If you voted for Obama...

page: 13
86
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


I agree Ron Paul is not facist, but anyone that supports an extremely small government, laissez faire capitalism is very, very right wing. The only distinction between him and the rest of the republicans is that he opposes the military industrial complex. Of course it is nothing to belittle him and to the contrary I praise him for taking this much necessary stand.

But you have to accept that not everyone shares your view of what government should be. Not everyone feels as though they have to be paranoid about any government. A government is composed of people who may belong to a party and have their ideology or just be an independant with mix-matched ideas. The bottom line is government philosophy is determined by those elected to office minus the permanent beaurocrats.

I personally HATE free trade and laissez faire capitalism because it gives big business too much opportunity to screw the working class, it opposes unions, it keeps salaries artificially low, it promotes elitism of the upper capitalist class, it allows wealthy people to have inordinate influence in politics with their contributions(more like legalised bribes).

I want A LEFT-WING government that at least pretends to care MORE for the working class than for any business, big or small. I want legislation that affects big business just as much as it affects small business. I am sick and tired of corporate sellouts, especially the zionist type, running amok in washington and taking america back to feudalism. Not only are they outsourcing jobs by the millions, thus denying americans jobs, they are also making indentured servants out of the asians as well.

I am pro-union and pro-protectionst policies for america: that means good salaries and lots of tariffs to MAKE business come back. Big business already doesn't pay enough taxes in america, why give them more incentives? It is perposterious. Both gary johnson and ron paul are lunatics. This is the bottom line, but I still appreciate their stand against the war machine.




posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Don't forget that if I had voted for anyone else, I would have supported the same.

For the record, I did not vote for anyone for president, I only voted locally



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Kang69
 


There were third party candidates that were worth voting for. If everyone who rebels by not voting had voted for a third party candidate, they would have accomplished something.



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


I agree Ron Paul is not facist, but anyone that supports an extremely small government, laissez faire capitalism is very, very right wing. The only distinction between him and the rest of the republicans is that he opposes the military industrial complex. Of course it is nothing to belittle him and to the contrary I praise him for taking this much necessary stand.

But you have to accept that not everyone shares your view of what government should be. Not everyone feels as though they have to be paranoid about any government. A government is composed of people who may belong to a party and have their ideology or just be an independant with mix-matched ideas. The bottom line is government philosophy is determined by those elected to office minus the permanent beaurocrats.

I personally HATE free trade and laissez faire capitalism because it gives big business too much opportunity to screw the working class, it opposes unions, it keeps salaries artificially low, it promotes elitism of the upper capitalist class, it allows wealthy people to have inordinate influence in politics with their contributions(more like legalised bribes).

I want A LEFT-WING government that at least pretends to care MORE for the working class than for any business, big or small. I want legislation that affects big business just as much as it affects small business. I am sick and tired of corporate sellouts, especially the zionist type, running amok in washington and taking america back to feudalism. Not only are they outsourcing jobs by the millions, thus denying americans jobs, they are also making indentured servants out of the asians as well.

I am pro-union and pro-protectionst policies for america: that means good salaries and lots of tariffs to MAKE business come back. Big business already doesn't pay enough taxes in america, why give them more incentives? It is perposterious. Both gary johnson and ron paul are lunatics. This is the bottom line, but I still appreciate their stand against the war machine.


Just because you hate the free market, doesn't mean it isn't morally sound.

The difference between us is, will you force your ideology on me? Do I fall under your world of socialism? Can people voluntarily opt-out of your system? Because people can voluntarily opt-out of mine.

You can't force your beliefs on me and I obviously believe that I can't for my beliefs on you-obviously since I believe in the free market and the freedom that comes with it.

We've had this discussion many times in the past and I still haven't seen you explain how bubbles are prevented when you print unlimited amounts of debt-free currency. And yes, I still remember the posts you made about unlimited printing of debt free currency. It is your explanation to how free healthcare, education, and who knows what else is paid for. I believe it is unsustainable and that industries cannot be created artificially without market demand. And as these industries crumble due to low demand and bubbles come and go, will you let those that previously believed in the socialized system, leave at their will? or will you keep them there to maintain the status quo? That is the difference between freedom and slavery.

edit on 9-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by sorgfelt
reply to post by Kang69
 


There were third party candidates that were worth voting for. If everyone who rebels by not voting had voted for a third party candidate, they would have accomplished something.


I voted for Obama.

Because I like Obama.

Lots of people voted for Obama - - because they think he is the best choice. Period!



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
Just because you hate the free market, doesn't mean it isn't morally sound.


Just because you love the free market,doesn't mean it is morally sound.

Market is a tool. It's not a gift of Gods or anything. Markets are regulated for a reason, such as they can have destructive power on the society. They can be also tremendously useful for the society. Just like automobile. Not more, not less. If you make more of it than it is, you probably have a fetish with it.


The difference between us is, will you force your ideology on me? Do I fall under your world of socialism? Can people voluntarily opt-out of your system? Because people can voluntarily opt-out of mine.


Who's kidding who? How can I opt out of free-for-all capitalism?



You can't force your beliefs on me and I obviously believe that I can't for my beliefs on you-obviously since I believe in the free market and the freedom that comes with it. And yes, I still remember the posts you made about unlimited printing of debt free currency. It is your explanation to how free healthcare, education, and who knows what else is paid for.


I personally don't believe printing money is a good source of funding in a very long term, and I don't think anyonw would mean that.


I believe it is unsustainable


Free (or almost free) healthcare and education work well in countries like Germany, without printing too much money. There are also other countries where it works well. And that's freedom -- being able to move from one job to another or starting up a business without worrying about losing the medical coverage, because life can become very, very bad without access to medicine. Freedom is counting on the higher education to be there when and only when you truly qualify, and freedom is starting your career without too much debt on your shoulders.


and that industries cannot be created artificially without market demand.


Again, talk to Germans and how they kick started the solar energy sector. Or talk to Scandinavians who work on other alternative energies. Of course if left to YOUR devices, we'd always be in the pocket of coal and oil special interests. Screw that. That's some freedom.

Ron Paul butthurt? Good.
edit on 9-11-2012 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by eLPresidente
Just because you hate the free market, doesn't mean it isn't morally sound.


Just because you love the free market,doesn't mean it is morally sound.

Market is a tool. It's not a gift of Gods or anything. Markets are regulated for a reason, such as they can have destructive power on the society. They can be also tremendously useful for the society. Just like automobile. Not more, not less. If you make more of it than it is, you probably have a fetish with it.


The difference between us is, will you force your ideology on me? Do I fall under your world of socialism? Can people voluntarily opt-out of your system? Because people can voluntarily opt-out of mine.


Who's kidding who? How can I opt out of free-for-all capitalism?



You can't force your beliefs on me and I obviously believe that I can't for my beliefs on you-obviously since I believe in the free market and the freedom that comes with it. And yes, I still remember the posts you made about unlimited printing of debt free currency. It is your explanation to how free healthcare, education, and who knows what else is paid for.


I personally don't believe printing money is a good source of funding in a very long term, and I don't think anyonw would mean that.


I believe it is unsustainable


Free (or almost free) healthcare and education work well in countries like Germany, without printing too much money. There are also other countries where it works well. And that's freedom -- being able to move from one job to another or starting up a business without worrying about losing the medical coverage, because life can become very, very bad without access to medicine. Freedom is counting on the higher education to be there when and only when you truly qualify, and freedom is starting your career without too much debt on your shoulders.


and that industries cannot be created artificially without market demand.


Again, talk to Germans and how they kick started the solar energy sector. Or talk to Scandinavians who work on other alternative energies. Of course if left to YOUR devices, we'd always be in the pocket of coal and oil special interests. Screw that. That's some freedom.

Ron Paul butthurt? Good.
edit on 9-11-2012 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)


The free market is morally sound, this is undebatable, you are free to opt-out and into it at any time.

Yes, he did say debt-free unlimited currency creation is the solution in another thread, he knows this and you weren't there.

Any country that prints money on the central banking system will eventually fail, a socialized approach isn't any better and Germany isn't an example, they have their share of debt and fiscal troubles too as well as being surrounded by nations who are even worse off. Medical coverage is not a right, higher education is not a right and automatic debt relief is not a right.

Everything you just talked about is immoral and INvoluntary. You cannot force others to pay for your lifestyle whether it be a greedy one or even a humble one.

Germany didn't kick start anything in green energy, they subsidized their own green energy, the market for demand is the government and that demand can't be sustained forever, you already admitted yourself that one cannot print money forever. Funding green energy companies don't work either, some companies might be lucky to survive and catch the coming wave but how much money must be invested and wasted to achieve that?

What happens when governments subsidize an entire industry? good lets look at corn in the U.S. heavily subsidized product = artificially cheap, destroys the economies of third world nations because our imported corn is cheaper than their agricultural market and we made them reliant on our food and not reliant on their own skills. Artificially cheap corn is then put in products of all types to cut costs, corn syrup, modified corn starch, corn everything, its in 80% of all supermarket products. GMO giants like Monsanto come into power and 80% of all those corn products are GMO.

Saying this doesn't mean I hate green energy or love coal and oil, I prefer green technology, doesn't mean I'll put a gun to somebody's head, tax their labor and force them to provide it for me and others that enjoy the green technology.

Why did you bring up Ron Paul? I thought we were talking about free markets vs UNfree and freedom vs slavery. If you want to make this personal, go right on ahead, I won't play your games.

The free market stands strong all on its own, why? it is morally sound, there is no force and thats the difference between freedom and slavery.

Please let's not faul oil and coal domination on the free market, you even admitted it yourself in your post, you called them oil and coal INTERESTS. The fact that they can buy their way into government and use the governments' monopoly on the use of force on Americans is what is flawed. The free market is not the flaw like you are claiming it to be.

Once again, you cannot force somebody else to pay for your lifestyle, even if that lifestyle includes debt relief, receiving medical coverage moving one job to another, and pursuing higher education all mandated by the government or else face the penalties of arrest, conviction, and prison.

THAT isn't freedom, THAT is slavery.


edit on 9-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by sorgfelt
reply to post by Kang69
 


There were third party candidates that were worth voting for. If everyone who rebels by not voting had voted for a third party candidate, they would have accomplished something.


But obviously the media in america cannot be bothered to do so, call it snob appeal of the big parties or whatever. It took the state-owned media of russia to cover the third party debate...but remember anything state owned is always evil.

Private media owned by the rockefellers and rothschilds is gooooooooddddddd!


Big government = baaaaaaddddd
small government= goooooodddd

(kindergarden logic)



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Trust me, free markets are a disaster waiting to happen. Today business is in china, tomorrow it is in bangladesh, the next day in nigeria, then the moon.

You give me $10 to work for you, someone else volunteers for $5...who gets the job?


I honestly wish I had more time to debate you but my schedule is a bit busy, so maybe tomorrow.

Did you even read the link I provided in that other thread discussing private central banking? It was a jewel and goes hand in hand with "creature from jekyl island".



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


At the same time I think you will find it amazing how many people that didn’t vote who will claim there was no one worth voting for yet if you ask them specifics about third party candidates they will be clueless. Those people are hiding behind the guise of indignation trying to mask their laziness to actually give a damn and research. Most people can’t even tell you the key issues that Romney and Obama differed on. Those people are the worst kind of voter/nonvoter.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   
Obama and Romney are just two sides of the same coin. As far as I am concerned the only thing that decided the presidency is a machine related to an ATM machine its called Diebold....



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


I agree Ron Paul is not facist, but anyone that supports an extremely small government, laissez faire capitalism is very, very right wing. The only distinction between him and the rest of the republicans is that he opposes the military industrial complex. Of course it is nothing to belittle him and to the contrary I praise him for taking this much necessary stand.

But you have to accept that not everyone shares your view of what government should be. Not everyone feels as though they have to be paranoid about any government. A government is composed of people who may belong to a party and have their ideology or just be an independant with mix-matched ideas. The bottom line is government philosophy is determined by those elected to office minus the permanent beaurocrats.

I personally HATE free trade and laissez faire capitalism because it gives big business too much opportunity to screw the working class, it opposes unions, it keeps salaries artificially low, it promotes elitism of the upper capitalist class, it allows wealthy people to have inordinate influence in politics with their contributions(more like legalised bribes).

I want A LEFT-WING government that at least pretends to care MORE for the working class than for any business, big or small. I want legislation that affects big business just as much as it affects small business. I am sick and tired of corporate sellouts, especially the zionist type, running amok in washington and taking america back to feudalism. Not only are they outsourcing jobs by the millions, thus denying americans jobs, they are also making indentured servants out of the asians as well.

I am pro-union and pro-protectionst policies for america: that means good salaries and lots of tariffs to MAKE business come back. Big business already doesn't pay enough taxes in america, why give them more incentives? It is perposterious. Both gary johnson and ron paul are lunatics. This is the bottom line, but I still appreciate their stand against the war machine.


Just because you hate the free market, doesn't mean it isn't morally sound.

The difference between us is, will you force your ideology on me? Do I fall under your world of socialism? Can people voluntarily opt-out of your system? Because people can voluntarily opt-out of mine.

You can't force your beliefs on me and I obviously believe that I can't for my beliefs on you-obviously since I believe in the free market and the freedom that comes with it.

We've had this discussion many times in the past and I still haven't seen you explain how bubbles are prevented when you print unlimited amounts of debt-free currency. And yes, I still remember the posts you made about unlimited printing of debt free currency. It is your explanation to how free healthcare, education, and who knows what else is paid for. I believe it is unsustainable and that industries cannot be created artificially without market demand. And as these industries crumble due to low demand and bubbles come and go, will you let those that previously believed in the socialized system, leave at their will? or will you keep them there to maintain the status quo? That is the difference between freedom and slavery.

edit on 9-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)


Ron Paul's economic beliefs would be practically an unparallelled evil in all of human history if they were actually forced upon a nation the size of the US. He may claim to be against war, but he is not pro life, he is pro murder just as much or more than any other Republican.

You don't have to drop bombs on people to be a war criminal and a terrorist. You can commit atrocities also through economic warfare and economic terrorism. And that is exactly what Ron Paul is very openly advocating to do.

All people that support Ron Paul are clearly incredibly intellectually and morally compromised. If his economic plan was actually put into place, the mass genocide and population culling that the elites want would happen in a very quick time.

Hundreds of millions of US citizens would die under his economic plan. Ron Paul is a megalomaniac, perhaps a different kind than ones like Romney and Obama, but still one nonetheless. What he is advocating is the Ayn Rand craziness of the "producers" of society in terms of how it would view the value of each individual's life among the common people. It's pure evil and an extreme form of psychopathy. It is an extreme narcissistic disorder.

What you call "freedom", is nothing but the advocating of pure evil through an economic terrorism. Which is why Ron Paul supporters are definitely morally and intellectually compromised. Because you have to be suffering from a severe psychosis to not understand this.

edit on 10-11-2012 by Red Cloak because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Why do you like Obama? I respect your decision even though I think he's a shifty, arrogant a-hole. But I would like to know what you see in him. What good has he done? What bad has he done? I mean, you have to admit to the bad stuff, too, right?



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 04:26 AM
link   
If you voted for either of the two, Romney or Obama, you support so much more than what even the OP mentioned.

Don't DARE call yourselves "Liberals". No true Liberal would support Obama.

There is no good reason to actually support OBAMA, he's just a better status quo figure head to some, compared to the other guy.

Obama is a LIAR. Romney was looking to be the same. Both fakes and frauds.

The difference is that Obama has been proven to be a liar of treasonous measure, and the population STILL deems him fit for Presidency. Like how KNOWN Felons are in political office in many poor drug infested neighborhoods like Detroit, on City Councils, even Congress.

I'm not fan of Romney but one has to ask themselves what the next 4 years will bring now. I fear much greater loss and debt than the previous.

The OP was right about this website somehow turning into a PRO OBAMA site as of late. Which is why I personally do not post hear that often. I couldn't stomach a 'research' site (well once it was) becoming a mirror of the status quo.

ATS HAS lost all credibility, and not just because of that, but it's one big contributor.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 06:01 AM
link   
reply to post by PaxVeritas
 


Another Ron Paul butthurt? Good.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Echo3Foxtrot
reply to post by Annee
 


Why do you like Obama? I respect your decision even though I think he's a shifty, arrogant a-hole.


Your definition of arrogance must be vastly different from most. Arrogant? You haven't seen arrogant. Obama is milky toast compared to arrogant. Gosh.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Echo3Foxtrot
reply to post by Annee
 


Why do you like Obama? I respect your decision even though I think he's a shifty, arrogant a-hole. But I would like to know what you see in him. What good has he done? What bad has he done? I mean, you have to admit to the bad stuff, too, right?


Sounds like you do not like him just because of your opinion of him. He is no better or worse than bush and I think many people have the same opinion of Romney. TO be quite honest your opinion of Obama would almost fit any successful politician so what is your point?



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 07:34 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 07:34 AM
link   
edit on 10-11-2012 by raketata because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by PaxVeritas
 





The difference is that Obama has been proven to be a liar of treasonous measure, and the population STILL deems him fit for Presidency. Like how KNOWN Felons are in political office in many poor drug infested neighborhoods like Detroit, on City Councils, even Congress.


...and this is Obama's fault how exactly? Did he vote all these people into office that you deem criminals? Or did voters who couldn't be bothered to do a little research?

Before you blame Obama for the fact that snow falls in the winter, how about we all take a deep breath and remember who puts these people into office.





new topics
top topics
 
86
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join