Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

If you voted for Obama...

page: 14
86
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.




posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Kang69
 


I don't support any of that crap.

But I do feel that voting for Mitt Romney wouldn't have made much of a difference.

DItto for Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, Snagglepuss, etc.

The point is, no matter who we vote for, we're still screwed.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 12:54 PM
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?


Most leaders tend to be a bit arrogant. You ever belonged to a group that had a great leader and then that leader left? You know what usually happens? That group dissipates. People are people - - Leaders are Leaders. I personally believe Leaders are born. Its in their DNA. What forms their direction is life. Not everyone is a genuine leader.

I like methodical thinking. I relate to methodical thinking. I relate to methodical progressive thinking.

Obama stated he would take each issue - - study it - - and only when he came up with a plan or solution would he act on it. That is what he has done. No "God told me to do it" - - No "Gut reaction".

God himself could not have solved in 4 years the mess the Bush administration created. (Oh and I voted for him BTW).

Obama has accomplished many of the things he said he would.

I do not consider incomplete - - - failure. It is simply incomplete.

Will he have to get more aggressive in the next 4 years? Yes he will. But I think there has been a dramatic shift in respect for Obama with this election - - - and the GOP will only cause themselves more damage if they keep up the Stonewalling.

As far as international affairs and terrorism - - - any average individual who thinks they know even an inkling of the true complexity of it is a fool IMO. That doesn't mean not questioning decisions or actions. But "playing" President of the United States is a fool hearty endeavor.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by PaxVeritas

POST REMOVED BY STAFF


So you are denying republicans are right wingers in everything, and libertarians are extreme fiscal conservatives and pot smoking socially? Do you live in an upside-down world or simply playing the denial game?



Name ONE example of "Laissez Faire" Capitalism in the U.S.
Define "Big Business" too.
Capitalism NEEDS the working class, it's goal should never be to 'screw' it. Corporatism screws it especially when it aligns with the STATE as it has done. Wealthy people having influence in politics is an aberration Fascism and made possible largely by LOBBY laws and people usurping the Constitution, which happens in Socialism and Capitalism alike.


Society needs laws to function properly. The problem is that most of the laws affect small and medium business who does not have enough money to move their operations overseas where they can take advantage of less stringent laws, then import american brand merchandise into america and claim it is american. Only a blind man will this this point. Lack of tarrifs(protectionism) IS LAISSEZ-FAIRE CAPITALISM! If I repeat it a million times will it sink in?


POST REMOVED BY STAFF


I think the same thing of the republicans and libertarians who view the economy in terms of business needs and profit before anything else. The workers are more important than the business man because if the workers decide to go on strike the business is capoot.



I am sick and tired of corporate sellouts


Yeah Corporatism sucks. Where'd that Capitalism stuff go to huh??????


Corporatism is the main branch of capitalism. Even high school dropouts know this. You trying to split hairs and deflect is very dishonest and typical of right wing lunacy. "Business first and the workers second." People need jobs and anyone can provide them. It is does not have to be billionares or millionares. The government can do this just as well. Europeans did it, communists in asia did it.



especially the zionist type
Most Zionists in history loved the Communist model


Is that why jews run wall street and contribute the most to the two big parties? So much so that they have a monopoly of influence in the middle east and can push countries like iraq and iran at will and with no remorse? You are most definitely not bs'ing anyone except yourself. You are so dellusional that you probably believe your own nonsense.



Not only are they outsourcing jobs by the millions, thus denying americans jobs,


Oh now you're interested in the jobs staying American? WTF?


You are not? You like outsourcing?



I am pro-union and pro-protectionst policies for america: that means good salaries and lots of tariffs to MAKE business come back.


Now you're a Capitalist AGIAN???


No I never said I was a capitalist. I am just pointing out the severe flaws of capitalism in different ways. I am for a mixed economy, both capitalism and communism, called social democracy.



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.


I got this far and realized I'm typing to someone who is possibly insane. You rant all over the place and speak against things most Libertarians are against, claim you WANT a "Leftist" Government because it has the illusion of 'caring for people'....not realizing that LEFTIST Government that sprang up in the Eastern Block, Asia, Africa, have killed the MOST Citizens last century alone.


Communism is extreme left. Only a myopic twisted person who is extreme right will claim everyone else is a communist because he/she is not extreme right. Everything is perspective. Take your right wing glasses off for a chance to see the world for what it is.


Then you bash Ron Paul as if he agrees with this stuff, which is CORPORATISM.....which you DON"T EVEN REALIZE??? Why are there so many like you that speak so much? Take the time to educate yourself THEN come rant on a political thread.

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


Ron Paul is not jesus christ. He was and still is a republican. And again for the thousand time, corporatism is the main branch of capitalism. I don't have to be a capitalist to point out its flaws!
edit on 10/11/12 by EarthCitizen07 because: fixed quotes
edit on Sat Nov 10 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Right on. In my perception of this world, Ron Paul migrated somewhere East of Mordor after this:
Audience at tea party debate cheers leaving uninsured to die


If you're uninsured and on the brink of death, that's apparently a laughing matter to some audience members at last night's tea party Republican presidential debate.

Texas Rep. Ron Paul, a doctor, was asked a hypothetical question by CNN host Wolf Blitzer about how society should respond if a healthy 30-year-old man who decided against buying health insurance suddenly goes into a coma and requires intensive care for six months. Paul--a fierce limited-government advocate-- said it shouldn't be the government's responsibility. "That's what freedom is all about, taking your own risks," Paul said and was drowned out by audience applause as he added, "this whole idea that you have to prepare to take care of everybody …"

"Are you saying that society should just let him die?" Blitzer pressed Paul. And that's when the audience got involved.

Several loud cheers of "yeah!" followed by laughter could be heard in the Expo Hall at the Florida State Fairgrounds in response to Blitzer's question.


So this is what I think about you, Dr.Paul: you are a consummate schmuck, and so are your brain dead and stone hearted followers.

Just beats me how people betray their human self by worshiping this scion of the Devil.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


I had forgotten about that thanks for posting it.

After learning about his views on foreign policy I ruled him out as someone I could support and didn’t pay much attention to him after that but I vaguely remember hearing about those remarks and just shaking my head. I just do not see how so many people got behind him after learning things like that about him.

I kind of understood how they fell for his foreign policy because it sounded good at first but the reality of the world is much different than what he made it out to be and many people just do not have a firm grasp on it.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by thePharaoh
 


A fact is a fact, Bush was a traitor as well.
Sorry to hear he is your Messiah.



personally i think obama is a living legend....wise up or you will miss it!
I truly hope I do miss the "IT".
I'm sorry you have a problem with the fact that I believe in freedom and the United States Constitution.
I'm sorry you have a problem with the fact that I am against democracies and that I believe in the American Republic.
Then again, no I'm not sorry for what you think, or have a problem with because I simply don't care about anti-Americans.
edit on 11/11/2012 by GunzCoty because: damn space bar



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Right on. In my perception of this world, Ron Paul migrated somewhere East of Mordor after this:
Audience at tea party debate cheers leaving uninsured to die


If you're uninsured and on the brink of death, that's apparently a laughing matter to some audience members at last night's tea party Republican presidential debate.

Texas Rep. Ron Paul, a doctor, was asked a hypothetical question by CNN host Wolf Blitzer about how society should respond if a healthy 30-year-old man who decided against buying health insurance suddenly goes into a coma and requires intensive care for six months. Paul--a fierce limited-government advocate-- said it shouldn't be the government's responsibility. "That's what freedom is all about, taking your own risks," Paul said and was drowned out by audience applause as he added, "this whole idea that you have to prepare to take care of everybody …"

"Are you saying that society should just let him die?" Blitzer pressed Paul. And that's when the audience got involved.

Several loud cheers of "yeah!" followed by laughter could be heard in the Expo Hall at the Florida State Fairgrounds in response to Blitzer's question.


So this is what I think about you, Dr.Paul: you are a consummate schmuck, and so are your brain dead and stone hearted followers.

Just beats me how people betray their human self by worshiping this scion of the Devil.



Interesting how you let the reaction of the hard right GOP audience's reaction dictate your opinion on Ron Paul. Did you even consider Ron's explanation? He didn't agree to the moderators suggestion, nope not at all.

The point Ron Paul is making is that people can and do voluntarily offer charity, it is immoral to forcefully TAKE (tax) from others' earnings to save somebody else.

Ron Paul is actually morally right on this topic. He is a doctor and often treated patients for free so I don't get why people see Ron Paul as evil or inhuman because he doesn't believe in taking others' money to do what he wants.

And scion of the devil? and consumate schmuck? sigh....

Right, and his supporters are the ones that are 'brain dead' when YOU can't even think critically about the situation before coming to an asinine conclusion.

Thats ATS for ya folks. EMOTION > LOGIC
edit on 11-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
Interesting how you let the reaction of the hard right GOP audience's reaction dictate your opinion on Ron Paul.


Yes, it is interesting. You see, THIS kind of people show up worked up and full of enthusiasm at his rallies. This is HIS base.


Did you even consider Ron's explanation? He didn't agree to the moderators suggestion, nope not at all.


What he did was worse, which was a cop out. I'm sorry I just don't see how anyone would take this seriously, e.g. that when a crisis strikes, a charity would magically appear out of thin air with the exact amount of money to keep the poor guy on life support. Like Santa Claus, only better. This is a fantasy produced by extreme ideology.

And you are in denial if you pretend that you didn't see that change of course during this conversation. With "freedom" and all. And when he realized that Blitzer has him cornered, he just copped out.


The point Ron Paul is making is that people can and do voluntarily offer charity, it is immoral to forcefully TAKE (tax) from others' earnings to save somebody else.


Is it immoral to use tax dollars to maintain roads? Fund research and science? Pay the police? Hell I don't need the police, my house is a fortress and every adult in my family has a carry permit. Is it OK for me to refuse funding for the police? So what really strikes me about Ron Paul's positions, is that when taken for the face value, they are just exceptionally stupid. And then he uses that little wiggle space left (such as mumbling about charities solving various healthcare and other problems in the society) to try and fix that, but still looks pathetic.


He is a doctor and often treated patients for free


This was in days of yore. If a person needs a test or hospitalization, Dr.Paul won't be able or willing to cover that bill. He can give them two aspirin and ask to call in the morning, but this is laughable.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


The way I see it, he would have had to compromise that audience in order to gain more votes.

He didn't gain more votes so it's obvious why he never had a chance.

Instead, those folks shifted their weight behind Romney.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by eLPresidente
Interesting how you let the reaction of the hard right GOP audience's reaction dictate your opinion on Ron Paul.


Yes, it is interesting. You see, THIS kind of people show up worked up and full of enthusiasm at his rallies. This is HIS base.


Did you even consider Ron's explanation? He didn't agree to the moderators suggestion, nope not at all.


What he did was worse, which was a cop out. I'm sorry I just don't see how anyone would take this seriously, e.g. that when a crisis strikes, a charity would magically appear out of thin air with the exact amount of money to keep the poor guy on life support. Like Santa Claus, only better. This is a fantasy produced by extreme ideology.

And you are in denial if you pretend that you didn't see that change of course during this conversation. With "freedom" and all. And when he realized that Blitzer has him cornered, he just copped out.


The point Ron Paul is making is that people can and do voluntarily offer charity, it is immoral to forcefully TAKE (tax) from others' earnings to save somebody else.


Is it immoral to use tax dollars to maintain roads? Fund research and science? Pay the police? Hell I don't need the police, my house is a fortress and every adult in my family has a carry permit. Is it OK for me to refuse funding for the police? So what really strikes me about Ron Paul's positions, is that when taken for the face value, they are just exceptionally stupid. And then he uses that little wiggle space left (such as mumbling about charities solving various healthcare and other problems in the society) to try and fix that, but still looks pathetic.


He is a doctor and often treated patients for free


This was in days of yore. If a person needs a test or hospitalization, Dr.Paul won't be able or willing to cover that bill. He can give them two aspirin and ask to call in the morning, but this is laughable.


Are you really this ignorant?

The people at his rallies are Ron Paul supporters, not NEOCONS, the same supporters who DON'T CHEER for the deaths of others. Have you EVER been to a Ron Paul rally? APPARENTLY NOT, yet you feel you can have an opinion on the attendees of Ron Paul rallies...quite interesting. I have been to several of his rallies, I hear people BOO'ING the deaths of innocent people.

Of course charities don't work well, especially in large disasters... the government is filling the current void and doing it wastefully and inefficiently.. Ron Paul is presenting an idea where there is no federal organizations like FEMA (which the Constitution actually STATES), which have shown OBVIOUS FAILURE during Katrina and Sandy.

Is it immoral to forcefully TAX people and if they refuse, put them in jail? YES. It doesn't matter what the tax is used for, the initial act is IMMORAL. This is undebatable which is why you needed to bring up fixing roads to appeal to the emotional side of people. Plus, taxes don't build roads, taxes go directly to pay the interest on the national debt owed to the PRIVATELY OWNED federal reserve.

Don't make excuses for not having a strong argument. Dr. Paul often treated patients for free. Medical care is just as valuable as today as it was back then, the only difference is the worth of the currency. Don't you understand what inflation is? Today, the dollar is worth over 90% less than its original value.

Why must I give you lessons on history, economics, AND morality!?

You talk a big game but at the fundamental level, you have no argument. You make things up, you repeat hearsay, you deflect and create strawmen.

I'm tired of people who are void of facts and evidence and in order to get their agenda across, create falsehoods to make up for the lack of knowledge.

Like I posted earlier, you are operating on EMOTION > LOGIC. Please get over it, you can't win this argument.
edit on 11-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


The way I see it, he would have had to compromise that audience in order to gain more votes.

He didn't gain more votes so it's obvious why he never had a chance.

Instead, those folks shifted their weight behind Romney.


At least somebody sees it the right way.

Ron Paul had to compromise to earn their support, he couldn't sell out his own principles so instead he said what they didn't like to hear.

Buddhasystem, why don't you understand what is in plain sight?
edit on 11-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Ron Paul is and will always be what I call "controlled opposition".

He's trotted out every 4 years to give a certain demographic a beacon of hope.

When he realizes he can't win (and he will predictably do so), he backs out, leaving these folks with nothing more than the same old choices, unless they vote for Gary Johnson or whatever nobody decides to try their hand at filling that void.

Controlled opposition.

Ron Paul is no savior, nor was he the right choice for this country.

You don't leave your poor to fend for themselves because they haven't learned how to game the system like you have.

If what I read is true, then some of Ron Paul's supporters, you included, need a reality check.

Of the states that hate Obama the most, how many of those are supported by tax dollars contributed by their northern or western neighbors?

And how many of those states continue to thumb their noses at common sense while stuffing the pockets of the filthy rich corpses that inhabit their borders?



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
Of course charities don't work well, especially in large disasters...


So you agree that Dr.Paul made a weak argument. Yes, he did.


Is it immoral to forcefully TAX people and if they refuse, put them in jail? YES. It doesn't matter what the tax is used for, the initial act is IMMORAL. This is undebatable which is why you needed to bring up fixing roads to appeal to the emotional side of people.


Ah, you simply dodge the debate. I'm not appealing to the "emotional side" of people, I'm appealing to common sense on the pre-K level. How the hell is the society supposed to function without basic services and infrastructure, and organizations maintaining same? Ancient Romans understood this and instituted a lot of things, including roads (with a mix of funding, which was ultimately based on tax revenue), and fire departments. However, some modern cavemen choose to turn back the clock on civilization and dim the light of reasoning. Who's going to save the apartment building on fire? How will Dr.Paul make it to the office if the road is in disrepair? You don't have answers to any of this.


Plus, taxes don't build roads


Mmm, how exactly is the Interstate system built and maintained? What's the magic behind the local roads in my county being built and maintained?


Don't make excuses for not having a strong argument. Dr. Paul often treated patients for free.


How many CAT scans did he pay for from his own pocket? Did he pay for anesthesia as well, when such was needed? Did he provide a two month supply of asthma medication to a few families? Go ahead and ask him. I'm all ears. Oh yeah, he took the blood pressure and body temperature. Call me in the morning.


Why must I give you lessons on history, economics, AND morality!?


Oh I'm not taking lessons from ignorant people, who are deluding themselves further into sheer nonsense.


You make things up, you repeat hearsay, you deflect and create strawmen.


Wait, what did I make up? That fire departments are a necessity? Whoa. That doctors won't be able to provide the necessary test and procedures for free?


I'm tired of people who are void of facts and evidence


Then you must be extremely p!ssed at yourself.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by eLPresidente
Of course charities don't work well, especially in large disasters...


So you agree that Dr.Paul made a weak argument. Yes, he did.


Is it immoral to forcefully TAX people and if they refuse, put them in jail? YES. It doesn't matter what the tax is used for, the initial act is IMMORAL. This is undebatable which is why you needed to bring up fixing roads to appeal to the emotional side of people.


Ah, you simply dodge the debate. I'm not appealing to the "emotional side" of people, I'm appealing to common sense on the pre-K level. How the hell is the society supposed to function without basic services and infrastructure, and organizations maintaining same? Ancient Romans understood this and instituted a lot of things, including roads (with a mix of funding, which was ultimately based on tax revenue), and fire departments. However, some modern cavemen choose to turn back the clock on civilization and dim the light of reasoning. Who's going to save the apartment building on fire? How will Dr.Paul make it to the office if the road is in disrepair? You don't have answers to any of this.


Plus, taxes don't build roads


Mmm, how exactly is the Interstate system built and maintained? What's the magic behind the local roads in my county being built and maintained?


Don't make excuses for not having a strong argument. Dr. Paul often treated patients for free.


How many CAT scans did he pay for from his own pocket? Did he pay for anesthesia as well, when such was needed? Did he provide a two month supply of asthma medication to a few families? Go ahead and ask him. I'm all ears. Oh yeah, he took the blood pressure and body temperature. Call me in the morning.


Why must I give you lessons on history, economics, AND morality!?


Oh I'm not taking lessons from ignorant people, who are deluding themselves further into sheer nonsense.


You make things up, you repeat hearsay, you deflect and create strawmen.


Wait, what did I make up? That fire departments are a necessity? Whoa. That doctors won't be able to provide the necessary test and procedures for free?


I'm tired of people who are void of facts and evidence


Then you must be extremely p!ssed at yourself.



Why would you split my arguments in half to make it sound like I only had half of an argument? Can you not debate the entire argument directly?

I didn't dodge anything, I told you TAXING is immoral, which it is. It doesn't matter how many roads you want to talk about, using force to steal money from another person is wrong and immoral, that is a fundamental idea that everybody understands. TAXES are directly used to pay the interest on the national debt owed to the federal reserve. I don't know why I must repeat myself again. Oh right, because you said you don't learn from ignorant people. So you don't obviously like facts and logic???

Things like local fire departments are paid for by local property taxes. Look it up. You've never heard of how the federal reserve system works!?!?!? you don't know how bonds work!? No wonder you can't make a coherent argument, you don't even understand the basics of how our economy and government works.

What I don't understand is why you can't debate head on and directly. You are full of holes and side comments that have nothing to do with the debate.

I told you Ron Paul treated patients for free and you want to know what equipment he had?? It doesn't matter because your original argument was that Ron Paul was a bad person who didn't care about others. Medical equipment has nothing to do with any of that. You are literally back peddling faster than you, yourself can even comprehend.

I should've known better than to fall for a troll trap. Good thing I now know who you are so I don't have to waste any time to bother posting facts when people like YOU don't take facts seriously.

edit on 12-11-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Ron Paul is and will always be what I call "controlled opposition".

He's trotted out every 4 years to give a certain demographic a beacon of hope.

When he realizes he can't win (and he will predictably do so), he backs out, leaving these folks with nothing more than the same old choices, unless they vote for Gary Johnson or whatever nobody decides to try their hand at filling that void.

Controlled opposition.

Ron Paul is no savior, nor was he the right choice for this country.

You don't leave your poor to fend for themselves because they haven't learned how to game the system like you have.

If what I read is true, then some of Ron Paul's supporters, you included, need a reality check.

Of the states that hate Obama the most, how many of those are supported by tax dollars contributed by their northern or western neighbors?

And how many of those states continue to thumb their noses at common sense while stuffing the pockets of the filthy rich corpses that inhabit their borders?



Thats your theory backed on nothing but rumor and hearsay. Got any proof? Maybe Ron Paul or any of his family or staffers admitting he is controlled opposition? Any at all with a credible background to make such a claim to be remotely true?

Who controls the opposition?

Who 'trots' him out every 4 years, in your opinion?

For somebody that accuses other people of needing a 'reality check', I do hope you can prove your accusations with some real evidence.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
I didn't dodge anything, I told you TAXING is immoral, which it is. It doesn't matter how many roads you want to talk about, using force to steal money from another person is wrong and immoral, that is a fundamental idea that everybody understands.


Oh wait, you still haven't provided that pixie dust that would fund road construction, research and plenty of other services. So you did dodge all right. You have a money fetish, plain and simple, and even a reasonable tax code won't sit with you. Well, an obsession is an obsession, why bother to argue.


TAXES are directly used to pay the interest on the national debt owed to the federal reserve. I don't know why I must repeat myself again.


I don't know either. Nobody does, actually, because you repeating this ad infinitum doesn't serve a purpose.


Things like local fire departments are paid for by local property taxes. Look it up.


I don't have to "look it up". I pay local taxes and have the bills. I'm glad my tax dollars support not only the fire department, but also the library. Great place for kids. Pleasure to see the library well stocked, clean and friendly. That's civilization. Cavemen wouldn't necessarily appreciate that.

Cavemen also don't necessarily know that local governments issue bonds on regular basis. So part of local tax is used to pay interest as well. Shudder! Horror!


You've never heard of how the federal reserve system works!?!?!? you don't know how bonds work!?


Having worked for an investment bank, it's safe to say that my knowledge of these matters is vastly superior to yours.


No wonder you can't make a coherent argument, you don't even understand the basics of how our economy and government works.


DERP. There is resounding silence on your part, on how a normal and modern society would work without taxes. You have no clue, all you have is a money hang-up. Nowhere in history could a society function without tax collection. With the exception of cavemen, maybe. You might as well learn to breathe without inhaling air. I'll be waiting.


I told you Ron Paul treated patients for free and you want to know what equipment he had?? It doesn't matter because your original argument was that Ron Paul was a bad person who didn't care about others.


If he talks about a patient on life support that's about to be disconnected for monetary reasons as an illustration of the American freedom, he's a schmuck and a lunatic all in one package.


Medical equipment has nothing to do with any of that.


Oh, in addition to your expertise in finance you are also dabbling in medicine. I see. So you propose to treat with herbs and hot tea? No scalpel for you, buddy. No pain killers. Want an X-ray? Tough.

I mean COME ON, how do you propose modern medicine is practiced with no tools, equipment of pharma? Really, how??? Can you answer the question straight, w/o red herring like "OH MY GOD % INTEREST, FEDERAL RESERVE"?

I'm really amused reading these silly posts, it's more like Dr. Seuss than Dr. Paul.


Good thing I now know who you are so I don't have to waste any time to bother posting facts when people like YOU don't take facts seriously.


You have ignored the facts I presented more than once here, please re-read these pages.
edit on 12-11-2012 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
86
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join