Barack Obama

1234689

Comments

  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    Hey I'm Still Here do you like Jim Mora?
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,830
    my2hands wrote:
    Ron Paul = the sink or swim you're on your own candidate


    no thanks


    Ron Paul has some very good ideas...and some very scary ones...but then again, so do all the candidates.

    I'm glad Ron Paul was part of the discussion after all. I thought he was a weird little troll man like Kucinich, and he kinda is, but he makes far more sense. ;)

    Still, I don't want him leading this country, I want him to have his voice in it, but not lead it. WE could use a few more Ron Paul's in Congress though.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • jeffbr
    jeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    my2hands wrote:
    Ron Paul = the sink or swim you're on your own candidate


    no thanks

    No he isn't. Ron Paul = the federal govt won't hire pimply 16 year old lifeguards. If you don't know how to swim, take lessons, feel free to bring a buddy who does, or get together with a bunch of friends/family/aquaintences and hire one yourself.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • Im still here
    Im still here Posts: 826
    Ron Paul = Less Government and More Freedoms
    PEARL JAM~Lubbock, TX. 10~18~00
    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
  • MasterFramer
    MasterFramer Posts: 2,268
    Ron Paul = Absolutely UN Electable
    10.31.93 / 10.1.94 / 6.24.95 / 11.4.95 / 10.19-20.96 / 7.16.98 / 7.21.98 / 10.31.00 /8.4.01 Nader Rally/ 10.21.01 / 12.8-9.02 / 6.01.03 / 9.1.05 / 7.15-16,18.06 / 7.20.06 / 7.22-23.06 / Lolla 07
  • SPEEDY MCCREADY
    SPEEDY MCCREADY Posts: 26,846
    MasterFramer wrote:
    Ron Paul = Absolutely UN Electable
    clinton
    obama

    absolutely UN Electable......
    Take me piece by piece.....
    Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
  • Im still here
    Im still here Posts: 826
    MasterFramer wrote:
    Ron Paul = Absolutely UN Electable

    LIES
    PEARL JAM~Lubbock, TX. 10~18~00
    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
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Im still here wrote:
    LIES

    how is it a lie? have you seen the man speak? is there any particular reason why is can never get over 10% voting in any primary.

    please explain to me how he is electable. his time is running out.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    DOSW wrote:
    Bill Clinton, a very wealthy man, is more than willing to pay higher taxes as he famously said.

    Did he then cut the government a check? I mean, no one is stopping him from paying whatever additional taxes he would like.
    It's based on a simple principle - you have more, you give more.

    I think you mean "foolish" principle.
    Is it fair? Not really, per se. But it's the right thing to do. The upper class should recognize that they have a responsibility to share some of their wealth because they can afford to do so.

    Huh? Why haven't you sold your computer and sent the money to Africa? You certainly could afford to do so.
    Boohoo, it's not fair. Poor people deserve to be poor, so you guys don't have to help them, right?

    No one "deserves" to be poor or rich. People are poor or rich, largely dependent on the conditions they live in and/or the choices they and others around them make. Everyone, rich or poor, has a right give help where they see fit and accept help when they see fit. But to suggest that either the poor or the rich have some kind of eternal responsibility to each other is baseless and silly, particularly when you seem to be saying that other people have whatever obligations you decide they do.
    I call bullshit.

    Me too.
  • MasterFramer
    MasterFramer Posts: 2,268
    SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:
    clinton
    obama

    absolutely UN Electable......

    You know he got 16,000 people to come out in Idaho the other day? I think there is only 12,000 democrats in Idaho... :)

    Cant wait for the free drinks at one of these shows Speedy! ;)
    10.31.93 / 10.1.94 / 6.24.95 / 11.4.95 / 10.19-20.96 / 7.16.98 / 7.21.98 / 10.31.00 /8.4.01 Nader Rally/ 10.21.01 / 12.8-9.02 / 6.01.03 / 9.1.05 / 7.15-16,18.06 / 7.20.06 / 7.22-23.06 / Lolla 07
  • drew0
    drew0 Posts: 943
    jlew24asu wrote:
    but the "wealthy" are already taxed the most. now you want to tax them more becuase you think they can afford it. so no its not fair. it creates an environment that discourages people to strive for higher positions. why do it when you are only going to be forced to give your money back?

    To be fair, I have talked to many, many wealthy people who said that they can afford a tax increase, or can afford the cost of something more expensive (an increase in college tuition, or something along those lines). Coming from a working class family, I cannot afford an increase in my tuition - I went to the cheapest school possible, and every hike is a stab in the heart. I've never talked to a working class family that has said "Yeah, I can afford a slightly higher tax rate"...I have heard the upper class say it plenty of times.

    Is raising their taxes fair to pay for welfare and other social programs? Not entirely, but in small doses I think it's justified. Although, I don't like $1 trillion of tax payers' money, including my own, going to a war that wasn't handled correctly and was lied about.
    Pittsburgh 6/23/06
    Madison Square Garden 6/25/08
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    my2hands wrote:
    - proposes a progressive tax system, shifting burden to the wealthier and cutting taxes for the middle class

    We already have that. The wealthy pay the majority of your taxes already:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#Tax_distribution
    - has clearly stated he will raise the Social Security tax cap from $96,500 (a fucking no brainer)

    How is this "a fucking no brainer"? Social Security was designed to be a pay-for-yourself system.
    - has clearly stated that troops will be withdrawn from iraq in 2009

    Not very clearly, considering the fact that he keeps voting to fund their stay.
    - has clearly stated that we will not have permanent military bases in iraq

    Not very cleary, considering the fact that he keeps voting to fund their establishment.
    - has clearly stated that we will not have a permanent military presence in iraq

    Not very cleary, considering the fact that he keeps voting to fund that presence in the absence of hard goals or timelines.
    - has clearly stated that he will remove the influence of the special interests and lobbyists in washington

    Not very clearly, since he is happy to accept their money.
  • drew0
    drew0 Posts: 943
    MasterFramer wrote:
    Ron Paul = Absolutely UN Electable

    Paulbots are honestly the most annoying group of people in politics since George W. Bush became president. Where were these millions of libertarians screaming about the price of the dollar, free trade, and the Constitution in '04, '00, and '96? If I have to see one more "VOTE DR. RON PAUL 09 OMGZ! HE IS THE ONLY PERSON WHO UNDERSTANDS TEH CONSTUTIONS!" when I watch a YouTube video, I'm going to hurt something.
    Pittsburgh 6/23/06
    Madison Square Garden 6/25/08
  • dmitry
    dmitry Posts: 136
    i would say ron paul can speak at least as well as g w bush. if you just want someone who can speak well, then obama is your man.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    drew0 wrote:
    Paulbots are honestly the most annoying group of people in politics since George W. Bush became president. Where were these millions of libertarians screaming about the price of the dollar, free trade, and the Constitution in '04, '00, and '96?

    Right here. We voted for Michael Badnarik and Harry Browne.
  • drew0
    drew0 Posts: 943
    farfromglorified wrote:
    Right here. We voted for Michael Badnarik and Harry Browne.

    I don't doubt there out there - one of my friends did. But, he got 397,265 votes in '04, and now he's getting 10x that in every state? Two guys on my dorm floor are Paulbots are constantly tell me how he's the only hope for America, how he is the only one who understands the Constitution, and a whole bunch of stuff they copied from his website about the dollar, free trade, and the gold standard. These two voted were Dubyah fans until Ron Paul started running (although they weren't really interested in politics, so I'm not sure how knowledgeable and devoted their backing was).

    I just find it kind of odd that the Libertarian candidate in '04 is getting 1/50 of the vote that Ron Paul is getting this year, and out of nowhere we have all these newfound Libertarians that, for some odd reason, either new absolutely nothing about politics a year ago, or supported George W. Bush.
    Pittsburgh 6/23/06
    Madison Square Garden 6/25/08
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    drew0 wrote:
    I don't doubt there out there - one of my friends did. But, he got 397,265 votes in '04, and now he's getting 10x that in every state? Two guys on my dorm floor are Paulbots are constantly tell me how he's the only hope for America, how he is the only one who understands the Constitution, and a whole bunch of stuff they copied from his website about the dollar, free trade, and the gold standard. These two voted were Dubyah fans until Ron Paul started running (although they weren't really interested in politics, so I'm not sure how knowledgeable and devoted their backing was).

    I just find it kind of odd that the Libertarian candidate in '04 is getting 1/50 of the vote that Ron Paul is getting this year, and out of nowhere we have all these newfound Libertarians that, for some odd reason, either new absolutely nothing about politics a year ago, or supported George W. Bush.

    Ron Paul is an "it" candidate, that's all. 75% of these people will move onto some other issue next year.
  • floyd1975
    floyd1975 Posts: 1,350
    farfromglorified wrote:
    Right here. We voted for Michael Badnarik and Harry Browne.

    Those supporters seemed much more mentally stable than the other 90% of Congressman Paul's supporters.
  • Im still here
    Im still here Posts: 826
    farfromglorified wrote:
    We already have that. The wealthy pay the majority of your taxes already:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#Tax_distribution



    How is this "a fucking no brainer"? Social Security was designed to be a pay-for-yourself system.



    Not very clearly, considering the fact that he keeps voting to fund their stay.



    Not very cleary, considering the fact that he keeps voting to fund their establishment.



    Not very cleary, considering the fact that he keeps voting to fund that presence in the absence of hard goals or timelines.



    Not very clearly, since he is happy to accept their money.

    The Truth shall set You Free

    Barack Hussein Obama = More of the same
    PEARL JAM~Lubbock, TX. 10~18~00
    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
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    floyd1975 wrote:
    Those supporters seemed much more mentally stable than the other 90% of Congressman Paul's supporters.

    Perhaps. But 90% of anyone's supporters don't seem very mentally stable. So meh....

Categories