Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Tonight South Carolina Presidential debate 9pm EST - join me to discuss it live.

page: 29
27
<< 26  27  28    30 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Wookiep
 


" Let Thee that is Without Sin, Cast The First Stone "..............JC .......+




posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 02:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Y2KJMan


Here is a montage of RP today... courtesy of the Daily Paul


At the end they show that twitter bar where Ron Paul is in the green the whole night, and Romney is in the red. Everywhere I go and no matter who I talk to I have met only one Romney supporter who simply said, "nah you gotta go with the frontrunner, you'll understand when your older."

I see a lack of Romney support everywhere and it baffles me that he seems to be number one nationally. People should realize, as I know most of you do, that Ron Paul is quite possibly our last chance at this. IMO we don;t have another four years at this rate.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by WhereAreTheGoodguys
 



OutKast
The boo's came during questions about War and what not. If you are still around I'd like to ask you what is your personal stance on War in general and then the War on Terror ... and if you have time the NDAA ?


I'm not for war...which is why I'm not a Republican. I agree with Ron Paul on his foreign policy...it's his domestic policy that I think is crazy.

Ron Paul getting boo'd for his anti-war stance at a Republican debate should be expected...but for some reason Ron Paul supporters think that since Ron Paul said it, the Republican base should throw out their foreign policy platform and bow down to him.

I've said it so many times now...Ron Paul has a duplicity issue. Conservatives like his domestic policy and hate his foreign policy, Liberals like his foreign policy and hate his domestic issues.

There is a very small minority that actually agree with both...that is his passionate base (10-15%). The rest of the votes he gets are Conservatives that are willing to sacrafice their beliefs in foreign policy to support his domestic policy or Liberals that are willing to sacrafice their beliefs in their domestic policies to support his foreign policy...this is another 5% or so.

This is why Ron Paul won't ever be elected.



Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Ron Paul have to get Domestic laws, etc. passed through House and Senate? I mean it's not like he has absolute power to pass any law. Likely, there would be resistance considering how corrupt the whole government is...and because of this there would be a "movement" towards his policies but they would remain grounded by the stubborn minds of congress and the like...If I may ask, what about his Domestic Policy concerns you?



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 03:56 AM
link   
it's pretty sad to see "journalists" intentionally manipulating and twisting Ron Pauls quotes to try and turn the audience against him.

these morons don't give a rats ass about law or the constitution, don't worry America, Goldman Sachs, I mean Mitt Romney will make it all better!



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I've said it so many times now...Ron Paul has a duplicity issue. Conservatives like his domestic policy and hate his foreign policy, Liberals like his foreign policy and hate his domestic issues.

There is a very small minority that actually agree with both...that is his passionate base (10-15%). The rest of the votes he gets are Conservatives that are willing to sacrafice their beliefs in foreign policy to support his domestic policy or Liberals that are willing to sacrafice their beliefs in their domestic policies to support his foreign policy...this is another 5% or so.

This is why Ron Paul won't ever be elected.


That all sounds very insightful and compelling, until you realize that under Obama, "liberals" are asked to sacrifice both their domestic and foreign policy principles for the sake of "not being too leftist".

They fact is, Obama is so far to the extreme right that if Ron Paul's foreign policy is all "liberals" are going to get out of him, they will.

That's why Ron Paul could indeed get elected. All this "unelectable" propaganda from Fox must have infected your brain through repetition. I'm no fan of Ron Paul, but the fact is, there are large segments of the American populace willing to vote for him out of sheer desperation.

Obama is a sell out, a coward, a two-faced hypocrite, a pathological liar and a tool, who has sought after and executed the betrayal of his own base to perfection.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


What are his domestic policies? I'm aware his foreign policies are along the lines of "We're not the world police", which I agree with.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by shadowland8
 



His domestic policy is pretty amazing. He essentially wants to restore rights to the individual and states, limit the scope of federal power, end the federal reserve and promote sound money, eliminate waste in govt, End the "Nanny State" Repeal tax code's, (no income tax). End the war on drugs. Repeal the patriot act. Stop bills like SOPA, NDAA.


-
-
-



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I've said it so many times now...Ron Paul has a duplicity issue. Conservatives like his domestic policy and hate his foreign policy, Liberals like his foreign policy and hate his domestic issues.

There is a very small minority that actually agree with both...that is his passionate base (10-15%). The rest of the votes he gets are Conservatives that are willing to sacrafice their beliefs in foreign policy to support his domestic policy or Liberals that are willing to sacrafice their beliefs in their domestic policies to support his foreign policy...this is another 5% or so.

This is why Ron Paul won't ever be elected.


That all sounds very insightful and compelling, until you realize that under Obama, "liberals" are asked to sacrifice both their domestic and foreign policy principles for the sake of "not being too leftist".

They fact is, Obama is so far to the extreme right that if Ron Paul's foreign policy is all "liberals" are going to get out of him, they will.

That's why Ron Paul could indeed get elected. All this "unelectable" propaganda from Fox must have infected your brain through repetition. I'm no fan of Ron Paul, but the fact is, there are large segments of the American populace willing to vote for him out of sheer desperation.

Obama is a sell out, a coward, a two-faced hypocrite, a pathological liar and a tool, who has sought after and executed the betrayal of his own base to perfection.


Obama has already lost the election. The US economy is wrapped around his neck.
Too many people are unemployed. In an actual election the undecided voters usually vote
for the challenger.

Translation: ABO wins in a landslide victory. ABO = Anybody But Obama

I'm sure the DNC has already speed dialed Hillary Clinton. Get ready. We are just
waiting for the unemployment rate to jump above 9%.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by buni11687
In my opinion, this debate was....so-so. It started out pretty strong, especially with all the attacks against Romney. I think Gingrich, Santorum, and Perry did better than expected.

Romney took some hits tonight. My favorite was when Santorum called him out for avoiding the question in the beginning of the debate. Im not sure how much these attacks will affect his numbers though.

As a Paul supporter, I think he did very good. But when he was asked about the Bin Laden raid, the audience was very torn during that part. I dont think it will hurt his current support (Obviously I still support Paul) , but Im not sure how well it will go over with other Republican voters in SC
edit on 16-1-2012 by buni11687 because: (no reason given)


As usual, Fox News did an excellent job running the Presidential Debate.

Fair and balanced.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 
It is not always easy to clearly define the "Good Guys" from the "Bad Guys" when trying to wake up the "Dumbed Down & Brainwashed" but I have found that being a member or participant in the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) is one of the "Tells" I look for. Maybe those of you faced with the same problem when trying to wake friends and family up will find this brief video of help:



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   
So even fox showed that rp was ahead in the twitter replies on everything all night. What is it going to take to get this guy off the "unelectable" label?

Also with romney in the red all night, plus the we will say, "mixed" reports from other states how is he still in the lead and so "electable"



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by snowcrash911That all sounds very insightful and compelling, until you realize that under Obama, "liberals" are asked to sacrifice both their domestic and foreign policy principles for the sake of "not being too leftist".

They fact is, Obama is so far to the extreme right that if Ron Paul's foreign policy is all "liberals" are going to get out of him, they will.

That's why Ron Paul could indeed get elected. All this "unelectable" propaganda from Fox must have infected your brain through repetition. I'm no fan of Ron Paul, but the fact is, there are large segments of the American populace willing to vote for him out of sheer desperation.

Obama is a sell out, a coward, a two-faced hypocrite, a pathological liar and a tool, who has sought after and executed the betrayal of his own base to perfection.


Couldn't agree more. Yet, the soundbite of Obama as an extreme leftist/socialist still sells like hotcakes. The fact is, the left and the middle elected a neo-FDR. We got George W. Bush's third term. In fact, I would go so far as to say that some of the stuff that has happened under Obama is WORSE than it would've been under Bush. The guy is pathetic. And I voted for him.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by samcrow
 


So this November 2012 you will voting for ABO?

Anybody But Obama



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by samcrow
 


So this November 2012 you will voting for ABO?

Anybody But Obama


Not sure yet. But, I can tell you who I WON'T vote for: Romney, Santorum, Perry, or Gingrich. I have issues with the way Paul has handled certain things throughout the campaign and I wholly disagree with a substantial portion of his neo-Randian domestic policy. If the right would've earnestly fielded somebody like Huntsman I would've probably went that direction. There's still time for me to defect to warmer climes.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Zanti Misfit
 


I listen to him on the debates. I believe what he says. If he can't say what he means, that is a problem isn't it? This site is part of the internet. From what I read here, he can walk on water. I don't believe that either.
edit on 17-1-2012 by Nite_wing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by samcrow
 


I had to look up the meaning of neo-Randian. It think it fits well.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   
The audience boo'ing the golden rule has sparked some 'blowback' in today's news.

Truly faithful Christians will not have any of that....


Ask yourselves this...why would so called Christians boo the very teaching (do unto others) of their savior, Jesus?



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nite_wing
reply to post by samcrow
 


I had to look up the meaning of neo-Randian. It think it fits well.


I think everybody in this country owes it to themselves to read and really digest 'Atlas Shrugged.' So much of our domestic and monetary policy is driven by Randian ideology, which was built on the back of Horatio Alger. People like Alan Greenspan were absolutely infatuated with Rand, for example.

Knowing Rand and knowing that context helps to explain a lot of the seemingly counter-intuitive and nonsensical ways that we handle the discourse surrounding things like social strata and class and, perhaps more dangerously, envision our place as individuals within this 'American' societal system.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
All of the ATS "Paulites" don't appear to dig around on this guy's track record. The "Good Doctor" has pretty much had a nondescript legislative career which began in 1997. If the Paul supporters want to know one of the many reasons this guy is unelectible, have a look.




Ronald Paul has sponsored 421 bills since Jan 7, 1997 of which 418 haven't made it out of committee and 1 were successfully enacted.


He's too fringe boys and girls. Just too fringe.

Source: www.govtrack.us...

Time to put Doc to bed.

Becker



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Becker44
 


I take it you Floridians are going to have a bash fest with him eh? The state of miscounting votes...
edit on 17-1-2012 by KonquestAbySS because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 26  27  28    30 >>

log in

join