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.

 

Why Should I Vote For Ron Paul?

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 

You better wake up sweetheart, this will be the last year of freedom as you ever knew it


I ASSURE YOU




posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


And I gave you more than hearsay. You were the one assuming (still are). I gave you a lead, do a 5 second search and you will see that it is more than hearsay. I even gave you a name of a billionaire that endorses Paul, yet he has no billionaires funding him financially. What does that tell you?

You can have all the opinion about Paul supporters you want... that only shows ignorance though. All of us are different. I was a Dem that voted for Obama last term, now I am a Rep so I can vote Paul. I don't assume. I research, I don't offer hearsay. Every supporter has their own reason for supporting him. Some are extreme (just like some supporters for Newt and Romney. If you think extremists support Paul you should see how many racists and rednecks support Newt!), but most are just sensible people that don't want to vote for flip floppers, and liars that are backed by corporations and endorsed by "news" stations. We just want an honest guy for once.
edit on 29-1-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


And I gave you more than hearsay. You were the one assuming (still are). I gave you a lead, do a 5 second search and you will see that it is more than hearsay. I even gave you a name of a billionaire that endorses Paul, yet he has no billionaires funding him financially. What does that tell you?
edit on 29-1-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)


1)No, you didn't. You said "it is common knowledge". That is flat out hearsay.
2)what have I assumed? Seriously, tell me.
3)again, I never said no billionairs offered him money, yet you go back to that again. What I said is that graph is irrelevant without qualification. Which it is.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by EvolEric
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Due to my dial up connection...


wow i don't know what's more amazing, a person that has so many posts on ats that doesn't know anything about ron paul or a person that still has dial up...



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


And I gave you more than hearsay. You were the one assuming (still are). I gave you a lead, do a 5 second search and you will see that it is more than hearsay. I even gave you a name of a billionaire that endorses Paul, yet he has no billionaires funding him financially. What does that tell you?

You can have all the opinion about Paul supporters you want... that only shows ignorance though. All of us are different. I was a Dem that voted for Obama last term, now I am a Rep so I can vote Paul. I don't assume. I research, I don't offer hearsay. Every supporter has their own reason for supporting him. Some are extreme (just like some supporters for Newt and Romney. If you think extremists support Paul you should see how many racists and rednecks support Newt!), but most are just sensible people that don't want to vote fiior flip floppers, and liars that are backed by corporations and endorsed by "news" stations. We just want an honest guy for once.
edit on 29-1-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



1)nice strawman.
2)I didn't say anything about RP supporters. I said something about the fanatics.
3)you say you don't assume, then you do just that about newt and romney supporters.
4)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by sweetnlow
Why everyone should Vote for Rom Paul is because his only agenda is the Constitution and the bill of rights

He knows that if hes not elected this term, USA as we ever knew it is HISTORY and a military regime and a dictatorship is what will take his place.

Vote RON PAUL or blame yourself for when blackwater blackbags you

it is statement like this that make the RP fanatics so laughable to me. What a load of complete and utter propaganda....how you can consider a statement like this to be better than anything the other candidates use is beyond me. I mean, there is a serious cognitive disconnect here...


He does support the constitution and bill of rights, so no, the post isn't propaganda
He is the only candidate trying to get the government off the peoples back, and stop needless war, so no, again not propaganda.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by SGTSECRET

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by sweetnlow
Why everyone should Vote for Rom Paul is because his only agenda is the Constitution and the bill of rights

He knows that if hes not elected this term, USA as we ever knew it is HISTORY and a military regime and a dictatorship is what will take his place.

Vote RON PAUL or blame yourself for when blackwater blackbags you

it is statement like this that make the RP fanatics so laughable to me. What a load of complete and utter propaganda....how you can consider a statement like this to be better than anything the other candidates use is beyond me. I mean, there is a serious cognitive disconnect here...


He does support the constitution and bill of rights, so no, the post isn't propaganda
He is the only candidate trying to get the government off the peoples back, and stop needless war, so no, again not propaganda.



Are you kidding me? Saying "vote for ron paul or blackwater will get you" isn't propaganda? SERIOUSLY?
Funny how we comdemn fear mongering except when it is used in support of something we agree with.

And for the record, there is no such thing as blackwater.....dude couldn't even get that right.
edit on 29-1-2012 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:56 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


There is no straw man. Everyone throws that term around here, I think about half know what it means. I make no assumptions (unless you were referring to my joke about Newt supporters in SC, there is truth to what I said though proof is easily available online). You are just avoiding the facts. You said it was hearsay that Paul was offered funding by billionaires. I showed you a billionaire that proposed backing him and Paul didn't have him. You ignored it. You have refused to acknowledge anything I have put forth, but you haven't provided any real counter argument or anything for anyone else to search. You didn't research what I brought up.

I gave you a solid counter argument and showed that you were wrong. When you can do the same about anything we have discussed we can continue.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


no such thing as Blackwater? where are you from? the company can change its name all they want, doesn't make it any different. i seriously can't believe you think there's no such thing as Blackwater. learn to use google please..



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 01:58 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Get real.. you know what they meant. Blackwater still exists, even if under different names now and it most certainly has existed as Blackwater before. Why play stupid?



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by SGTSECRET
 


Tell me about it.. I was going to ask if he knew how to google when he continued to argue after I gave him evidence of a billionaire that endorsed and offered to support Ron Paul.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:01 AM
link   
He won't switch his views. Most of what presidential candidates promise once they get in office will never happen. I'm sure RP isn't going to switch his views over decades.

Plus I really don't want another useless war. Really bring our troops home, secure our borders, and profit. I wonder what goes through the troop's minds when they come back and find they have no job, gas is still expensive. Do they start to think it just might not have been worth it?

Its no wonder most of the armed forces support RP. They know its not worth it. When members of the armed forces support an anti war presidential candidate, isn't it our duty to back them up and stop voting these money hungry politicians into office?

Or we could send them out again to put their lives on the line for nothing again.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by SGTSECRET
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


no such thing as Blackwater? where are you from? the company can change its name all they want, doesn't make it any different. i seriously can't believe you think there's no such thing as Blackwater. learn to use google please..


You guys are amazing. Blackwater can't come and bag me because there is no blackwater. There is XE. Its that simple.and truth be told, if anyone is gonna come bagging people, it will be wackenhut. My point is, if you all are going to use asinine fear tactics, at least know what the hell you're saying.

I do love that both of you jump on that and not on the disgusting use of fear mongering and propaganda that I pointed out. Which, again, proves my poiny.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:04 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Actually you did.
You mentioned it again after making the graph comment. Maybe you forgot.
You said:



It seems to be a trend among his supporters to throw out things like that "he knows this and still wants to", or like earlier in the thread "billionairs have offered him money and he said no". Just like I don't take the rumors at face value with the other candidates, I don't with him either. Show me where he has said these things.


I provided evidence to show you that it wasn't a rumor. I can't help it if you choose to remain ignorant. I mean I probably should have expected it considering the conversation was kicked off by you thinking a Dr and politician of over 30 years isn't aware of what it means to go after international bankers.. but I don't know, benefit of the doubt I guess.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by SGTSECRET
 


Tell me about it.. I was going to ask if he knew how to google when he continued to argue after I gave him evidence of a billionaire that endorsed and offered to support Ron Paul.


So in other words you were going to continue to lie and attempt to misconstrue what I said. Doesn't really work when people can just scroll back a page to see.

Why do you have to lie and misconstrue to defend your point?



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by cconn487
He won't switch his views. Most of what presidential candidates promise once they get in office will never happen. I'm sure RP isn't going to switch his views over decades.

Plus I really don't want another useless war. Really bring our troops home, secure our borders, and profit. I wonder what goes through the troop's minds when they come back and find they have no job, gas is still expensive. Do they start to think it just might not have been worth it?

Its no wonder most of the armed forces support RP. They know its not worth it. When members of the armed forces support an anti war presidential candidate, isn't it our duty to back them up and stop voting these money hungry politicians into office?

Or we could send them out again to put their lives on the line for nothing again.


we realize long before we get back how bad things are. we had many conversations about 'why are we here.' the only thing we could come up with was try to protect yourself and the guy next to you so we can all make it home. too bad it didnt happen that way. ron paul has military support because because he is the only anti-war candidate and these b.s. 'wars' have ruined so many lives and families its ridiculous.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


I didn't. I am glad you addressed it. See the post I made above yours to see that I not only didn't lie, but that your short term memory is busted and I quoted you on the argument you made and then forgot despite it only being a couple posts back.

Also.. what? You're whole post there makes absolutely no sense. Maybe you are just trolling, because there is nothing to indicate I was trying to misconstrue anything. Good luck trolling/making no sense. I'm done here for the night.
edit on 29-1-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Actually you did.
You mentioned it again after making the graph comment. Maybe you forgot.
You said:



It seems to be a trend among his supporters to throw out things like that "he knows this and still wants to", or like earlier in the thread "billionairs have offered him money and he said no". Just like I don't take the rumors at face value with the other candidates, I don't with him either. Show me where he has said these things.


I provided evidence to show you that it wasn't a rumor. I can't help it if you choose to remain ignorant. I mean I probably should have expected it considering the conversation was kicked off by you thinking a Dr and politician of over 30 years isn't aware of what it means to go after international bankers.. but I don't know, benefit of the doubt I guess.


Way to prove that you are misconstruing. I said RUMORS, not speaking of any one specifically.

Nice try.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


I didn't. I am glad you addressed it. See the post I made above yours to see that I not only didn't lie, but that your short term memory is busted and I quoted you on the argument you made and then forgot despite it only being a couple posts back.
and I've again shown your accusation to be false, so I ask again:why do you have to misconstrue to make your point?



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:13 AM
link   
so this entire subject has turned into two individuals arguing, awesome...as Ron Paul would say, 'lets just stick to the issues' and quit the back and forth b.s.
edit on 29-1-2012 by SGTSECRET because: corrected




top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join