a different feather,that's why they don't wanna give him any air time for fear he may break the trance they worked so hard to put you in.
and THAT is the real answer to your question.
"I would rather die on my feet than to live on my knees."
Emiliano Zapata
paul gets - about - as much coverage on CNN as richardson did, as thompson does. and that = very little cause people don't really support them.
one final thought of mine - i don't vote/support a politician because i agree with everything they say. just like the smartest person in the office shouldn't necessarily be the manager. it's about who can lead. who can bring people together, create some positive vibes, some change, and not fuck up. it's called the american deliberative system. it's why, though i support much of what kucinich stands for, i don't support him. he can do great things, but not as chief executive.
i don't think i'm alone here.
Most average people in general have no idea how things really work around them, or who owns and controls what.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
what about me? i consider myself pretty well informed and realistic. but you consider me an average american who just falls for the latest schtick government commercial. i understand you aren't *necessarily* addressing me explicitly in your post, but you are arguing the point i made before, which includes people like me.
i mean, condescending is a polite word for these attitudes.
I'm just looking at who owns what, and how they're connected, and who's making the money, and where it's all coming from....and who it's all going to.
Pretty standard stuff.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
i definitately appreciate the questioning, and the challenge to the authoritative structure that the people with the money have set in place.
however, what if i happen to agree, fundamentally, with a candidate, whether it be clinton or obama, regardless of the money spent. do you accept that i could have an opinion that was not bought by the omniprescent, all-knowing, media?"
it's not too far in the distant pass to bring up schwarzneiger's campaign that gave him califiornia...
honestly, i wish that mr. paul will be nominated for the repub party. i do think this man could make changes...i also don't understand why the republican party wouldn't want to side with a candidate that appeals to all parties.
mr. paul seems to have gained alot of favor from many of the communities i visit. i hope he does get a nomination, for the sake of our people...
i truly pray that our leaders of our localities, states, and countries have guidance by our Spirit Guide and start doing what is right as opposed to what makes $ and opens doors at the bank..
when it all boils down, the power that Be will have the final say...
i have not really decided if i am gonna make that stroll to the ballot box...(i usually do though, even though i resist.)
i can only hope that people will truly read and research each measure and each candidate's voting record...
for instance find out if your candidates support or discount principles that make a difference in your life...
macgyver: i used to think that many of my countrypeople are sheep thinkers and yes there is a large portion of people who like to be milk fed, information; but the interaction here and at many other message boards has brought me to eat my words and humble my closed and premise based mindset. i have always thought if we could take out the corporate influence in voting, that the people would be represented...
unfortunately, capitalizm is our king and the united states is set up a bit like old rome...it's not a matter of if the system falls apart, but more so when...
thanks for your time and energy, MT community...xox
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
He has railed against the president essentially violating the constitution by sending troops without a decleration of war/congressional approval for a decleration....
as president, wouldnt he need congressional support and approval to remove all the troops FROM Iraq? Assuming he didnt get the approval to do so, wouldnt he be left with 2 options... Going against his campaign promise (and main point of his platform) and Not bringing them back immediately, or just doing it without approval- which would be the same violation that bothered him so much about Bush?
The fact is, even if Paul manages to pull out a victory, he will need to work within the system to bring the troops home, or dismantle the federal reserve- and with more "standard" politicians in the house and senate, there is absolutely no way he will be able to accomplish the things he has promised.
My understanding, and I'm sure someone will be more than kind enough to point out if I'm wrong, is that if the troops are over there unconstitutionally (meaning never receiving a congressional declaration of war) then there is nothing really stopping them from coming home other than the President. The congress never gave their support to begin with. So, in order for there to be a requirement for congressional support to bring the troops home, Congress would first have to support the troops being there with a declaration of war; which, to my knowledge, hasn't happened yet.
As for your other points, he would obviously have to work with the system to dismantle things such as the federal reserve.
I think Sludge made an accurate statement.
Adding to that,
congress has the sole authority to issue a "declaration of war", meaning that it is the sole government entity capable of starting a war ... per the constitution.
What happens when we violate that fundamental tenant of the constitution? (rhetorical)
HOWEVER,
EVEN ASSUMING CONGRESS DECLARED WAR,
as Commander-In-Chief, the president is basicaly the highest general in the army, and is therefore capable (so far as i understand) of positioning the troops as he\she sees fit.
Congress gets to declare and FUND the war, not draw the battle plans.
If congress disagrees with the president on how the war is being fought, it has the right to re-position or withhold funding.
Got it?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
If he annoys you so much, why do you keep talking about him?
seems kinda odd doesn't it?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
you bring him up, I just laugh at him. He's got about the same shot of being president as you or I.
You have to look at the past 100 years out of the last several thousand to really understand what RP is trying to accomplish. This is why his message is getting a ton of international attention. It's bigger then the US as a country itself.
The alternative is to start killing a whole lot of people, and soon.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
So you think he can reverse the last 100 years in a 4 year term? Or an optimistic 8 year term? You're not realistic....not even somewhat reasonable!
So don't even bother is your solution?
nice solution...think often do you?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
You gotta start small....and work up to the big picture. We're in pretty bad shape right now and your main concern is dismantling the government......WTF....the government needs to finish a few things before we start taking it down a notch.
In bad shape for a specific reason.
Finish something?
Finish what?!
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")