Ron Paul Reacts to Time Magazine "Bernanke Most Poweful In The World"

reply to post by Mak Manto

Look, the guy's spoken out of line WAY too many times. He's acting like a spoiled brat who's not able to get his way.

So, are you going to bother giving even one example of this claim, or are you going to just keep rambling off insults like a spoiled brat who is not able to get his way?

Like I said in another thread, if he believes that he'll gain the vote by putting down Obama, or Bernanke, or Pelosi, or Reid, he's out of his mind.

If you are referring to the presidency you are right, he's not going to win that because he won't ever get his party's nomination. Why? Because he doesn't fall in strict line with the GOP agenda. He can run as a third party candidate, but this country as a whole has their heads too far up their a$$es to vote for a third party candidate no matter how much better he is for the job.

If you are talking votes as in having his voice heard in the house, well it is you that is lacking in mental stability if you think that Ron Paul is not listened to carefully, that is why his face is seen more and more often on your television, because people are taking notice of what he has to say.

He's a little representative who'll never get anywhere. His son's in the same boat with him.

You know I had an entire paragraph typed up for this one before I decided that it would be better just to point and laugh at you.

Alright, I've been fighting the flu for the last few days, which is why I haven't been on, but I've seen my comments have generated a lot of hatred. So, I guess it's time to explain why I despise Ron Paul.

Now, unlike the rest of you who believe that Ron Paul is the savior, I don't fall into the category that I either LIKE THE GUY or HATE THE GUY.

I agree with Ron Paul on several positions, such as the fact he believes strongly in protecting the internet for the people, so corporations aren't allowed to block content.

But, for the most part, his ideas and views are insane.

Such as the fact he's a silent racist. His newsletters have shown that he bigot and a racist of black people.

Other things are things that I hate with many conservatives (and he is a conservative with many issues), such as the DADT policy, voting against rights for gay marriages, etc.

Plus, civil rights should not be left up to the states, because if one state allows something, another state may not allow it. When it comes to certain issues, the government should be left to decide it, which is something he is against.

And yes, Majiq, I'm talking about the presidency. He'll never be president. Don't buy me with that crap of "The right-wing and left-wing would never allow him to be President" crap. He's unable to be anything other then a one show pony.

Seeing he's a doctor who's been opposed to universal health care, now it's the time where he's giving out his energy.

Once this bill passes, though, he'll fade back to his usual activities.

Originally posted by Mak Manto
Alright, I've been fighting the flu for the last few days, which is why I haven't been on, but I've seen my comments have generated a lot of hatred. So, I guess it's time to explain why I despise Ron Paul.

Now, unlike the rest of you who believe that Ron Paul is the savior, I don't fall into the category that I either LIKE THE GUY or HATE THE GUY.

Um.. Ok, which is it? Do you despise him as you state at the end of the first paragraph, or do you not fall into the category of I HATE THE GUY, as stated at the end of paragraph 2?

I agree with Ron Paul on several positions, such as the fact he believes strongly in protecting the internet for the people, so corporations aren't allowed to block content.

But, for the most part, his ideas and views are insane.

Such as the fact he's a silent racist. His newsletters have shown that he bigot and a racist of black people.

Care to post a newsletter or two giving these racist views of his? If you are referring to his stance against Affirmative Action well that makes me, as well as a quickly growing segment of the black community racist as well.

Other things are things that I hate with many conservatives (and he is a conservative with many issues), such as the DADT policy, voting against rights for gay marriages, etc.

He has said that the DADT policy is sufficient. In a perfect world gays & lesbians could serve openly, but this isn't a perfect world. Openly gay recruits would cause a great deal of distraction.

Is it right for people to be so distracted by the sexuality of someone else? I don't think so, but it is still a fact. DADT gives gay people the ability to serve even if it isn't a perfect place we live in.

As far as voting against gay marriage, I'm not sure what you are talking about. Yes, he did vote against a constitutional amendment that would federally guarantee the rights of marriage to gays, but he also voted against an amendment that would define marriage as only between a man and a woman. His stance on this has always been that he believes marriage should be something that the government does not meddle with.

Plus, civil rights should not be left up to the states, because if one state allows something, another state may not allow it. When it comes to certain issues, the government should be left to decide it, which is something he is against.

Exactly what issues is it that you think should be mandated by the government that he is against?

And yes, Majiq, I'm talking about the presidency. He'll never be president. Don't buy me with that crap of "The right-wing and left-wing would never allow him to be President" crap. He's unable to be anything other then a one show pony.

Whether or not he would be elected if he were to gain his parties nomination is something that people can debate forever. The fact is that he isn't going to get the GOP nomination because he refuses to give up some of his beliefs that are not 100% along the parties guidelines. So you are right, he will never be president.

Seeing he's a doctor who's been opposed to universal health care, now it's the time where he's giving out his energy.

Once this bill passes, though, he'll fade back to his usual activities.

Anyone with any common sense is against universal health care in America. Unfortunately most U.S. citizens have no common sense on this issue so It will be passed, and will be a massive failure. It will cost tax payers billions and cause the quality of health care in the country to plummet.

Here is a good page that covers pros and cons to UHC. I think everyone should check it out.

Originally posted by Mak Manto
What a stupid little twit...

Honestly, he's the biggest horse's ass in the world.

Don't talk about yourself like that.

Oh was that a cheep thing to say? Really, just look at what they did to him during the race in 07/08. That alone tells you he is good for the people and not for TPTB.

[edit on 21-12-2009 by 22-250]

[edit on 21-12-2009 by 22-250]

Um.. OK, which is it? Do you despise him as you state at the end of the first paragraph, or do you not fall into the category of I HATE THE GUY, as stated at the end of paragraph 2?

I despise him, don't get me wrong, but it's not black and white. Do you not like a politician? Most likely you do, but there is most likely some issues you agree with him on.

The guy's crazy, but I still agree with him nonetheless.

Care to post a newsletter or two giving these racist views of his? If you are referring to his stance against Affirmative Action well that makes me, as well as a quickly growing segment of the black community racist as well.

Making an argument against affirmative action is one thing. Stating that they're barbarians and that the riots only ended because they needed to go get their welfare checks is sickening. It's racist, and he's a bigot.

He has said that the DADT policy is sufficient. In a perfect world gays & lesbians could serve openly, but this isn't a perfect world. Openly gay recruits would cause a great deal of distraction.

Is it right for people to be so distracted by the sexuality of someone else? I don't think so, but it is still a fact. DADT gives gay people the ability to serve even if it isn't a perfect place we live in.

Then it works both ways. If homosexuals aren't allowed to talk, neither are heterosexuals. That way, we can make it fair for everybody.

Exactly what issues is it that you think should be mandated by the government that he is against?

LGBT rights, embryonic stem cell research, and abortion to show the three most important.

Anyone with any common sense is against universal health care in America. Unfortunately most U.S. citizens have no common sense on this issue so It will be passed, and will be a massive failure. It will cost tax payers billions and cause the quality of health care in the country to plummet.

See, the thing is, we're already costing tax payers billions of dollars every years because of privatized health care. I don't understand where you think it's going good.

Universal health care is NEEDED.

[edit on 21/12/09 by Mak Manto]

reply to post by Mak Manto

Making an argument against affirmative action is one thing. Stating that they're barbarians and that the riots only ended because they needed to go get their welfare checks is sickening. It's racist, and he's a bigot.

Once again I would ask you to post a link that shows where he made those statements. If you can that would be great, if not then you are just making ridicules accusations.

Then it works both ways. If homosexuals aren't allowed to talk, neither are heterosexuals. That way, we can make it fair for everybody.

Like I said before, I wish that an openly gay person could serve with no problems, but unfortunately that isn't the case. Openly gay people in the military would cause disruptions among the men, and that is something that we can't have in a combat situation.

"We don’t get our rights because we’re gays or women or minorities. We get our rights from our creator as individuals. So every individual should be treated the same way. So if there is homosexual behavior in the military that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. But if there’s heterosexual sexual behavior that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. So it isn’t the issue of homosexuality, it’s the concept and the understanding of individual rights." - Ron Paul - 2007 GOP debate at Saint Anselm College

It looks as if Mr. Paul is in agreement with you however, being openly straight doesn't cause the same disruptions

LGBT rights, embryonic stem cell research, and abortion to show the three most important.

Once again I don't really see what he has done to hurt the rights of gays other than not supporting an amendment to the constitution to define marriage, but then he is against that across the board for either side of the argument.

As far as abortion and stem cell research, those are two areas that I disagree with him on. I think stem cell research is important, and I am pro-choice (Although I do believe that controls should be put into place so that abortion cannot be used as birth control.)

See, the thing is, we're already costing tax payers billions of dollars every years because of privatized health care. I don't understand where you think it's going good.

Universal health care is NEEDED.

No, we are costing taxpayers billions from partially socialized health care (medicaid/medicare) and I don't think it's going good. I feel that those programs are necessary, but need reform. This broken system covers about 20% of people, and you think the thing to fix it is to put 100% of the country on medicare?


HERE
is a good page to look at all the pro's & con's of socialized health care