Go Newt

[cmk227]

Originally Posted by Templar

Um, who?

You really think any of these rejects have a chance in hell? I don't like Obama, so don't get me wrong, but the fact doesn't change that the GOP collection of rejects makes Obama the clear winner...

This election is not if we like Obama or Not. This election is about Obama's policies. The man will be judge on his track record and nothing more.

We both clearly have different views and I expect Obama to lose this November's election.

[Neema]

I don't ever want to hear another Christian say a freaking thing about "family values."

Really won't matter who gets into office as long as we have the same bickering jackasses in Congress. The real vote needs to focus on replacing the vast majority of them. Both sides of the aisle.

+1

[Templar]

Originally Posted by cmk227

This election is not if we like Obama or Not. This election is about Obama's policies. The man will be judge on his track record and nothing more.

We both clearly have different views and I expect Obama to lose this November's election.

I will admit, you have a lot more faith in the GOP than I do.

The people will have to choose between Obama and a bunch of liars and cheats and old men, so IMO the current President looks like the best choice (even if he isn't someone the majority of the people agree with now).

[ghosthi32]

Originally Posted by Templar

I will admit, you have a lot more faith in the GOP than I do.

The people will have to choose between Obama and a bunch of liars and cheats and old men, so IMO the current President looks like the best choice (even if he isn't someone the majority of the people agree with now).

sad but true..


The GOP race is a circus.

[ideliver]

So Ron Paul is a liar and a cheat? Can you provide an example?

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by ideliver

So Ron Paul is a liar and a cheat? Can you provide an example?

I will. Here in NH, ahead of the primary I got a 3-page letter from Paul, explaining every way that he'll eliminate abortion in this country; from passing bills to kicking-out judges and replacing them with partisan ones who will amend the constitution. Doesn't sound very "libertarian" to me.

But do you ever hear him say this publicly?

[ghosthi32]

Originally Posted by ideliver

So Ron Paul is a liar and a cheat? Can you provide an example?

and here comes the troll

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by ghosthi32

and here comes the troll

Are you referring to me?

[ideliver]

Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar

I will. Here in NH, ahead of the primary I got a 3-page letter from Paul, explaining every way that he'll eliminate abortion in this country; from passing bills to kicking-out judges and replacing them with partisan ones who will amend the constitution. Doesn't sound very "libertarian" to me.

But do you ever hear him say this publicly?

hmmm...no and not what i would expect either...abortion is the one issue that i think he is very wrong on...

clearly it is a state issue...not a federal one

However...as an OB/GYN...many develop very strong pro-life convictions...clearly he has also

[Templar]

Originally Posted by ideliver

So Ron Paul is a liar and a cheat? Can you provide an example?

Nah, he's under the old man category.

Although some of the changes he proposes sound logical to me, the problem is that there's no way in hell he could implement those changes immediately without the entire country falling apart. Large structural changes to the government like he proposes would take years to occur, way more than he has left I think...

And Scotch, mind showing us that letter? I'd like to see it, since that really doesn't sound like Ron Paul at all... Sounds like you might be taking some things out of context and not showing us the contents of the letter. Not shocked at all that you would do that though

EDIT: Looking into more quotes about Paul's stance on abortion. As expected, he is pro-life, but it seems his main focus is to prevent the federal government from mandating that states be pro-choice. It seems he wants the states to be able to choose to be pro-life without the intervention of the federal government. Interesting:

In 2005 and 2007, Paul introduced the Sanctity of Life Act, which would define human life as beginning from conception, removing abortion from federal jurisdiction and effectively negating Roe v. Wade. Paul has also introduced a Constitutional amendment with similar intent. Such laws would permit states to declare abortion to be murder and to outlaw new fetal stem cell research and some contraception and fertility treatments. Also in 2005 and 2007, Paul introduced the We the People Act, which would forbid all federal courts from adjudicating abortion as well as same-sex marriage, sexual practices, and government display of religious symbols. The Act would make federal decisions on those subjects nonbinding as state precedent, and would forbid federal courts from spending money to enforce their judgments.

[ideliver]

Originally Posted by Templar

Nah, he's under the old man category.

75 won't be old....when you are 75...lol

[ScotchAndCigar]

Originally Posted by Templar

Sounds like you might be taking some things out of context and not showing us the contents of the letter. Not shocked at all that you would do that though

This forum is just full of the nicest people, I'll have to visit again soon.

[txz4]

scotch is right on this, though the info isn't exactly secret. and still as scotch implied, even saying its a state issue isnt a libertarian ideal.

I like some of Pauls ideas, but his thoughts on the Money system/ Fed and his thoughts on foreign policy are nuts. And thats not even getting into his past craziness.

I will say this however, i will take ANY of the current candidates over Obama, and the reason is simply that Obamas policies are seriously harming this economy, and thats glossing over the fact that he has no issue misleading normal Americans on a regular basis.

[bolinp78]

Originally Posted by txz4

he has no issue misleading normal Americans on a regular basis.

see: refundable tax credits, as featured in another thread

[Templar]

Originally Posted by txz4

scotch is right on this, though the info isn't exactly secret. and still as scotch implied, even saying its a state issue isnt a libertarian ideal.

I like some of Pauls ideas, but his thoughts on the Money system/ Fed and his thoughts on foreign policy are nuts. And thats not even getting into his past craziness.

I will say this however, i will take ANY of the current candidates over Obama, and the reason is simply that Obamas policies are seriously harming this economy, and thats glossing over the fact that he has no issue misleading normal Americans on a regular basis.

Explain the bolded parts please. How is letting the states figure out their own laws regarding their own issues not a libertarian ideal? What exactly about his economic policy and ending the Federal Reserve is nuts?

Just curious as to what your thoughts are...

Paul is pro-life, nothing about that should be a surprise to anyone considering he is 1) an OB/GYN and 2) a religious conservative. However I would REALLY like to see where he has said he will force everyone to make abortion illegal. I haven't seen it so I'm curious... I'm not saying any of you are lying about it, I just want to see the facts Taking his goal of negating Roe v. Wade out of context and saying he wants to make everyone declare abortion illegal is a bit of a stretch IMO.

And please stick around Scotch... Sorry if you were offended by what I said! You can always try to prove me wrong though, you know, by posting a picture of the letter from Ron Paul

[txz4]

Originally Posted by Templar

Explain the bolded parts please. How is letting the states figure out their own laws regarding their own issues not a libertarian ideal? What exactly about his economic policy and ending the Federal Reserve is nuts?

Just curious as to what your thoughts are...

Paul is pro-life, nothing about that should be a surprise to anyone considering he is 1) an OB/GYN and 2) a religious conservative. However I would REALLY like to see where he has said he will force everyone to make abortion illegal. I haven't seen it so I'm curious... I'm not saying any of you are lying about it, I just want to see the facts Taking his goal of negating Roe v. Wade out of context and saying he wants to make everyone declare abortion illegal is a bit of a stretch IMO.

And please stick around Scotch... Sorry if you were offended by what I said! You can always try to prove me wrong though, you know, by posting a picture of the letter from Ron Paul

For sure, I was a libertarian but have shrugged the title off as of late, i call myself more of a realist than anything. Libertarians dont believe that the government has ANY say in whether something should or should not be allowed. Libertarians usually support government only in terms of roads, defense, etc.

Pauls THEORIES regardless of what he will do, is that he would prefer us to be on the gold standard and to remove the Fed from the equation. Refer to the zeitgeist of the federal reserve thread for much writing on this topic. but for the cliffs:The gold standard would be rapidly deflationary and highly toxic to the economy, and thats outside of what things tend to go with it, think FDR confiscating gold to foster economic growth. Currently the value of money is based on every commodity one could purchase, if we based value on gold, than our money is compared to only one commodity. Dont be fooled by someone saying or money isnt worth anything... Last time i checked you can buy computers, cars, milk, gas, silver, and even gold with these "worthless dollars" the value of these items fluctuate relative to our dollars. The only real argument is whether you think the Fed should or should not exist. Fiat money is an absolute must now. I argue that without the accountability that the Fed forces on the U.S. in regards to debt, the inflationary environment would be FAR worse than the debt crisis we are currently in, though this is just based on my logical deduction. Again refer to the "Zeitgeist of the Federal Reserve" thread.

His foreign policy is nuts as he lives in a dream world in regards to other countries intentions, the consequences of his foreign policy ideas would be devastating. Hes just too naive.

It is worth noting that Paul is NOT running as a libertarian, instead running as a Republican which makes sense as the New republicans are more towards the realistic libertarian territory than previous times. Hence why it makes no difference that his ideas on abortion aren't strictly consistent. He did never say anything about making abortion illegal but by making it a state right that may depending on your understanding of this, make him inconsistent or perhaps evolving in thought, take your pick.

[Templar]

Originally Posted by txz4

For sure, I was a libertarian but have shrugged the title off as of late, i call myself more of a realist than anything. Libertarians dont believe that the government has ANY say in whether something should or should not be allowed. Libertarians usually support government only in terms of roads, defense, etc.

Pauls THEORIES regardless of what he will do, is that he would prefer us to be on the gold standard and to remove the Fed from the equation. Refer to the zeitgeist of the federal reserve thread for much writing on this topic. but for the cliffs:The gold standard would be rapidly deflationary and highly toxic to the economy, and thats outside of what things tend to go with it, think FDR confiscating gold to foster economic growth. Currently the value of money is based on every commodity one could purchase, if we based value on gold, than our money is compared to only one commodity. Dont be fooled by someone saying or money isnt worth anything... Last time i checked you can buy computers, cars, milk, gas, silver, and even gold with these "worthless dollars" the value of these items fluctuate relative to our dollars. The only real argument is whether you think the Fed should or should not exist. Fiat money is an absolute must now. I argue that without the accountability that the Fed forces on the U.S. in regards to debt, the inflationary environment would be FAR worse than the debt crisis we are currently in, though this is just based on my logical deduction. Again refer to the "Zeitgeist of the Federal Reserve" thread.

His foreign policy is nuts as he lives in a dream world in regards to other countries intentions, the consequences of his foreign policy ideas would be devastating. Hes just too naive.

It is worth noting that Paul is NOT running as a libertarian, instead running as a Republican which makes sense as the New republicans are more towards the realistic libertarian territory than previous times. Hence why it makes no difference that his ideas on abortion aren't strictly consistent. He did never say anything about making abortion illegal but by making it a state right that may depending on your understanding of this, make him inconsistent or perhaps evolving in thought, take your pick.

I got you, and agree on most all accounts.

My biggest issue is foreign policy. What dream world do you mean? I'm trying to wrap my head around what you're thinking we should do. Should we have troops stationed in over 100 countries around the world? Should we intervene in every conflict in other countries around the world? I don't think we should. I think there's a lot of stuff going on that we don't see. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I think that the US imposes its will in too many places around the world and disguises it as "good intent" when it's really only in our best interest, usually economically motivated.

Being a complete isolationist isn't right either, but I definitely think we need to bring the troops home. For example, troops stationed in Germany... Why are they there? The original argument went back to the World Wars of course, but recently it's been "because it's a quicker jump from Germany to Kuwait than from ATL, Georgia to Kuwait." Maybe true, but is it necessary? I flew from Kuwait to Ireland to ATL in less than one day when I was coming home for leave during my deployments. The flight is basically cut in half if we go to Germany. Is it really that necessary? I don't think so. Because of the SOFA's we have with all of these other countries, we spend so much money pleasing them to allow us to keep Soldiers there. It's a waste. Plus, the Soldiers are paid a lot of extra money to live in these places (Cost of living allowance or COLA).

Little known fact... A Soldier who is stationed in Germany originally is deployed to a combat zone in Iraq of Afghanistan. They are no longer burdened with an additional cost of living for being in Germany under the Euro, right? Well, the government still gives them their COLA in their paycheck every month. Complete and utter waste of funds. Sure, I enjoyed it while it happened to me, but you can't tell me it isn't a waste of money...

/end rant, lol... Went totally off topic

[BKsBimmer]

Originally Posted by txz4

I will say this however, i will take ANY of the current candidates over Obama, and the reason is simply that Obamas policies are seriously harming this economy, and thats glossing over the fact that he has no issue misleading normal Americans on a regular basis.

Based on your statement you've disqualified Romney; a serial filp-flopper with no core convictions, who will say and do anything for the sake of political expedience and Gingrich; a desparate ego maniac who has no problem saying or doing anything politically expedient. Both have a very low trust and confidence quotient even within their own party.

That leaves Ron Paul who, let's face it would be a total dissaster as president, and Rick Santorum, who, let's face it would be a total dissaster as president. While both, to their credit do have core convictions and beliefs; their core convictions and beliefs are not shared by a majority of Americans. Both have views too far outside the mainstream to be able to successfully lead the country, let alone even get elected.

If Ron Paul was president we would not have even gone after Osama Bin Laden.

If Rick Santorum was president women's contraception would be banned.

They are both unelectable.

[txz4]

Originally Posted by BKsBimmer

Based on your statement you've disqualified Romney; a serial filp-flopper with no core convictions, who will say and do anything for the sake of political expedience and Gingrich; a desparate ego maniac who has no problem saying or doing anything politically expedient. Both have a very low trust and confidence quotient even within their own party.

That leaves Ron Paul who, let's face it would be a total dissaster as president, and Rick Santorum, who, let's face it would be a total dissaster as president. While both, to their credit do have core convictions and beliefs; their core convictions and beliefs are not shared by a majority of Americans. Both have views too far outside the mainstream to be able to successfully lead the country, let alone even get elected.

If Ron Paul was president we would not have even gone after Osama Bin Laden.

If Rick Santorum was president women's contraception would be banned.

They are both unelectable.

hence why im, at the moment, for Romney (not my first choice). Earlier in the thread i go into why but its pretty obvious. And i agree 100% Newt is completely untrustworthy, and im not speaking in regards to his cheating. I just dont trust the guy. At the end of the day i dont think any of the candidates save for maybe paul would be a disaster as president. Santorum, you know where he stands and their wouldn't be any question though im not enthused about a hard right religious sort of character, though again i dont think he would actually try anything odd. His point about contraception was more that the government shouldn't be saying that contraception is either right or wrong, but instead should not be worry themselves with personal matters. Though he did say he didn't support it.

Nobody supports having troops strewn wherever and further more the thing that pisses me off the most about Paul, NOBODY IS FOR USELESS FOREIGN WARS. the only difference is every other person figured it goes without saying. Look at what could happen if we didnt police things, Iran could be allowed to have a nuke, a country ran by a know holocaust denier. just one of the many instances.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by Templar

I will admit, you have a lot more faith in the GOP than I do.

The people will have to choose between Obama and a bunch of liars and cheats and old men, so IMO the current President looks like the best choice (even if he isn't someone the majority of the people agree with now).

REALLY??? That is really scary to hear because it would seem to me not only does Obama fall into several of the categories in which you describe, but many others which in my opinion are far worse. He is a liar, a socialist, a man who routinely attended the church of a radical prejudice preacher, a man that worked with and socialized with terrorist Bill Ayers, a man who has surrounded himself with many people in his administration that touch on every one of your categories to include known tax cheats, corruption etc.

It is clear to me you have no idea what is going on with this country right now and are either uninformed or blinded by the man's charisma, which unfortunately descirbes a large majority of people in this country, which in itself is scary to think about. I will take any one of the GOP candidates over a man that is running this great country of ours into the ground; okay Ron Paul scares me a little bit.

This country is lead by a man that believes the government is here to solve everyone's problems. A man that believes in robbing Peter to pay Paul while Paul chose not to get a high school education sits on his ass all day collecting a pay check funded by yours truly and has otherwise no incentive to get a job. A man that believes the government actually "creates" jobs. A man that believes in a government that should regulate every aspect of business and your life to include requiring you to get health care. A man that believes continuing to sink this country into financial oblivion while at the same time borrowing money it does not have from communist China to fund this administration's social programs/agenda at the expense of my children's future. A man that believes he can spend this country into prosperity. A man that believes prosperity is a strong BIG government in which its citizens have become dependent on for their survival. This is a man whose beliefs and agenda fly in the face of this great country's founding principles and has a complete disregard for liberty and freedom.

The average debt you and I owe because of the fiscal irresponsibility of this and past administrations totals approximately $55k for every man, woman and child living in the US and that amount is rapidly growing. I will vote for anyone that is NOT Obama this election, because we cannot afford to continue down the path we are on.

[Team Plutonium]

Originally Posted by cssnms

REALLY??? That is really scary to hear because it would seem to me not only does Obama fall into several of the categories in which you describe, but many others which in my opinion are far worse. He is a liar, a socialist, a man who routinely attended the church of a radical prejudice preacher, a man that worked with and socialized with terrorist Bill Ayers, a man who has surrounded himself with many people in his administration that touch on every one of your categories to include known tax cheats, corruption etc.

It is clear to me you have no idea what is going on with this country right now and are either uninformed or blinded by the man's charisma, which unfortunately descirbes a large majority of people in this country, which in itself is scary to think about. I will take any one of the GOP candidates over a man that is running this great country of ours into the ground; okay Ron Paul scares me a little bit.

This country is lead by a man that believes the government is here to solve everyone's problems. A man that believes in robbing Peter to pay Paul while Paul chose not to get a high school education sits on his ass all day collecting a pay check funded by yours truly and has otherwise no incentive to get a job. A man that believes the government actually "creates" jobs. A man that believes in a government that should regulate every aspect of business and your life to include requiring you to get health care. A man that believes continuing to sink this country into financial oblivion while at the same time borrowing money it does not have from communist China to fund this administration's social programs/agenda at the expense of my children's future. A man that believes he can spend this country into prosperity. A man that believes prosperity is a strong BIG government in which its citizens have become dependent on for their survival. This is a man whose beliefs and agenda fly in the face of this great country's founding principles and has a complete disregard for liberty and freedom.

The average debt you and I owe because of the fiscal irresponsibility of this and past administrations totals approximately $55k for every man, woman and child living in the US and that amount is rapidly growing. I will vote for anyone that is NOT Obama this election, because we cannot afford to continue down the path we are on.

Maybe it's because I'm German, but I will never understand why socialism is a bad thing? The last time I checked Germany is one of the very view countries on earth that is doing very well... they also built nice cars. People in the US also don't know what socialism is or means.... Germany, and scandinavian companies are all about profit as well, so capitalism and socialism can go hand-in-hand pretty well.

I love how the GOP prides itself with their christian values, but hates socialism, and in fact confuses it (on purpose) with communism. Fail all across the board.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by SehrSchnell

Maybe it's because I'm German, but I will never understand why socialism is a bad thing? The last time I checked Germany is one of the very view countries on earth that is doing very well... they also built nice cars. People in the US also don't know what socialism is or means.... Germany, and scandinavian companies are all about profit as well, so capitalism and socialism can go hand-in-hand pretty well.

I love how the GOP prides itself with their christian values, but hates socialism, and in fact confuses it (on purpose) with communism. Fail all across the board.

While I agree with some of what you say e.g. Germany builds some nice cars, many in the US don't know what socialism is or its consequences, I do not agree there is any confusion with regard to the definition of a socialist government and a communist government despite similarities between the two with regard to government run/funded programs. The best example to differentiate between the two which I am sure you can relate were the stark differences between East and West Germany. Most on this board were not alive when that wall came down. What a liberating moment that was, thanks in large part to the influence of arguably one of the best Presidents this country has ever seen, Ronald Reagan, a democrat turned republican that believed in smaller government and lower taxes would lead to prosperity; how right he was! Those were the good 'ol days....

While true Germany's economy is one of the strongest in the European Union, today it is more of a pseudo capitalistic society with many socialist programs such as national health care, not much unlike what Obama is trying to create here. However on the opposite of end of the spectrum all Germany has to do is take a look around them to see what happens when the government and its policies become to overreaching e.g. Greece, U.K. and the list goes on.

As a German (living in NY?) I would not expect you to be familiar with or necessarily understand our country's founding principles and despite the fact that the Constitution remains the supreme law of the United States there are certain people to include many in the current administration that disregard the Constitution when setting policy. I have noticed a dramatic shift in our government over the last 20 years and it's that shift that has lead us to where we are today and I do not just blame the current administration or just democrats. There is a deep seeded problem with our government which is fueled by corrupt politicians, the fact that there are no term limits on these politicians, crony capitalism, and an inherent incentive for government officials to justify their existence/jobs through the creation of more regulation and needless policies all in the name of job security. More policies and more regulation means a bigger more expensive government and these same politicians are expected to find a way to cut meezly $1 trillion from our bloated budget?! HA

People in this country need to wake up. For a glimpse into the future, just take a look at what is happening in Greece.