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: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ittabena


Oh get real. If you can't see a difference it is only because you don't want to. Besides I wasn't talking to trolls tonight, I was answering the OP's question.

He wanted to know, you don't. Suit yourself. I'm not interested in helping those who don't ask. Better things to do with my time.


Your response makes no sense. All you have to come back with is to call me a troll because I pointed out what you posted were outright lies? Sorry if the facts upset you as a Ron Paul supporter. If you could refute what I actually pointed out, you might seem sane and mature. Instead you called me a troll for calling you on your lies. Nice!




posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 02:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Ittabena
 


1)there is no argument to make. If you think the us could default on their debt and not face huge consequences because of it, there's not much I can say to you.
2)comparing the us to venezuela is laughable
3)comparing us debt to venezuelan debt is laughable.
4)fox news? What a textbook reply. I do love it, thought, that depending on whcih thread I'm in, I'm called either a liberal or a neo-con, a bleeding heart or a warmonger. Same playbook, different candidates. You RP fanatics may just be worse than the rest, as you all do truly deify him.
5)I never once claimed to want the same old thing. In fact, if you read my posts, you'll see that I advocate a systemic change, I don't bank my hope that someone coming out of the same system will magically fix everything.
6)the president, regardless of inntention, cannot change a thing, so long as we keep this system.


I have to state again, though, that I find it laughable, and scary, that you think defaulting on its debt wouldn't destroy the united states.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:01 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


I am aware of where the government "borrows" money from. Doesn't change the fact that it is a good idea. Nothing out of context. Just a deflection by you to downplay a good idea.



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

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Still
 


Actually. His net worth is only 5 million.


Which last time I checked is "millions." Is it not now?
Seems you would be backing me up in pointing out that the claim that "he is not a millionaire" is wrong. Yet you seem to be trying to refute something.


Considering Huntsman is estimated at 50 million (possibly upwards of 100 million) and Romney's net worth is estimated at around 200 million. Paul's 5 million (rounded up) is pretty humble for a doctor and congressman. That is all of his assets too.




It really does not matter how rich anyone else is. More than 1 million is still millions. When you are worth millions, you are a millionaire. Tell me what I got wrong?



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:03 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


So, would the answer to this be to continue building debt?
Dr. Paul is suggesting a very difficult concept in which we operate by honesty. It would certainly involve growing pains as we have fallen asleep on our honesty and we all know what happens when we cut-off the circulation to a part of us.

I understand the course Dr. Paul is suggesting will weaken us (America) in a way (relative to our current Imperial standards), but it will strengthen us in ways which are far more crucial to the development of our species as a whole.

So I say directly, just because the task is overwhelming, it does not justify allowing the task to become even more overwhelming.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


No, using blanket statements to agitate the posters, like calling them "fanatics," is what makes you a troll.



I never used the word fanatic in any of my posts and I was the one being called a troll.
Is there a problem with reality in this thread?



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Still
 


I never said he wasn't a millionaire?
He is a man in his 70's though and that money is square with what I seventy year old doctor would accumulate in his life. It doesn't reek of corrupt dealings and corporatism.

What you got wrong was the part where you think I ever said he wasn't a millionaire.
So, no, you still have no point.
edit on 29-1-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Still
 


Is there a problem with your reading glasses because that reply is not to you?
He was being called out as a troll too. Stop being oversensitive/brush up on reading comprehension.

People trolling this thread really got it off track.
I apologize OP.

He asked for why he should vote for Ron Paul and people came in here with nonsense arguments and presented no evidence as to why any of the positive voting points were incorrect.
edit on 29-1-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Still
 


I never said he wasn't a millionaire?


I never said you did.
The person I actually responded to with that is the one that did. If you are going to butt in, keep up.


He is a man in his 70's though and that money is square with what I seventy year old doctor would accumulate in his life. It doesn't reek of corrupt dealings and corporatism.

So, no, you still have no point.


Yes I do if you are paying attention to what I post and who I post it to instead of sitting there with your "DEFEND RON PAUL AT ALL TURNS" button in hand. Take a breath and read the conversation in context. It can only help you out to do so.

Also, your idea that his wealth is accumulated solely as a doctor makes little sense at all. He makes no money running for office? Being in office? Publishing newsletters? I hope you don't make me show you how much money he makes NOT being a doctor. I hate when I know more about Ron Paul then the people erroneously attacking me because of their own personal confusion caused by their love of the man they seem to lack all that knowledge of.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Still
 





Your response makes no sense. All you have to come back with is to call me a troll because I pointed out what you posted were outright lies?


Uh, You did what, where? Because I didn't see where you pointed out anything? All I saw was innuendo, and supposition. When they hire trolls they don't hold out for the bright guys do they?



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by WP4YT

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
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.





Is the Washington Post a good enough qualification for you?

www.washingtonpost.com...|

They are the ones that made the graph. The sources for the data are Forbes magazine (billionaires list); Federal Election Commission (donor records). The Washington Post. Published on December 5, 2011, 8:01 p.m.
edi
t on 29-1-2012 by WP4YT because: (no reason given)
another person jumping on that, another person missing the point.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Still
 


I said in the post before that a doctor and congressman.
Either way the fact remains that is a reasonable amount of money, and goes a long way for showing that he wasn't using his position in government to make millions upon millions like the other candidates. In his position he could have easily made the tens of millions of other candidates.

You know what the point is, you are intentionally being dense, which is, i suspect, why you are being called a troll.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:13 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


More gentlemanly responses might garner more support for the cause.
Please judge your words before posting; How would you care to be treated? And please disregard the discourtesy dealt to you (it is evident, but in no way does it justify perpetuating the discourtesy).
Thanks.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Still
 


Is there a problem with your reading glasses because that reply is not to you?
He was being called out as a troll too. Stop being oversensitive/brush up on reading comprehension.


I am guessing it is your reading comprehension as here is how that post appears to be addressed on my screen.


Originally posted by Ittabena
reply to post by Still
 

Oh get real. If you can't see a difference it is only because you don't want to. Besides I wasn't talking to trolls tonight, I was answering the OP's question.


So um...huh?




People trolling this thread really got it off track.
I apologize OP.

He asked for why he should vote for Ron Paul and people came in here with nonsense arguments and presented no evidence as to why any of the positive voting points were incorrect.
edit on 29-1-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)


Actually he said Ron Paul was a non millionaire doctor. I pointed out he was in fact a millionaire, an author, and a politician for over 30 years. You got all upset, he called me a troll and here we are.

No one ever pointed out what I got wrong though.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:15 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


I would love for you to tell us what you think the point is. I think it is you that is missing it.
The point we have for sharing this info is to give the OP an informed opinion. It is not a rumor, it is fact that Ron Paul is the only candidate that doesn't have billionaire backers and it isn't because he hasn't had the chance.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Dasher
 


I know. I even know that they are trolling for those responses. It just comes from a desire to educate about a good candidate and being met with the most dense counter arguments imaginable that never change.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ittabena

Uh, You did what, where? Because I didn't see where you pointed out anything? All I saw was innuendo, and supposition. When they hire trolls they don't hold out for the bright guys do they?


Well you and even another poster both responded to it and you claim you never saw it? You said was not a millionaire and he was a gynecologist.

I POINTED OUT HE WAS INDEED A MILLIONAIRE AS WELL AS A POLITICAN AND AUTHOR.

Can you see it now?

If you want to argue the facts, argue the facts. Responding to a post then pretending you never saw it a page later after one of your cohorts even backs up my claim is just silly.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dasher
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


So, would the answer to this be to continue building debt?
Dr. Paul is suggesting a very difficult concept in which we operate by honesty. It would certainly involve growing pains as we have fallen asleep on our honesty and we all know what happens when we cut-off the circulation to a part of us.

I understand the course Dr. Paul is suggesting will weaken us (America) in a way (relative to our current Imperial standards), but it will strengthen us in ways which are far more crucial to the development of our species as a whole.

So I say directly, just because the task is overwhelming, it does not justify allowing the task to become even more overwhelming.


1)do you really think the only options are to either default or continue to grow the debt?
2)growing pains? Defaulting on our debt would end america. Period.no more imports. No more exports. No more SS (which is owed to us, the people, by the way). Far less oil. You wanna know the main reason venezuela could get away with it? They are a major exporter of oil.
3)I don't know what you are getting at here, except that you don't seem to get there are more than 2 options.



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:20 AM
link   
The only reason anyone would want to vote for RON PAUL is because hes REAL, not some hidden agenda creep like ALL the rest

What more does the man need? he humbles himself on his wise investments and sound practices, not pushing any envelopes and has been clearly shown for over 30 years not to be a flip flopper and a thieving liar....AND "WE" CAN PROVE WHO HE IS



posted on Jan, 29 2012 @ 03:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


I would love for you to tell us what you think the point is. I think it is you that is missing it.
The point we have for sharing this info is to give the OP an informed opinion. It is not a rumor, it is fact that Ron Paul is the only candidate that doesn't have billionaire backers and it isn't because he hasn't had the chance.
just embarrassing. Seriously. Get an education.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join