3-4 years later, after being strongly anti-Obama....I will be voting for him for a second term.

reply to post by Alxandro


The real question is...do you think we'd be in better shape if we had a Republican in there the last 4 years...or that Romney or Gingrich is a better option for the next 4 years?

My answer in no to both. What is yours?

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by vasaga

 

You are assuming using violence to get something is always wrong. I am not convinced of this. It usually is wrong. But sometimes it is the only way left.

It is always wrong if you're the one initiating the violence, which is what governments do.

Originally posted by Gorman91

Really? There is more progress by division than by collaboration?

Did you miss the whole 1950s-1980s?

I guess I did. Enlighten me.

Also not directly to you, but, to everyone here... If you take the stance that Ron Paul will not win anyway, you're part of the reason he will not win, because you're refraining from voting for him because you think he won't win, and when a lot of people think that way, that's how it will happen. If you stop thinking that way, he will actually get more votes..

And last but not least, a nice video about how the voting system is rigged for the ones who are interested.


And for people who have more time:

reply to post by vasaga

It is always wrong if you're the one initiating the violence, which is what governments do.

If I smack a child because he's being mean... not violent, just mean, I am right in what I do.





There are plenty of rumored vote rigging, but really I don't see it as significant. People usually know their own location and protest when they know the vote is rigged.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by vasaga

 

It is always wrong if you're the one initiating the violence, which is what governments do.

If I smack a child because he's being mean... not violent, just mean, I am right in what I do.

Lol.. No you're not. Spanking only has adverse effects for the child.

Originally posted by Gorman91
There are plenty of rumored vote rigging, but really I don't see it as significant. People usually know their own location and protest when they know the vote is rigged.

What if they don't know?

reply to post by vasaga


Great, another 10 minute video with lots of claims that my own life contradicts. Why should I believe your sources anymore when common sense refutes them?

I got spanked, and all it did was make me stronger. I intend to do the same to my kids. My cousins gave me a good whack when I was misbehaving. It helps to build consensus against the child that he's being retarded and should stop.

Smacking a fool is a good way to get him to shut up, and it can be perfectly justified.




If people don't know their own communities, they get what they pay for.

Originally posted by Gorman91....There are plenty of rumored vote rigging, but really I don't see it as significant. People usually know their own location and protest when they know the vote is rigged.

It's more than rumor. What came out in a Ohio courtroom after the 2004 elections scared me. A programmer testified he was hired to rig voting machines, and he delivered the code. He explained how it was undetectable. The customer was a Republican and there is speculation, it's how they manipulated elections in 2004 and 2008 as vote tallys did not match the exit poll.

More than rumor my friend.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by vasaga

 

Great, another 10 minute video with lots of claims that my own life contradicts. Why should I believe your sources anymore when common sense refutes them?

Uh.. Which part of scientific evidence did you miss? Oh right. You didn't even bother opening it right? And you're not talking about common sense... Even if you believe you do.

Originally posted by Gorman91
I got spanked, and all it did was make me stronger.

As far as I see it made you delusional... No offense. And even if you turned out "fine", it doesn't made you couldn't have turned out better. And again, how do you know you turned out stronger? You have no point of reference.

Originally posted by Gorman91
I intend to do the same to my kids.

I encourage you to investigate parenting and scientific articles regarding spanking, if you really care for your future children. When you spank, you're not reasoning, and, people spank when they get angry, not as a moral act. The moral stuff is the excuse to justify it, and probably to refuse to acknowledge that they were wronged as a child.

Originally posted by Gorman91
My cousins gave me a good whack when I was misbehaving.

Because that's how they were probably brought up, and then people ask themselves why the world has so much violence in it..

Originally posted by Gorman91
It helps to build consensus against the child that he's being retarded and should stop.

And yet he'll never understand why. Why do you think spanking increases in most cases?

Originally posted by Gorman91
Smacking a fool is a good way to get him to shut up, and it can be perfectly justified.

Why not explain WHY he/she is being a fool? Children are barely reasoned with nowadays, and I'm pretty sure you're underestimating their reasoning capabilities.

If you need to spank, you failed as a parent.

reply to post by averageGuy505


And I have no way to know if he didn't do it for publicity.

reply to post by vasaga

Uh.. Which part of scientific evidence did you miss? Oh right. You didn't even bother opening it right? And you're not talking about common sense... Even if you believe you do.

Society has exited for thousands of years, and weather you hit your kids or not, it went on. Society didn't get any better or worse once it got out of style. Common sense dictates that it is therefore irrelevant.

As far as I see it made you delusional... No offense. And even if you turned out "fine", it doesn't made you couldn't have turned out better. And again, how do you know you turned out stronger? You have no point of reference.

Because as my parents got older and I got faster, they couldn't hit me anymore, and I saw no reason to take responsibilities. I had to learn responsibility, indeed the problems with spoiling your child, on a personal experienced level. I look back, and I wish they'd had me ten years younger, because then I would have gotten a good slap when I went against common sense.

I encourage you to investigate parenting and scientific articles regarding spanking, if you really care for your future children. When you spank, you're not reasoning, and, people spank when they get angry, not as a moral act. The moral stuff is the excuse to justify it, and probably to refuse to acknowledge that they were wronged as a child.

And that's the border between being a dumb parent and smart parent.

Do you not have common sense? Of course you reason with the child first. Hell maybe even let him screw up his social life. Then when he does it again, you smack him from being an idiot.

Of course, if he goes and hits someone, say his brother or sister, then there is no reason to speak as to why you get smacked. You do it to create common sense. You hit someone for no reason, a bigger person will smack you harder for abusing innocent people. That's common sense all people can understand.

reply to post by David9176


Now you are dancing around the question with a hypothetical.
If we had Repub Prez, i doubt he would have been involved in three scandals in three years, even with the media being the way they are.

I can understand the concern you have about the condition the country could be in when your daughter is an adult, but you and Obama should at least be thankful Uday and Qusay are no longer around to cause the world grief. I mean, regarding the Iraq war, if pacifist Obama had had his way, he would now be bowing to the Hussein brothers. Sure he pulled the troops from Iraq, but now there is some concern they may have to return at some point, after 2012 no doubt.

Do you honestly believe things can be fixed just by throwing money at it?

It's almost as if Obama is intentionally stunting economic growth, forcing more and more Americans to keep pleading for help just so that he can implement his Socialistic agenda he planned on implementing in the first place.
Problem, Reaction, Solution, and you are taking his bait.
Truth is, businesses are ready to hire and grow, they are just holding back because they are not sure what Obama has in store when the flood gates open.

Obama supporters should be happy for a Republic win in November because you can expect to see dramatic economic recovery within weeks of the election, thus allowing them to give credit to Obama.

Win win, dont cha think?

reply to post by Alxandro


What three scandals? Obama has yet to be involved in any scandal.

Its like the people who support the republicans live in a different universe.

Wow. I cannot believe how many people want to vote for Obama again.

I guess the fluoride must be working.

ANYbody but Obama would do a better job at this point. Even a freaking houseplant.

Ron Paul is the ONLY ONLY ONLY one speaking any sense on both sides.

If you hate freedom, and love being an ignorant slave fighting to further your own enslavement, then by all means OBAMA 2012.

Originally posted by FREEwoman
Ron Paul is the ONLY ONLY ONLY one speaking any sense on both sides.

Ron Paul would destroy America. You can't just look at Right Now and ME ME ME.

Looking down the line - - - giving states more rights - - - including Personal Individual Rights - - - would be insane - - - creating areas similar to Tribal Ideology.

Obama is steadfast and methodical. He was handed a mess. Much of what the Reps complain that he hasn't done - - was blocked by the Reps themselves.

post by David9176

Now you are dancing around the question with a hypothetical.
If we had Repub Prez, i doubt he would have been involved in three scandals in three years, even with the media being the way they are.

What 3 scandals???

post by David9176
It's almost as if Obama is intentionally stunting economic growth, forcing more and more Americans to keep pleading for help just so that he can implement his Socialistic agenda he planned on implementing in the first place.

What agenda?

Republicans instituted their "No wins for Obama" strategy in 2008. Other than the new American health care plan, Obama can't even get permission to go to the bathroom from congress, let alone implement any kind of agenda, socialist or other wise. Republicans have left this guy occupying space in the White House with no power to enact anything. And you think he's powerful?

I think you need to change your drugs as whatever you're taking has left reality far behind. Of course, feel free to list this agenda... I can't wait.

reply to post by Annee


For sure annee, most here are just sucked up into the craze that is RP since he's against war and wants to bring the troops home etc. Most who back him don't know that he'd like to repeal civil rights and disability rights because he'd like to give establishments the choice to make their own decisions. Although even if he got in he'd never be able to repeal these things cause congress would never allow it, whether rep. or dem. because the # storm that would follow. Your comments about Obama are also my feelings as well. Great post.

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by Annee

 

For sure annee, most here are just sucked up into the craze that is RP since he's against war and wants to bring the troops home etc. Most who back him don't know that he'd like to repeal civil rights and disability rights because he'd like to give establishments the choice to make their own decisions. Although even if he got in he'd never be able to repeal these things cause congress would never allow it, whether rep. or dem. because the # storm that would follow. Your comments about Obama are also my feelings as well. Great post.

Well yeah. And is anyone really Pro War? We certainly aren't the only geographical location that wants power and control over natural resources.

Of course RP wouldn't be able to do what he promotes.

reply to post by Annee


RPs real goal is to sell our nations public assets to corporations, which would lead to our slavery.

That is what he would do if given the opportunity.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by FREEwoman
Ron Paul is the ONLY ONLY ONLY one speaking any sense on both sides.

Ron Paul would destroy America. You can't just look at Right Now and ME ME ME.

Looking down the line - - - giving states more rights - - - including Personal Individual Rights - - - would be insane - - - creating areas similar to Tribal Ideology.

Obama is steadfast and methodical. He was handed a mess. Much of what the Reps complain that he hasn't done - - was blocked by the Reps themselves.

America was destroyed a long time ago.

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
for this election (assuming ron paul doesn't get the nomination), i will choose the ONLY option that wasn't chosen for me.

i will not vote. the whole system is rigged, and we are forced to settle for a selection of candidates picked FOR us, not BY us. i say no.

voting lets them know you sanction this debauchery of a government. it lets them know you still think you have a choice.

I SAY NO!

IF RON PAUL ISN'T ON THE BALLOT, WRITE HIM IN!

Originally posted by vasaga

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by FREEwoman
Ron Paul is the ONLY ONLY ONLY one speaking any sense on both sides.

Ron Paul would destroy America. You can't just look at Right Now and ME ME ME.

Looking down the line - - - giving states more rights - - - including Personal Individual Rights - - - would be insane - - - creating areas similar to Tribal Ideology.

Obama is steadfast and methodical. He was handed a mess. Much of what the Reps complain that he hasn't done - - was blocked by the Reps themselves.

America was destroyed a long time ago.

No - - progression is change.

The changes may not be what everyone wants - - but they are what some people want - - and those people fought for that change.

Sound familiar? Its what America was built on.