It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So, You Think You Want Another POTUS From Texas Huh?

page: 2
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by whaaa
 

Any politician that even hints a revamping the social security, medicare, medicaid is doomed in today's geriatric political climate. Don't even think about touching my parents medicare.

The GOP can demonize Obama until they are blue in the face but all he has to do to be reelected is point out the GOPs stance on medicare.

The GOP needs to come up with a viable alternative and quick.

So what you're saying is the GOP then just needs to point out what the Social Security Administration itself is saying about the program, highlight what David Walker (former head of the GAO) has been pointing out about our national revenues for quite awhile now, and clarify that Paul's plan to cut the ridiculous overseas spending and channel half of the savings from that into shoring up the entitlement programs to take care of those dependent on them while allowing others to opt-out is the only realistic approach we've heard in some time now?




posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrianC
reply to post by whaaa
 


So we should support puppets to gain support of the sheep?


I don't really care. I'm leaving soon!

I'm just stating political reality. I work for local GOP candidates on their campaign's and they are scared ****less because they are being painted with the broad brush of national candidates. Campaigns are a science with lots of consultants, PR guys flopping back and forth to both parties depending on who is paying the best.
Campaigns are big business with lots of money being raised, spent, squandered and paid to articulate hired guns, media companies [me], pollsters, academics and outright charlatans. The season is upon us yeeehawwww!

It's politics....it's perception.... and facts and truth don't even enter into the equation. Haven't you learned anything since the last election?


Don't let your ideology get in the way of your common sense.

It's a brave new world. Nothing is as it seems and if you can't read between the lines....believe whatever you want if it makes you feel better because....

www.youtube.com...

edit on 25-8-2011 by whaaa because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 


Im sure any other the Blue states would love to have you.
Texas sure as hell doesnt want you, So if you dont like it, guess what, you can just get the **** out.

I have been to 46 states and numerous countries all over the world, and I can tell ya, Texas is great!
I was born a Texan and I will die a Texan.

Texas is God's country, if you dont like it, we dont give a hell.

bye Mr. flatfish, you wont be missed around these parts.

oh yeah, RON PAUL 2012!!!!!



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by whaaa
 


Trust me, I see where you're coming from, but looking at Paul's polling numbers makes me think this is the only chance we will get to try. Could Obama stop Paul by using this stuff against him? I'd say there's a 80% chance of it but I never thought I'd see the day where there is (in my mind) even a 20% chance of getting Paul into office. That being said, we fight now in the primaries because if Paul gains attention and gets destroyed by Obama then at least we can fall back on a safer pick for the GOP candidacy and I would gladly vote for anyone they choose over Obama.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Talltexxxan


Texas is God's country, if you dont like it, we dont give a hell.



I also am a born and raised Texan, proud of it, but never have I heard "we don't give a hell" used in Texas.

Now the phrase..."We don't give a ****" is heard all the time!

Sorry, I'm forced to call "cheese" on this one.


Have you ever heard the phrase "all hat, no cattle"?

Flatfish......I'd be proud to buy you a cold Shiner bock any time you are down on 6th in Austin!
edit on 25-8-2011 by whaaa because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 


It's not a matter of how small a percentage of federal spending that earmarks make up, it's the hypocrisy involved when someone goes around bragging about never voting for one when in fact, they authored 400 million dollars worth. To put an earmark in a bill, knowing the bill is going to pass, then bragging about not voting for the earmark is nothing short of pure unadulterated hypocrisy.

Medicare and Social Security are only unconstitutional if you accept Ron Paul's definition of the word "Welfare" in the U.S. Constitution, and I don't.

Regarding someone's right to discriminate at their place of business, I have to inquire; If you don't mind me asking, how old are you? Do you remember any of the "Whites Only" signs on restrooms and water fountains when you were a kid? I do! Have you ever worked in a business where they closed and locked the front door every time a black patron showed up? I have! Do you remember when black people were forced to ride in the back of the bus? I do! Did you ever hear of a business being forced to close because of people refusing to do business there due to their "Whites Only" policies? I haven't! This behavior didn't stop in America until it was outlawed and regardless of whether or not Ron Paul thinks it's OK, I Don't!

And ya'll wonder why he doesn't get the coverage in the main stream media.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fitch303
Hmm according to OP logic I guess we shouldn't have another black president since the one we have now is god awful?






no, that's according to your way of looking at logic....he's saying presidents from texas, didn't say anything about black presidents....see it's your fuzzy logic....



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Talltexxxan
reply to post by Flatfish
 


Im sure any other the Blue states would love to have you.
Texas sure as hell doesnt want you, So if you dont like it, guess what, you can just get the **** out.

I have been to 46 states and numerous countries all over the world, and I can tell ya, Texas is great!
I was born a Texan and I will die a Texan.

Texas is God's country, if you dont like it, we dont give a hell.

bye Mr. flatfish, you wont be missed around these parts.

oh yeah, RON PAUL 2012!!!!!


Yeah I believe you when you say you're a native Texan, I'd recognize that typical Texas republican swagger anywhere. Texas is a great state, I agree. It's just that we have a dirt bag of a governor and no matter how much you boast about everything being bigger & better in Texas, it doesn't make it true. I assure you that God doesn't favor Texas in any way and Texas is no better than anywhere else. As a matter of fact, I have clearly demonstrated that in many ways, it's worse.

Now for the bad news, I won't be leaving any time soon so it looks like you'll just have to put up with me.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa

Originally posted by Talltexxxan


Texas is God's country, if you dont like it, we dont give a hell.



I also am a born and raised Texan, proud of it, but never have I heard "we don't give a hell" used in Texas.

Now the phrase..."We don't give a ****" is heard all the time!

Sorry, I'm forced to call "cheese" on this one.


Have you ever heard the phrase "all hat, no cattle"?

Flatfish......I'd be proud to buy you a cold Shiner bock any time you are down on 6th in Austin!
edit on 25-8-2011 by whaaa because: (no reason given)


I might one day take you up on that offer. I'm up there quite often visiting my sister who lives on 6th. She puts me up overnight when my wife and I are up there participating in protest at the capitol building. I love Austin and maybe one day we'll have that cold Shiner together. Thanks.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   

In 1984, Perry was elected to the Texas House of Representatives as a Democrat from district 64 that included his home county of Haskell.
Perry supported Al Gore in the 1988 Democratic presidential primaries and chaired the Gore campaign in Texas.[19][20]
In 1989, Perry announced that he was joining the Republican Party
Wiki

Another establishment Politician no one as a Conservative should vote for. He seems no different than Arlen Specter that we had here in Pa. How many times can a Leopard change his spots? Looks like this Conservative will still lean towards Paul or an Independent. Also, If i recall, there was a thread here about Perry being at the Bilderburg conference recently?
edit on 8/25/2011 by mugger because: sp.

edit on 8/25/2011 by mugger because: (no reason given)



n 2001, Perry expressed his pride in the enactment of the statute extending in-state tuition to children of undocumented workers. He said: We must say to every Texas child learning in a Texas classroom, “we don’t care where you come from, but where you are going, and we are going to do everything we can to help you get there.” And that vision must include the children of undocumented workers. That’s why Texas took the national lead in allowing such deserving young minds to attend a Texas college at a resident rate
From above link.
Seems like the wrong answer to most law abiding tax paying Citizens.
edit on 8/25/2011 by mugger because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Janky Red will be taking bets that Rick Perry IS our new president once the right date rolls around.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa
The GOP can demonize Obama until they are blue in the face but all he has to do to be reelected is point out the GOPs stance on medicare and social security.


Obama has been doing that (along with shifting every iota of responsibility for everything from the depression to the debt to the germs that cause the gum disease known as gingivitis) off onto the GOP since his presidency began... check the polls. How's that strategy been working out for the man?


I'll not be voting for Perry in the primaries, but I'll cst my chit for him in the general election if he wins the nomination against Obama. Lesser of evils, yet again.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   
yep i already got a bumper sticker made up and its ready to go on my truck

"shut up i wanted paul now deal with it"

i do want another potus from texas dont like perry
edit on 25-8-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
yep i already got a bumper sticker made up and its ready to go on my truck

"shut up i wanted paul now deal with it"

i do want another potus from texas dont like perry
edit on 25-8-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


Yeah, I got mine ready too!



What do ya think?



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish

 

It's not a matter of how small a percentage of federal spending that earmarks make up, it's the hypocrisy involved when someone goes around bragging about never voting for one when in fact, they authored 400 million dollars worth. To put an earmark in a bill, knowing the bill is going to pass, then bragging about not voting for the earmark is nothing short of pure unadulterated hypocrisy.


Hello again, and thanks for the response. I suppose we'll just have to disagree on this one - apologies - as I don't see Paul bragging about not voting for the earmarks here. He was asked a question, and provided his response. I don't believe I've ever seen him campaigning on not supporting earmarks, and has actually been quite clear that he believes there should be more - in fact, that ALL congressional/gov't spending should be earmarked (article here.)


Medicare and Social Security are only unconstitutional if you accept Ron Paul's definition of the word "Welfare" in the U.S. Constitution, and I don't.


And how exactly do you define welfare? Sure, robbing Peter to pay Paul is great in theory, but it does MY welfare no good to take money from me in forcing me to support a system that under all current factors and estimates, I won't get to take advantage of. Additionally, a lot of other people who have paid in over the years prior to myself will also be left flat.

Additionally, our definition of welfare doesn’t matter – the definition intended by those writing the contract is all that matters, and the constitution itself also aids in interpretation.

Article 1 section 8 of the US Constitution says “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States”, and then goes on the list the enumerated powers of Congress:


To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress


You’ll notice the common defence clause at the opening, and then if you read the powers, you’ll see they also clarify HOW Congress can provide for the common defence as mentioned.

Jefferson himself addressed this well – in short, to assume the general welfare clause allows Congress to do anything as long as they claim that’s why they’re doing it wipes out any need for enumerated powers, as well as giving Congress a blank check for all SORTS of mischief (it could be in the 'general welfare' for them to mandate that all young girls take Gardasil like Perry did - we all know the government has no problem with a little collateral damage, right?):

“You will have learned that an act for internal improvement, after passing both houses, was negatived by the President. The act was founded, avowedly, on the principle that the phrase in the constitution, which authorizes Congress 'to lay taxes, to pay the debts and provide for the general welfare,' was an extension of the powers specifically enumerated to whatever would promote the general welfare; and this, you know, was the federal doctrine. Whereas, our tenet ever was, and, indeed, it is almost the only land-mark which now divides the federalists* from the republicans, that Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action: consequently, that the specification of powers is a limitation of the purposes for which they may raise money.” (FROM: THOMAS JEFFERSON TO: ALBERT GALLATIN. Monticello, June 16, 1817.)


Just since I've always loved how succinct and true this one is, I'll throw it in despite the redundancy:

Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction. --Thomas Jefferson, to W. Nichols (1803)



Regarding someone's right to discriminate at their place of business, I have to inquire; If you don't mind me asking, how old are you? Do you remember any of the "Whites Only" signs on restrooms and water fountains when you were a kid? I do! Have you ever worked in a business where they closed and locked the front door every time a black patron showed up? I have! Do you remember when black people were forced to ride in the back of the bus? I do! Did you ever hear of a business being forced to close because of people refusing to do business there due to their "Whites Only" policies? I haven't! This behavior didn't stop in America until it was outlawed and regardless of whether or not Ron Paul thinks it's OK, I Don't!

I'll admit, too young to personally remember that, but it doesn't disgust me any less either. I will not ever condone or agree with racism, but I think as a culture we have moved past that - whatever the initial motivation was. And if you'll research Paul's views, he sees racism as "an ugly form of collectivism" (and aside from the newsletters - likely ghostwritten by Rockwell, all of Paul's legacy is based on individual liberty and not seeing people on the basis of groups) - regardless, the government doesn't have any right to be telling people what they can or can't do with their private property. It sets a bad precedent and is just wrong, even if some people will be stupid with liberty (apologies, but Jefferson applies here again, as well):

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.


Imagine if the government, for the common welfare, decided that the goods sold by certain private businesses were too expensive for certain sectors of society to afford. Instead of taxing people to provide federal aid to help them buy these items, they instead decided to mandate that the businesses had to be subjected to price controls...you can extend this concept to a whole range of other possibilities, and the precedent is already set via the CRA. Yes, it has noble intentions, and some positive effects, but there can always be unintended consequences as well, in addition to other ways to bring about positive change.


And ya'll wonder why he doesn't get the coverage in the main stream media.

Actually issues like this make for great sensationalistic coverage, even if it's unfairly so and only due to a skewing and misunderstanding of his opinions on these matters. Regardless, there's plenty of other more likely explanations for that (some already given be the media themselves), and thus far it's not negatively impacting him, so I won't worry too much about it. However, I'm sure you'll see these brought up again ad infinitum once the new car smell wears off Perry and the other 'frontrunners' have dug up their own dirty laundry on each other, and Paul's left with enough continually-increasing support to be viewed as an actual threat.

Be well, friend.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Be a lot better than a chicago moron with a fake connecuit social security number...



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Perry was campaign manager for AL GORE!!

NOBODY stupid enough to work for Al Gore will ever get my vote for anything.

Ron Paul is steady and constant year after year on his principles.

RON PAUL 2012!!



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 



Actually I didn't know the majority of what you posted.

I want him to be President because of the platform he stands on. Not because Texas has their stuff together.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
I to am a native Texan. Not quite as long as the OP. But I have been here my whole life ( 24 years).


Take it from us... Just remember what happened the last time we elected the governor of Texas, POTUS.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 07:30 PM
link   
I really don't too much care about his politics. I have lived in Texas my whole life and have met Rick Perry quite a few times and he will not get my vote. Not because of his platform or views but because of the simple fact that he is the biggest, most arrogant as@#hole I have ever met. I don't like him on a personal level.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join