Ron Paul voted to not protect children from harm

page: 18
15
<< 15  16  17   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
You know, the more anti-RP threads appear, the happier I am.
No one hates on a loser.

Ron Paul has an excellent chance of winning the republican nomination for President Of The United States. If he does so, he will win, by a landslide. It won't even be close. even us black folks see through Barack Obama's ass now. I can't wait


P.S. the only(and incredibly major) downside is, TPTB will try to whack him and his son too. can't let that happen, no matter what.




posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Veilwalker
P.S. the only(and incredibly major) downside is, TPTB will try to whack him and his son too. can't let that happen, no matter what.


If they do, it'll be ON. People aren't too happy with TPTB right now, they've been getting sloppier and sloppier. It would be obvious if they took him out, or tried to. Then, peaceful change is out the _



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 


Thank you for your enlightened post. I suggest you rethink your deathsticks, oh, Fabian Socialist.

You have BIG wake up call coming to you... Learn or suffer... your choice.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by MainLineThis
reply to post by hawkiye
 


You are 100% correct, but as this thread has showed, normal folk are too stupid to see through it. That is why the "save the children b.s" works so well.....the average voter is an idiot, and lacks the intelligence to actually understand the base logic behind the very laws that govern them.

So, time and time again politicians will use the "save the children" garbage because they understand that people are frigging idiots and it works. Those that actually use logic, reason and common sense in their actions get idiotic thread like this one made about them, which was done either by a political hack, a paid internet troll...or one of the LEGIONS of ignorant American voters (that last one should scare the heck out of all of us).

I used to think the future was going to be so bright....with the advent of the internet....information at the tips of anyone's fingers....I thought the advancement of society would progress exponentially. Imagine my surprise when, 35 years later, I find that people are as stupid, if not dumberer (lol) than any time I can every remember.....

I would like to take this time to invent a time machine and go back 20 years or so to slap every mom and dad in America and tell them to pull their heads out of their asses and give two craps about the education of their children. We are now stuck with an entire generation of IDIOTS and we are all paying the price.....


I agree. Now see? I knew you had it in yuh bro.
~SheopleNation



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   
One question.
Why hasn't this thread been moved to HOAX.
Really.
Or, a TROLL forum?



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo


The measure would make it a crime to pander visual illustrations of children as child pornography.

What exactly does this mean? I don’t agree with criminalizing child porn drawings.


The government would be able to arrest and jail anyone who creates or processes drawings/illustrations that might be interpreted as depicting a child.

How a human being, especially an American, can read this law and not be absolutely livid is beyond me. Where's the outrage? Artists? Animators? Hollywood?

If I draw stick figures and scribble ages underneath I'll have to turn myself in. Welcome to 1984.


Originally posted by Ironclad

Also just read what one of the restrictions on the bill says... "The measure would make it a crime to pander visual illustrations of children as child pornography."

OK so this would mean any image of a child, any illustration...!! That is exactly what it will be, cause that is what it specifically states.. "VISUAL ILLUSTRATIONs"...!! This could literally mean any image at all..!!

Can't take pics of your kids enjoying a day at the beach, can't take pics of your kids in the school concert, cant take pics of your child’s first steps... Hell, no more children in the movies either..lol You'd be pushing child porn..!!!

So who writes these bills...? Mostly old middle aged busybodies from the bible group, who've never even had kids because they too frigid to take their clothes off to make them,...lol


This is why the separation of church and state is more important now than ever before. Imagine what a Rick Perry type could do if he attains influence and power. People will be burning on stakes on the White House lawn in no time.

As for the other laws addressed in this bill, do we really want more of the same? Right now we’re sending teenagers to jail and labeling them as lifetime sex offenders for taking photos of themselves, for having a girlfriend/boyfriend that’s a matter of days younger/older, for innocent pranks that harm nobody, etc.

Meanwhile, it’s the government that refuses to deal with bullying and harassment in schools. It’s the government that says it’s OK to literally beat children. If you read the news you’ll see stories all the time where it’s the government that’s sexually harassing and abusing children.

Whenever there's a law that's pandered to the public as 'for the children' I know it's a ruse to that will ultimately harm children and further infringe on our basic freedoms.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by HybridEB
 


Too bad RP didn't state this as the reason for not signing the bill, then he would have sounded like he wasn't just another clog in the machine repeating propaganda nonsense, as he does in his response.

RP is just another Mises style communist.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 


Perhaps you comment about the money that Child Protective Services obtains for each child "abdocted"
by this service, in particular the Texas CPS. There are many disgusting incidents; just Google them.

Or perhaps you could tell us about the Florida CPS; just Google them.

Hint: Ron Paul had nothing to do with either Child Protective Services.

So, tell me how Florida CPS can lose track of 4000 children and such events elude the FED GOV
AMBER system?

How can the Texas CPS perverts NOT attract the attention of the FED GOV AMBER system?



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 


Ron Paul is wrong about a lot of things, but this is not one of them.

Every problem does not have a federal solution.

This piece of "feel good legislation" one is not even well thought out. If you got Amber Alerts from 49 other states all the time, would you pay attention to the ones from your state or would you mind also filter them out? Practically speaking there are very few places where multi-state Amber Alerts would work and the media around those metropolitan areas would just be duplicated.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   
I can't believe this thread is 18 pages long.

The truth was ferreted out in the first 3 pages...

1) He voted against it because it would hurt the existing state level Amber Alert system. Thereby doing more harm than good.

2) The bill contained other amendments that stunk.

The premise of this thread is a good example of common disinformation techniques though.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 08:42 PM
link   
Just got back. Saw the insults. I give up.

Ron Paul is God. That's what everyone wants to hear.

Okay.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ClintK
Just got back. Saw the insults. I give up.

Ron Paul is God. That's what everyone wants to hear.

Okay.


I dont think anyone said Ron Paul is God, those are your words, not mine. However this thread was a gross misrepresentation of the facts. The sad part is people will read the sensationalized thread title, not actually think the Bill through, and they will swallow this garbage hook, line, sinker. Then they will go out and vote for the lesser of two evils then sit back and wonder why things are so screwed up.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by filosophia
 


So your kid get's abducted from a playground or somewhere and you wouldn't want every available resource to get that child back?

I find that hard to believe.


Yeah how often do you think the government would really actually care.

Are they going to send in the navy or air force to help you?

I don't think so.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by robyn
I can't believe this thread is 18 pages long.

The truth was ferreted out in the first 3 pages...

1) He voted against it because it would hurt the existing state level Amber Alert system. Thereby doing more harm than good.

2) The bill contained other amendments that stunk.

The premise of this thread is a good example of common disinformation techniques though.


3 pages?

Nah the first 3 posts did that already.

Move this to hoax please.





 
15
<< 15  16  17   >>

log in

join