Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
More Laughs with Ron Paul; Time to pull Clown Off Stage
Topic Started: Jan 13 2008, 11:07 PM (103 Views)
Sgt. Jaggs
Member Avatar
How about a Voyager Movie
Wow I am watching the rerun debate tonight on FNC and Ron Paul is absolutely fantastic!! He is the only candidate that consistently gets his ass handed to him by the moderator! :rotfl:

In his Lunified derrangement he mixes in things like "we're bankrupt" and girls in the audience holler *wheeew** :lol: :rotfl: .

What a Troll. It may be time to remove this Clown from the stage. He is a Yellow embarrassment. :wave2: By Ron have fun. Time to go away now. :wave2: bye bye
Buh-bye :wave2: :please:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
The government is broke; it is and has been mired in deceiptful, Enron-style, accounting practices; and printing money like they can actually back it up. And in the next decade or so, social security and medicare are going to kick our asses.

I did watch Romney and Huckabee interviews on some ABC news show this morning. I just don't like Huckabee. Romney says all the right things, but....
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Sgt. Jaggs
Member Avatar
How about a Voyager Movie
38957
Jan 13 2008, 11:12 PM
The government is broke; it is and has been mired in deceiptful, Enron-style, accounting practices; and printing money like they can actually back it up. And in the next decade or so, social security and medicare are going to kick our asses.

I did watch Romney and Huckabee interviews on some ABC news show this morning. I just don't like Huckabee. Romney says all the right things, but....

Being a doomsday guy you should like Glenn Beck. :chicken: Did you not read STC's post about GDP? WTH?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
Jag
Jan 13 2008, 11:18 PM
38957
Jan 13 2008, 11:12 PM
The government is broke; it is and has been mired in deceiptful, Enron-style, accounting practices; and printing money like they can actually back it up.  And in the next decade or so, social security and medicare are going to kick our asses.

I did watch Romney and Huckabee interviews on some ABC news show this morning.  I just don't like Huckabee.  Romney says all the right things, but....

Being a doomsday guy you should like Glenn Beck. :chicken: Did you not read STC's post about GDP? WTH?

Not a doomsday guy. Just a guy who wants some sanity to come to the budget process and government powers in Washington. Yes, we have a huge GDP, a giant GNI, woo-hoo. That doesn't mean we can continue the crap that we are doing without it hurting. I think that my future is just fine, even if that socialist Hillary is elected. But, I do think that it is important that the government stay within the limits of its authority as laid out by the constitution.

My main objections: a pork-barrel congress that spends more than it takes in and uses shady accounting practices to hide the fact that it is spending all of the social security money AND congress weenieing out and basically giving its powers to the President who should have NEVER been given them. Sure, go wage a war, George, no matter the cost, we'll 'pay' for it the same way we 'pay' for everything else. We just want the weenie clause so you can't blame us later.

Man, if I were to read the Republican Party platform, which I posted at the last election, you'd wonder how most of these guys can be considered Republicans. I am a strong beleiver in the Republican platform and I would like to eventually see elected Republicans who act as though they beleive in it as well. The last bunch that ran congress until 2006 were trying to out-Democrat the Democrats, and it disgusted me.

Paul and Romney, in that order, are closest to the Republican Party platform our of the current bunch running for President in my estimation.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
I am NOT saying that I am or was opposed to our waging war on the Taliban regime in Afganistan or the Hussein regime in Iraq. I am saying that the constitution states that "The Congress shall have Power To declare War", and I have thought from the beginning that our military actions should have been a declared war, declared by congress, or should not have been fought.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Sgt. Jaggs
Member Avatar
How about a Voyager Movie
38957
Jan 13 2008, 11:29 PM
Jag
Jan 13 2008, 11:18 PM
38957
Jan 13 2008, 11:12 PM
The government is broke; it is and has been mired in deceiptful, Enron-style, accounting practices; and printing money like they can actually back it up.  And in the next decade or so, social security and medicare are going to kick our asses.

I did watch Romney and Huckabee interviews on some ABC news show this morning.  I just don't like Huckabee.  Romney says all the right things, but....

Being a doomsday guy you should like Glenn Beck. :chicken: Did you not read STC's post about GDP? WTH?

Not a doomsday guy. Just a guy who wants some sanity to come to the budget process and government powers in Washington. Yes, we have a huge GDP, a giant GNI, woo-hoo. That doesn't mean we can continue the crap that we are doing without it hurting. I think that my future is just fine, even if that socialist Hillary is elected. But, I do think that it is important that the government stay within the limits of its authority as laid out by the constitution.

My main objections: a pork-barrel congress that spends more than it takes in and uses shady accounting practices to hide the fact that it is spending all of the social security money AND congress weenieing out and basically giving its powers to the President who should have NEVER been given them. Sure, go wage a war, George, no matter the cost, we'll 'pay' for it the same way we 'pay' for everything else. We just want the weenie clause so you can't blame us later.

Man, if I were to read the Republican Party platform, which I posted at the last election, you'd wonder how most of these guys can be considered Republicans. I am a strong beleiver in the Republican platform and I would like to eventually see elected Republicans who act as though they beleive in it as well. The last bunch that ran congress until 2006 were trying to out-Democrat the Democrats, and it disgusted me.

Paul and Romney, in that order, are closest to the Republican Party platform our of the current bunch running for President in my estimation.

Agreed with most of that. Unfortunately the garbage you get with Ron Paul and his fantasy version of the real world we live in you can not support nor can you defend. Therefore the things he says that you like or agree with get lost by his nutty act.

Clown he is. Nothing more.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
I have watched him interviewed. He didn't come off as a nut to me. Perhaps he is a nut for saying that the emperor has no clothes (Uncle Sam is broke)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
I pretty much agree with your first two posts.
38957
Jan 13 2008, 09:33 PM
I am NOT saying that I am or was opposed to our waging war on the Taliban regime in Afganistan or the Hussein regime in Iraq.  I am saying that the constitution states that "The Congress shall have Power To declare War", and I have thought from the beginning that our military actions should have been a declared war, declared by congress, or should not have been fought.

What is the difference between congress voting almost unanimously for the war and congress actually declaring war?

Are there advantages/loopholes to not declaring war? POWs vs enemy combatants, for example.

What was our last declared war? WWII?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
RTW
Jan 14 2008, 12:51 AM
I pretty much agree with your first two posts.
38957
Jan 13 2008, 09:33 PM
I am NOT saying that I am or was opposed to our waging war on the Taliban regime in Afganistan or the Hussein regime in Iraq.  I am saying that the constitution states that "The Congress shall have Power To declare War", and I have thought from the beginning that our military actions should have been a declared war, declared by congress, or should not have been fought.

What is the difference between congress voting almost unanimously for the war and congress actually declaring war?

Are there advantages/loopholes to not declaring war? POWs vs enemy combatants, for example.

What was our last declared war? WWII?

What was the advantage???

How about the last 5 years of moaning and complaining by the very congressmen and women who voted to cede their power to the President about how we need to leave, and we have no clear objective, we can't win, troop strengths are too high, troop strengths are too low, too much violence, death and destruction, close down Guantanamo, what about fair trials for these terrorist dudes, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

How about the stupid arguements over funding?

The Democrats (especially Hillary) playing the weenie clause for all it's worth, turning on the President that they themselves told to go to war??? (How many flip-flops is she allowed on this exactly??? Is that the President that we want????)

The villification of Rumsfeld and Cheney by the Democrats in congress and the media.

If we are going to fight a &@#%&^ war, then let's fight a &@#%&^ war; and do it well.

For Bush's part, he moved forward and has not done a lot of second guessing. He has made some mistakes, and when that was obvious, took steps to fix them. He hasn't backed down and played politics on this. This is one of the reasons that I like Bush. But, he was given power that he never should have been given. We have a constitution to protect us from the tyranny of the government, and congress turned their cowardly backs to one of those checks and made the President too powerful. So, we, as a nation, have an "undeclared war" against another government in another country, in which real soldiers are operating real war machines, inflicting real death and destruction on a real enemy, who would visit the same on us. That is a war. But instead of waging it like a war, we have the constant undermining of it by the congress who virtually told the President to do it, now claiming that they are against it.

Should a President be able to start wars, on his own????
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus