Metalcore1487 Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 I want him to win http://www.revolvermag.com/news/30896.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carpe Diem Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 Americans on the board: http://esupport.fcc.gov/complaints.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navyblue Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 But since it IS being controlled, you might have to play the game to change it. That's like saying some one who doesn't agree with the system shouldn't vote. He's the lesser of evils even if some one might not agree with every single thing, and that's not to say that I disagree with this or that. I don't like the system but while it is in place I am going to follow its rules, and complain about a biased media. Sigh... ? And is his position not that he would let the states decide ? Just because his position is against federal regulation, doesn't mean his position says that the states shouldn't have that choice either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carpe Diem Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 But since it IS being controlled, you might have to play the game to change it. That's like saying some one who doesn't agree with the system shouldn't vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navyblue Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 wrong analogy. is more like asking for police protection while activing trying to abolish the police department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisenberg Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Where does Ron Paul stand on foreign aid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navyblue Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Yea, I guess we are moving from the media constructed viewpoint of paul, lets change the subject I could make money on this fortune telling business Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carpe Diem Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 As I already posted (and you ignored, "sigh"), Paul's stance is that of the states regulating not the federal gov, so this is a moot point. Perhaps you should think before you point. But lets run with your analogy..... Would you still not call the cops? Taking a dangerous situation in your own hands would not result in being put in jail? I would still call the cops even if I WAS for abolishing their services, because the law, or system, would still throw my ass in jail. Thanks for proving my point. Cheers mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navyblue Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 its merely a fundamentally hypocritical position. akin to asking for police protection when holding an anti-police rally. Paul supporters complain about the corporate controlled media, yet are keen to remove any remaining safeguards against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carpe Diem Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Anderson Cooper? Wolf Blitzer? Is that you? Okay...this is the third and final time I'm going to clarify this for you. Dr Paul proposes the states to decide. Your point doesn't hold water because it is based on a common misinterpretation that seems to be deliberately spread by the media and certain people. I've already illustrated how your cop comparison lends credence to my side of the argument, even if it doesn't really cover the scope of what we are talking about. It isn't a hypocritical position. These issues aren't black and white. If your eyes only see two extreme shades , I guess there isn't much left for me to say. Long live the propaganda machine and all it's little minions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navyblue Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I would assume that most states would end up adopting similar regulations anyway in the interest of making things work, at their discretion. The crazy ones would opt out. It would not be a federally mandated regulation, if it was up to Paul, yet there would still be the opportunity for states to continue down the current path if they see fit so on and so forth. This is all beside the point. You claimed Ron Paul wanted to deregulate TV and that I was a hypocrite for supporting him and saying people should write the FCC. I disagree and I think common sense does too. It's my belief that while rules are what they are they should be followed and the correct paths should be taken to voice your opinion, until things are changed. The fact that you keep running on a premise that is false (paul's stances) troubles me. I don't mean to be disrespectful either...but when you start throwing out sighs insinuating people don't know what they're talking about or are unaware of some media drummed up fallacy of hypocrisy...you better know what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
key2thecup Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 This past weekend: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbo Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 My take on the candidates still in the race: Rick Perry: George Bush v2.0 but (somehow!) more stupid. Newt Gingrich: Probably one of the most corrupt, insincere people in politics. And that's saying a lot. Mitt Romney: This is the scariest guy in the field, not because he's the worst, but because he's probably the only one who can beat Obama. The rest are too crazy and people will figure it out; Romney seems more "normal" so he stands a chance. But he's a corporate tool, he'll sell out to personal interest groups at the drop of the hat, and unless you're rich you're going to suffer a lot under him while he grows richer. Ron Paul: On the one had, he's my favourite candidate, because he's the only one in the field who has an ounce of sincerity behind the things he says. On the other hand, many of his policies are ridiculous and he would also serve primarily the rich. But at least he's honest. Rick Santorum: Competing with Perry for the dumbest candidate in the field. A bigoted homophobic tool. I hope he wins, because there's not a chance Obama will lose to this guy. John Hunstman: All things considered, probably the best candidate the Republicans have. Not as sincere as Paul, but his policies are less insane. Not to say I especially like him, but he's probably the only one that wouldn't destroy the country as a Republican president. Of course, he doesn't stand a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverpig Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 In case this hasn't been posted before: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/candidate-match-game?loc=interstitialskip For me it was Obama Huntsman Romney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carpe Diem Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 In case this hasn't been posted before: http://www.usatoday....nterstitialskip For me it was Obama Huntsman Romney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 stupid questions. For energy, every answer other than 'none of the above' started with 'increase domestic oil and gas production'. Not much of an option there... Obama Paul Huntsman although that's kinda irrelevant given how leading the questions were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carpe Diem Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 stupid questions. For energy, every answer other than 'none of the above' started with 'increase domestic oil and gas production'. Not much of an option there... Obama Paul Huntsman although that's kinda irrelevant given how leading the questions were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbridled_id Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 The "moderators" were democratic hacks so it was little surprise that it was light on substance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 those are not leading questions. There really is NO candidate that is opposed to increasing domestic oil and gas production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverpig Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Of course they are leading questions. That was just one example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.