Ron Paul on with Alex Jones Jan 5th
RolandTD20Kdrummer
Posts: 13,066
Ron Paul Discusses Iowa caucus results.
http://prisonplanet.com/audio/040108paul.mp3
Some very good points are made.
Ron Paul is pulling in consistently around $70,000 per day on just regular days.
Some anti RP people really want this war on terrorism to keep happening soooo (soo) badly.
http://prisonplanet.com/audio/040108paul.mp3
Some very good points are made.
Ron Paul is pulling in consistently around $70,000 per day on just regular days.
Some anti RP people really want this war on terrorism to keep happening soooo (soo) badly.
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.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
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)
(")_(")
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
i actually thought he was the only one that made any real sense on the foreign policy/war topics...
all the other candidates were pussies... constantly preaching fear, fear of islam, and a fear of a worlwide jihadist movement... i am sorry but they are acting like a very small fanatical MINORITY of a religion is going to take over this country? we will all be wearing turbans and growing beards reading the Koran... what a fucking joke... when did americans become such gullable pussies? "oh my god, the evil islamojihadistfascists are going to take over the world, so we must continue to funnel all of our wealth and resources into the greatest killing machine ever".
what a bunch of bullshit
He appeared that way at times because he had the entire panel against him.
In a social structure, the mind is easily swayed under those circumstances even if the person under attack is 100% correct.
Basically it was a bunch of pro war guys making a case for war against one guy who wasn't.
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 somewhat agree with this. but I just wasnt feeling his debating style that night.
At the end of the day though, are you voting for someone with good "debate style" or someone who stands strong on a very logical and smart set of policies?
http://www.ronpaulforums.com
I havent decided who I'm voting for, but ron paul didnt help his case for me that night. just a personal opinion I guess. I expected more from someone who could potentially be the leader of my country.
i think you need to take the longview, jlew.
The leader of our country needs to be someone who sees the BIG PICTURE ... understands the intracacies of how "lofty" subjects like monitary theory work, and also the delicacies of how history predicts the future. A leader needs these abilities, and the abilities to moderate their own tendency extraneous towards action much more than he needs some quickwited boxer-like rehtorical skills.
The fate of humanity or of a country rarely comes down to some insane tense moment (like a finger on the button at the apocolypse) ... and while i think GW is a good example of when "lack of them vebal skills" be gettin a little extreme,
I don't think the lack of "putting up one helluva fight" when it comes to 1 vs. 5 debate skills is a make or break qualification for president, becaues i am not sure where it has a whole hell of a lot ot do with leading the country ...
but if you would rather put your vote behind somone who can deliver a command performance while convincing you that utter bullshit is true, then go for it.
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?