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.

 

Question to Ron Paul: "Why did you come out with an ad calling Rick Santorum fake?"

page: 5
75
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
reply to post by wtbengineer
 


No Santorum's face is saying, "Yeah, what am I gonna do, I just got totally pwned."



I agree with the above and if you watch this video again keep an eye on Mr Santorum's hands they are awfully busy and that my friends is a sign of some nerves getting pinged big time.

I have no business in this thread as I am from another country but I could not ignore his hands and all the jerks they were doing while he showed his million dollar teeth to the cameras.

Great thread and S&F
Regards, Iwinder




posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirhumperdink
reply to post by filosophia
 


yeah but the question was how do you always manage to make politics about religion.... you know.... seperation of church and state and all that

when it enters politics that kind of does interfere with how i want to live
edit on 23-2-2012 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)


The first amendment states that government can not endorse or limit any religion. Aside from that there is no separation of church and state in theconstitution. Show me where it says 'separation of church and state.'

I don't always make politics about religion, i do however try to make politics about facts.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


did i say its in the constitution
show me where in my post it says that
i believe the point we were both trying to make comes in here "endorse" if you make law based on a religion that would be considered endorsing it ....or appear to most people as such

do you not understand why our founding fathers left england? it certainly wasnt because they were ok with religious tyranny just so long as most people thought it was ok (they were in the extreme minority remember)

freedom for all not freedom for those who agree with us
edit on 23-2-2012 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by supermanning
Ron Paul: "Cuz he is fake!" hahahahahahhahahahhahahahahahh​aha


edit on 22-2-2012 by supermanning because: (no reason given)


All reports I've read about this incident mention that the audience went wild with approval, and for a long time, after Ron Paul's reply.

He can say that because It's the truth. It was like a torpedo broadsided Santorum. At that moment his ship started sinking. The audience knew it, and judging by the reaction of the media, they know it too.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrnotobc

Originally posted by supermanning
Ron Paul: "Cuz he is fake!" hahahahahahhahahahhahahahahahh​aha


edit on 22-2-2012 by supermanning because: (no reason given)


All reports I've read about this incident mention that the audience went wild with approval, and for a long time, after Ron Paul's reply.

He can say that because It's the truth. It was like a torpedo broadsided Santorum. At that moment his ship started sinking. The audience knew it, and judging by the reaction of the media, they know it too.


Romney was probably thinking, I don't want to get on this guys bad side.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


The Constitution doesn't specifically say "separation of church and state," but its implications as intended by the founders is cited repeatedly in SCOTUS decisions.

Separation of Church and State

The founders were very religious people, no doubt, and their religious values guided their decisions, but they certainly knew that religion rooted in government would lead to oppression.

Personaly, I boggle at the idea that grown adults believe in an all knowing, all powerful God (or Gods). And yet those same people tell children not to put belief in imaginary friends.

But I digress. Keep kicking tail and taking names, RP. Hopefully before my children are adults we'll have constitutionally limited government again.

-Mordeen



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrnotobc

Originally posted by something wicked

Originally posted by InfoKartel
reply to post by colbe
 



See how killing a baby would offend God? He's my creator and yours...


What offends me is people pretending to think like God. Complete nutjobs.


And people saying they would ban abortion are pretending to think like God, total nutjobs - oh wait!!!!! That means the sacred RP is choosing to decide against choice! Actually he isn't is he? Like most of the things I've seen he'll allow states to make the decision, just like drugs and prostitution. Nice clear answers, that is very helpful. Does he actually have a manifesto that states what he will do, not what he would let states do?


I think yes. His manifesto is called "The Constitution", and he's pretty good at

understanding it.


Soooo, his manifesto is based on a paper writen several centuries ago with no foresight into current political and non political trends - really? If you are happy with that then frankly you aren't really worth a vote. Grow up, this isn't the 18th century. maybe you all need to learn that.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by something wicked
 


It worked pretty well until we thought it would be good to make all kinds of changes regarding laws, now look at where we are.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by something wicked
 


No foresight, really? The strongest and longest-surviving constitution in the world, written without foresight or consideration for trends?

Wow.

I personally think individual rights and limited government isn't a trend. Trends come and go.

But that's just me, again. Maybe we sould burn that old piece of paper and write something more trendy that we can change easily, or set aside when its contents aren't convenient.

-Mordeen



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirhumperdink
reply to post by bigwig22
 


of course not i love ron paul
you my friend seem a tad paranoid haha (that could be a good thing though so im cool with that as long is its not overboard i also left gingritch out but that was an oversight haha)
i didnt mention him because its usually a lesser of two evils type deal so lets not associate the good one with that kind of thing
edit on 23-2-2012 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)


Haha! Happy to see that you love Ron Paul


Yeah i may sound a little paranoid but aren't we all on ATS? One must be to come to a conspiracy site


Have a good one!

Peace out.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by colbe

Originally posted by LErickson

Originally posted by colbe

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by colbe
 


Go google the true meaning of an isolationist and you'll find that it isn't what Ron Paul is like so much of the mainstream media tries to make everybody think.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
I love Ron Paul!



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Santorum / To Mr Anus Anagram

edit on 23-2-2012 by ILikeStars because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by colbe
 


As a Catholic, I believe life begins at conception. Conception does not begin until 48-72 hours after copulation. So, how could the morning after pill be an abortion pill and for that matter, any different from "the pill"? It can't! That is what he means by the two being one in the same. They both prevent conception, just one goes about it in a much more aggressive way.

I am sick and tired of parishioners misconstruing the facts. There are so much more important issues to deal with that I am embarrassed to be a Catholic. This is just more ways to divide. It's all smoke and mirrors. Beyond that, Rick Santorum is not presidential.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by NowIsThe
reply to post by colbe
 


As a Catholic, I believe life begins at conception. Conception does not begin until 48-72 hours after copulation. So, how could the morning after pill be an abortion pill and for that matter, any different from "the pill"? It can't! That is what he means by the two being one in the same. They both prevent conception, just one goes about it in a much more aggressive way.

I am sick and tired of parishioners misconstruing the facts. There are so much more important issues to deal with that I am embarrassed to be a Catholic. This is just more ways to divide. It's all smoke and mirrors. Beyond that, Rick Santorum is not presidential.



Good little rant there. Couldn't agree more.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by speculativeoptimist
reply to post by colbe
 



What do the "vulgar" Libs here have to say about a fact Gingrich brought
up last evening?

colbe, man it's not nice to judge, especially inaccurately. My Granny's a lib, and vulgar is the last thing she is. Do we want to talk about vulgarities?
armchairsubversive.blogspot.com...


Hi speculativeoptimist,

Your grandmother is an exception then. Read the responses here, someone used the -F- word. Tolerance is one the 4 Cardinal Virtues
of Secularism.

Everyone should do what they want, with no judgment, that's not what Our Lord meant. It's in Scripture, helping someone come to the Truth pleases God very much.

James 5:20
He must know that he who causeth a sinner to be converted from the error of his way, shall save his soul from death, and shall cover a multitude of sins


And you judged Santorum, making fun of his name. Mitt Romney does
something similar, instead respectfully calling Santorum Senator, he calls him Rick. He doesn't address Paul or Gingrich by their first names.


see you,


colbe



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by colbe

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by colbe
 


Go google the true meaning of an isolationist and you'll find that it isn't what Ron Paul is like so much of the mainstream media tries to make everybody think.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mordeen
reply to post by something wicked
 


No foresight, really? The strongest and longest-surviving constitution in the world, written without foresight or consideration for trends?

Wow.

I personally think individual rights and limited government isn't a trend. Trends come and go.

But that's just me, again. Maybe we sould burn that old piece of paper and write something more trendy that we can change easily, or set aside when its contents aren't convenient.

-Mordeen


No it's not, that would be at least the Magna Carta, Does your knowledge extend outside of the USA? Actually, you mention trends, what do you think the word 'Amendment' means?
edit on 23-2-2012 by something wicked because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by TiM3LoRd
 


Newt is like the Republican mascot, more than a real presidential candidate. For me he's there for comic relief, with an extra dose of irony.

Most politicians cannot live up to the standards they get paid to make into laws for the rest of society.




top topics



 
75
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join