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.

 

The GOP Debate: Reagan Library

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 



Ron Paul was a physician and has received the most military donations compared to all candidates combined and was the only one on the podium to have served.
Yeah he actually called them out for not asking him even though he was a physician. The military donations should have been brought up, but nope, they decided to ask him about FEMA and TSA....


But that Trust ad he created was nationally posted and should have ran twice during the debates on commercial time.
You're right I forgot all about that. I didn't have MSNBC though so I had to watch it online, but I saw the commercial on The Daily Paul earlier today.




posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuervo
You just pointed out the problem. We SHOULD have free trade within our borders. Not outside. Outside our borders, trade should be heavily tariffed.

Free trade within borders = deregulation
heavily tarrifed trade internationally = a Gandhi-like principle

few people understand this



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by The Old American
 





ETA: I miscounted. He got 7 directed to him, but 3 of them were afterthoughts. He was not directed a question of healthcare, but he answered it anyway.


I never counted the questions....just noticed they he was often speaking. I did not watch the last part of the debate, so if it was skewed then...i didn't see it...but what i did watch..he had plenty of time to speak.

I also need to remind you that there are other Republican candidates out there who didn't even get to be there.

The best Republican candidate....Roemer...probably one that millions would most likely vote for...wasn't even invited.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 



We SHOULD have free trade within our borders.

We do have free trade within our borders.



Not outside. Outside our borders, trade should be heavily tariffed.

No...... You do realize that when the U.S was a manufacturing power house we sold most of our goods overseas? If European countries would've imposed heavy tariffs on us, most U.S firms would've went out of business.

It's funny how you didn't answer my question though: What's the difference between Maryland trading with Sweden from Maryland trading with New York?



But... even in the best of times under our current philosophies, there comes a point in the game where the game board needs shaken up. Capitalism is wrong. Communism is wrong. We need to make room for something different. Something better.

Yes, you're a socialist. I understand, but we aren't talking about that.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by The Old American
 





ETA: I miscounted. He got 7 directed to him, but 3 of them were afterthoughts. He was not directed a question of healthcare, but he answered it anyway.


I never counted the questions....just noticed they he was often speaking. I did not watch the last part of the debate, so if it was skewed then...i didn't see it...but what i did watch..he had plenty of time to speak.

I also need to remind you that there are other Republican candidates out there who didn't even get to be there.

The best Republican candidate....Roemer...probably one that millions would most likely vote for...wasn't even invited.


What I said was harsh. I apologize. But it's frustrating to the MSM so blatantly just ignore him. Yes, he is my candidate. But this was supposed to be a debate between 7 candidates, and only 2 of them were really represented. This was set up as a "Romney vs. Perry" boxing match, not a debate on issues.

/TOA



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockdisjoint
 





No...... You do realize that when the U.S was a manufacturing power house we sold most of our goods overseas? If European countries would've imposed heavy tariffs on us, most U.S firms would've went out of business.


Tariffs are needed on countries that pay slave labor wages. If not they will simply sap all the jobs from other countries....as has happened here. If this isn't done, the only way to get the jobs back is to also pay slave labor wages.

We can have "free trade" with countries that actually make it "fair" to actually have free trade. I have no problems with that...but what is happening right now it completely destructive to our country.

We have a massive trade deficit that has to be fixed. What would you rather have? Slave wages or a tax on imports (those based on slave labor especially)?

The hopes is...eventually jobs come back...imports go down...unless the countries allowing slave labor change their practices....which again...is still good for the US job situation at home. Products will cost more...but it will also be easier for american small businesses to compete.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Remembering what it was like to be left out in 2008 as a Ron Paul supporter I will tell you who is getting left out this time, it's Newt Gingrich. He always has something interesting to say and offers insight and seems to have a strong understanding of all these issues and they really ignore him. I was impressed by pretty much everyone on the stage tonight. I like Huntsman a lot. I think Perry and Santorum are the only ones who really come across badly. I think Bachmann lost my interest a long time ago, though tonight she looked pretty good it's not enough to save her image.

Ron Paul continues to impress me. I still think they ask him tough questions, but he always fires back. Sometimes it's not perfect but you have to admit that man has handled so many questions that were very difficult and pretty much designed to make him look like a kook, and he handles almost all of them with flying colors.

But if the republicans choose Perry as the leading guy? That's ridiculous when you have 4 or 5 very strong people up there. Romney, Cain, Huntsman, Paul, and Gingrich are so much better than Perry I don't understand why the establishment GOP can't choose at least one of those over Perry who looks ridiculous and is ridiculous.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:15 PM
link   
Roemer is this years Ron Paul:

Roemer excluded from Republican debate




"The Godfather of Obamacare will also be allowed to defend his unconstitutional law; there will be a former pizza chain executive who discriminates against the Muslim faith; and there will be someone on stage who thinks it's more important to vacation in Hawaii than to campaign for the most important office of the free world," Sierra said, respectively, of Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Godfather's Pizza CEO Herman Cain and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. "I don't know about you," Sierra continued in the email, "But I'm truly disgusted by our system right now."



Furthermore, Roemer's decision to not accept donations greater than $100 and to not accept money from Political Action Committees has left his campaign with an emptier piggy bank than his opponents. "It's going to be a long, tough process with the rules we've put on ourselves, but it's the right thing to do," Sierra said. Despite being excluded from the nationally televised Politico/NBC News debate, Roemer will step into the spotlight the evening before the Sept. 7 event.


www.theadvertiser.com...|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

I don't know much about the guy, but what I have read and seen...i have to admit...I like. He's against all big money in politics. that's a huge plus to actually getting government to work again. Plus...he anti-free trade

Look at this man......I LOVE IT!!!!

www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 7-9-2011 by David9176 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 



Tariffs are needed on countries that pay slave labor wages. If not they will simply sap all the jobs from other countries....as has happened here. If this isn't done, the only way to get the jobs back is to also pay slave labor wages.

You do realize that U.S workers also made low wages [5 cent per hour] at one point in time? As for them ``sapping`` jobs away, who cares? I didn't see anyone complaining about China when our economy was booming. When our economy was booming the last thing on a U.S workers mind was making crappy trinkets in a factory.



We can have "free trade" with countries that actually make it "fair" to actually have free trade. I have no problems with that...but what is happening right now it completely destructive to our country.

How is China not playing fair? The U.S is the world reserve currency here, not China. Their currency manipulation may seem unfair to you, but it's necessary for them to compete in the global economy. How come you're not upset about Americas currency manipulation?



We have a massive trade deficit that has to be fixed. What would you rather have? Slave wages or a tax on imports (those based on slave labor especially)?

Our current trade and account deficits are caused by govt, not by a lack of production, since the U.S still manufactures somethings -- like planes, yachts, big machinery and other stuff like that.



The hopes is...eventually jobs come back...imports go down...unless the countries allowing slave labor change their practices....which again...is still good for the US job situation at home. Products will cost more...but it will also be easier for american small businesses to compete.

Cutting off trade with China wouldn't ``return`` any jobs to the U.S, if anything it will create a war. If god was real and he decided to give all Americans free food forever, would you want to stop him to save U.S jobs? Probably not, so why make everyone pay more for everyday items just to [supposedly] create jobs?
edit on 7-9-2011 by Rockdisjoint because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by Janky Red

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by Janky Red
Bush and Perry have both Murdered innocent people

T
O
T
A
L
I
T
A
R
I
A
N

People clapping yee haw!!! (Bomb Iraq, bomb wherever!)

Lets kill people, to show people that killing people is wrong!


JANKY....if you don't realize that both parties have had blood on their hands for a long time....then I hope you will look it up. Split Infinity


I don't cheer, smile and smirk about killing people


Past and Present leaders of both parties do...and have. Split Infinity


I didn't cheer

I shuddered when that audience erupted into cheers

That audience has the lets Bomb Iraq gene



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
reply to post by David9176
 




You do realize that U.S workers also made low wages [5 cent per hour] at one point in time? As for them ``sapping`` jobs away, who cares? I didn't see anyone complaining about China when our economy was booming. When our economy was booming the last thing on a U.S workers mind was making crappy trinkets in a factory.


You do realize that D is an American patriot don't you?

Things have changed, the dynamic with China needs to be adjusted.



How come you're not upset about Americas currency manipulation?


Probably because he cares about this country



Our current trade and account deficits are caused by govt, not by a lack of production, since the U.S still manufactures somethings -- like planes, yachts, big machinery and other stuff like that.


Bull, plain and simple, companies are taking advantage of a huge income disparity between the two nations,
unless you are blaming the Chinese government, who could legislate better wage floors. American Oligarchs became rich because of American production, this nation is being turned into a consumption/service economy
which is what constitutes a third world model. Crash the wage floor, instate a true third world economy and then
reintroduce production, when you can pay people Republican prices.




so why make everyone pay more for everyday items just to [supposedly] create jobs?
edit on 7-9-2011 by Rockdisjoint because: (no reason given)


An economy based upon consumption becomes like the relationship with the OIL companies, no real competition, flat lined demand and an ever growing desire to shave more and more money off of the overhead,
workers.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 





You do realize that D is an American patriot don't you?


Shhh....don't tell anyone. Virtually every stance I have is in defense of our country and the people that live under the same laws and beliefs I do....friends and neighbors and those I share my walk of life with.

Anyway, I prefer to be called a communist, socialist, racist, fascist, neo-con, libertarian, isolationist, etc.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by Janky Red
 





You do realize that D is an American patriot don't you?


Shhh....don't tell anyone. Virtually every stance I have is in defense of our country and the people that live under the same laws and beliefs I do....friends and neighbors and those I share my walk of life with.

Anyway, I prefer to be called a communist, socialist, racist, fascist, neo-con, libertarian, isolationist, etc.


Well I am get tired of being told this insane B.S

feeding someone makes em hungry

laying blacktop to repair a road ain't real work

teachers, firefighter and policemen are all thugs

The way you get more money into the hands of the working class is to make it easier for billionaires to
hoard more and more money.

It is like the whole playbook is based on Peyote



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint

Yes, you're a socialist. I understand, but we aren't talking about that.


You caught me. But, yeah... we are sort of talking about that. We are talking about where to have free trade and where to not have it. The corporations that survived because of cheap international trade did so at the detriment of the United States.

If you charge nothing for domestic trade and charged everything for foreign trade... the desperate would still trade domestically and the greedy would still trade foreign. The shift would be nothing but fair.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 



You do realize that D is an American patriot don't you? Things have changed, the dynamic with China needs to be adjusted.

That's just it patriots just don't think about the negative effects of their supposed actions. A trade war with China would be horrible, on top of that imagine if European countries would have heavily tariffed the U.S after WWII where would we be without them?



Probably because he cares about this country

And america's currency manipulation hurts this country.........



American Oligarchs became rich because of American production, this nation is being turned into a consumption/service economy

The differences between what is considered service and manufacturing are completely fallacious. If you ``patriots`` want to return U.S ``manufacturing`` into what it use to be, go ahead and do that -- if people wanna buy your stuff they will.

But don't force me to buy your products that I probably won't even like through tariffs. If I want to buy Chinese goods I should have the option to do that.



Crash the wage floor, instate a true third world economy and then reintroduce production, when you can pay people Republican prices.

Why would they instate a socialist economy in the U.S? Even if they did it's because people voted for it so they'll deserve it.



An economy based upon consumption becomes like the relationship with the OIL companies, no real competition, flat lined demand and an ever growing desire to shave more and more money off of the overhead, workers.

The U.S still manufacturers some stuff we should manufacture more, but who is stopping you from opening up your own manufacturing company? How many Americans actually ``want`` to work in a factory making baseball caps and other kick-knacks?



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint


That's just it patriots just don't think about the negative effects of their supposed actions. A trade war with China would be horrible, on top of that imagine if European countries would have heavily tariffed the U.S after WWII where would we be without them?


Not a trade war, fair policy.

Europe didn't do that, probably because America helped liberate Europe.




And america's currency manipulation hurts this country.........


You mean China?




The differences between what is considered service and manufacturing are completely fallacious. If you ``patriots`` want to return U.S ``manufacturing`` into what it use to be, go ahead and do that -- if people wanna buy your stuff they will.


How is it fallacious? We have, more and more store fronts, who are virtually selling China direct for the benefit
of China and a few core business owners. That is not the American model, that is why America is hurting



But don't force me to buy your products that I probably won't even like through tariffs. If I want to buy Chinese goods I should have the option to do that.


You are in China?



Why would they instate a socialist economy in the U.S? Even if they did it's because people voted for it so they'll deserve it.


I don't know what you are talking about, are you imitating idiot? Its not your look, sorry



The U.S still manufacturers some stuff we should manufacture more, but who is stopping you from opening up your own manufacturing company? How many Americans actually ``want`` to work in a factory making baseball caps and other kick-knacks?


I don't want to open up a manufacturing company thank you... If you like China so much, why are you here
discussing American politics with people who care for America? Talk to your Republican corporatist friends,
you father will listen to you I'm sure.
edit on 8-9-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 



You caught me. But, yeah... we are sort of talking about that. We are talking about where to have free trade and where to not have it. The corporations that survived because of cheap international trade did so at the detriment of the United States.

We don't really even have free trade atm, the U.S current trade set up isn't that free at all. It's actually very restrictive. Some companies can trade some can't, the U.S still has tariffs on Mexico among many other countries, etc, etc....

I would call america's current trade, anti-free trade and even protectionist in several areas.



If you charge nothing for domestic trade and charged everything for foreign trade... the desperate would still trade domestically and the greedy would still trade foreign. The shift would be nothing but fair.

Fair to who? Would it be fair to all the Chinese workers who lost their job? Would it be fair for U.S workers who are shifted into manufacturing even though many of them probably won't want to be there?

Would it be fair the U.S consumers [who are already struggling] to pay 10 times more just for toothbrushes, socks, shoes and many other things? I'm not seeing this ``fairness`` here......



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Rockdisjoint
 


If i'm understanding you, you don't know what you're talking about.

America is in this jam because wealthy business owners have hijacked the government and manipulated it so they can get laws they need to make them more money passed. They have taken the economy global...of which America has NO chance of competing in our accustomed lifestyle.

Meaning, we Americans have gotten used to living a middle class lifestyle. The rest of the world (majority) is used to a low class lifestyle. With the economy being GLOBAL, companies (in the name of capitalism) make a decision to move their production facilities to Third World countries. Why not, when you don't have to provide healthcare and you pay workers $1 per day.

Take time and digest that.

The very thing that had us living middle class (factories) have been taken away in the name of capitalism, and placed in China, Mexico, etc. We have been left with a sprinkling of factories, a few high end positions and millions of LOW INCOME jobs! We've morphed from a world leader in manufacturing to a services based country. No actual labor, just paperwork.

On the contrary, the countries our factories have relocated too, are beginning to form a middle class! Reason being....they have the components that CREATE a middle class.

This peaves me....MANY people are talking out their a## and don't know what they're talking about. Especially people on this site who are quick to call someone "socialist" and declare their hatred for Obama....when they're actually cutting their own throats!

They come in here and other boards FIGHTING for capitalism when capitalism has royally BENT THEM OVER! They don't realize that America has LOST in the game of CAPITALISM! It's capitalism that has them losing their homes and possessions. Yet they misdirect their attention toward Obama and government. Screaming about socialism and marxism...showing they're just rehashing talking points from puppets like Rush.

The wealthy have paid billions to enlist trailer park wonnabe Republicans into their ranks to fight their war for them. They used terms like socialism and Marx and patriotism, and suddenly they have every beer bellied hillbilly believing they have to fight this evil socialism. All the while they're grinning and laughing while the poor and middle class Republican basically say this:

"Up with capitalism! Down with socialism! No more theft! CORPORATIONS HAVE A RIGHT to move their factories to China! We will fight so that in the name of capitalism, Mr. CEO can move his company to India and pay them $1 per day....it's his Right!


Then they look round and wonder why their job which was previously paying the mortgage and sending the kids to college is gone. DUMB AZZ...you sent it away! Like the old bugs bunny cartoon where he would be arguing with Daffy saying "yes" while Daffy is saying "no" and after a few exchanges, Bugs would say "no" and Daffy switches to saying "yes" in effect winning the argument for Bugs.

***This isn't all directed at the person I replied too, but for everyone to see***



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint

Fair to who? Would it be fair to all the Chinese workers who lost their job? Would it be fair for U.S workers who are shifted into manufacturing even though many of them probably won't want to be there?


And you think Americans want to stand there, with a name badge selling the stuff???




Would it be fair the U.S consumers [who are already struggling] to pay 10 times more just for toothbrushes, socks, shoes and many other things? I'm not seeing this ``fairness`` here......


They are struggling since the introduction of this model, which is based upon the very toothbrushes, socks, shoes and many other things



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


Not a trade war, fair policy.
Europe didn't do that, probably because America helped liberate Europe.

Lol, but it's okay for the U.S to do it even though China is helping the U.S govt just stay afloat?



You mean China?

No, I meant the U.S ignore my location thing.



How is it fallacious? We have, more and more store fronts, who are virtually selling China direct for the benefit of China and a few core business owners. That is not the American model, that is why America is hurting

In a way an economy is always a service economy. Servicing and manufacturing are both processes of production and the utility of the goods being produced always comes from the value of the service it contributes to satisfy others.



You are in China?

No, I live in the U.S but I like Asian products. If I want to go to the store and buy Japanese manga, I should be able to do that without paying artificially high prices meant to force me to buy U.S made comics.



I don't know what you are talking about, are you imitating idiot? Its not your look, sorry

You said they would instate a 3rd world economy and 3rd world economies are normally socialist, I thought that is what you meant. I'm not going to talk to you any more if you're going to call me names though, be nice.



I don't want to open up a manufacturing company thank you...

You might not want to, but some people probably do and they should have the option to do that rather than sitting around and begging corporations to come back and give them a job... the U.S use to be full of entrepreneurs.



If you like China so much, why are you here discussing American politics with people who care for America?

I like the U.S and I care for the U.S I just don't think cutting off trade with China would help the U.S. In fact I think it will greatly impoverish the rest of the U.S. The same way the smoot–hawley tariff act intend to increase U.S jobs during the great depression did nothing but increase unemployment and poverty.



Talk to your Republican corporatist friends, you father will listen to you I'm sure.

Dude protectionism IS republicanism, free trade is a liberal idea and even FDR ran on free trade..... Free trade was working just fine until Reagan came along... and began to regulate it.


In the United States, the decade from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s saw import quotas placed on textiles, agricultural products, automobiles, sugar, beef, bananas, and even underwear — among other things. In a single session of Congress in 1985, more than three hundred protectionist bills were introduced as U.S. industries began voicing concern over foreign competition. www.answers.com...


Bush was also a protectionist, iirc he tried to shield americas steel industry I'm not sure how that ended though. Lincoln was a protectionist too and so was Hoover.
edit on 8-9-2011 by Rockdisjoint because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join