Ron VS Mitt, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times
Topic started on 16-1-2012 @ 07:27 PM by CALGARIAN


These two facts alone should automatically decide your vote, even if you were to ignore everything else.. and STILL make the right choice.

RP ad's are awesome!


reply posted on 16-1-2012 @ 07:40 PM by Praetorius
reply to post by ModernAcademia

Hi MA - I'm of mixed opinions on the PAC bag.

I saw a petition idea floating around some time back about limiting all donations from any single entity to a political candidate to $100 each, which I think would allow for better representation of the people and direct funding of the candidates according to the will of the people as such.

What would you think about something along those lines?



reply posted on 16-1-2012 @ 07:49 PM by freedom12
reply to post by CALGARIAN

Here's the video the ad video refers to in the OP.

You shoulda put this up too OP as the ad is all about this-







Go Ron Go!


reply posted on 16-1-2012 @ 08:28 PM by Wildmanimal
reply to post by CALGARIAN



Damn Straight. You think these fine young American Men and Women who have Earned a right
to come home, want to see that while they have been busy fighting it,
Willard has been busy ... Gutting it?

www.bls.gov... (March 2011)

www.afba.com...

www.bls.gov...

If you cannot smell the Foreign Influence and Agenda, you better clear your sinuses.

Because you a strolling blindly into a Cesspool.


reply posted on 17-1-2012 @ 07:18 PM by Praetorius
reply to post by ModernAcademia

I'll agree on the slippery slope, pretty much any time it comes to government.

As far as the donation/funding - perhaps more than $100, but something within the doable reach of the average citizen, but not so high as to allow well-connected bigwigs to reach out to a relatively small number of people while padding their campaign accounts well in excessive of candidates who are actually more popular...basically a matter of making it up on volume for income to more accurately represent actual support, and thus drive candidates who are actually more popular (compare Paul's # of donors to Romney and Perry, etc.).

As to regulatory agencies - ugh. Talk about a double-edged sword. I believe the terms "unintended consequences..." and "even the best-laid plans..." apply well here, as it seems to me they tend to quickly get corrupted and then populated by those they were founded to regulate, so they eventually only end up regulating competition out of business while insulating those to be regulated from serious challenge, by imposing stifling regulations only they can afford to meet - or ignore directly by simply paying the fines the competition can't.

The thought makes me sick, and forces me to ask who regulates the regulators? And on and on...it's like a russian nesting doll when you think about it, a never-ending cycle of regulatory agencies seems called for.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



Ron Paul Didn\'t Bully Anyone Or Do Drugs in High School!
  Posted 19 days ago with 26 member flags
Mitt Was A High School Bully
  Posted 19 days ago with 20 member flags
Vale Don Ritchie: the angel of the gap
  Posted 14 days ago with 18 member flags
Obama: \'Sometimes I Forget\' Magnitude of the Recession
  Posted 19 days ago with 16 member flags
One of these politicians is not like the others
  Posted 4 days ago with 16 member flags
5 Big Accomplishments of President Obama
  Posted 8 days ago with 9 member flags
Obama Campaign Uses Mother’s Day to Raise Cash
  Posted 16 days ago with 7 member flags