Pink Bike would implode, that would be awesome.
Ron Paul - 1 Week, 1 Million Dollars
- Thread starter RenegadeRick
- Start date
i happen to have a man-crush on huckabee, tyvm
Best description of Ron Paul and his campaign yet comes from the national ledger (say what?).
But most of the proletariat won't. They are too busy worrying about the Biggest Loser and Dancing with the Stars to be bothered with the political process.
I know I won't convince you Ron Paul is a viable candidate and you can't convince me he isn't. He has thousands of motivated supporters that will vote in the primaries. 'Nuff said.
I don't wish to stifle anyone's opinion, so I won't be taking you up on your bet. I would miss out on your witty commentary that just had me lolling like mad. Pissing rainbows would be sweet. I can't wait.
Ron Paul won't win, and frankly I wouldn't want that, but you hecklers are missing the point: he's the only politician out there with a spine, and he has excited a small but not insignificant part of the populace.
Now go back to your ham sandwich and colbert jokes...
Now go back to your ham sandwich and colbert jokes...
Making crazy claims like abolishing the IRS because it worked fine before 1913 is not having a backbone. It's either being clinically insane or a compulsive liar.
I think Ron Paul has some interesting points and some great ideas. But I don't agree with a lot of his message.
The true issue in this country is we are a 2 party system. After the primaries, the race is down to 2 people (douche and turd sandwich). The majority of the populous will vote for who the "think" will win because they would rather not vote for a loser.
Red states are solid examples of these types of people. Oregon is a much more intelligent state. I vote for who I feel stands for a majority of my views because there will NEVER be one person who I agree with on everything.
The true issue in this country is we are a 2 party system. After the primaries, the race is down to 2 people (douche and turd sandwich). The majority of the populous will vote for who the "think" will win because they would rather not vote for a loser.
Red states are solid examples of these types of people. Oregon is a much more intelligent state. I vote for who I feel stands for a majority of my views because there will NEVER be one person who I agree with on everything.
The other major issue is the "one -issue" voters. Ie: they vote for whoever is for/against abortion, or for/against gay marriage or whatever hot button issue is in the news.
You should have to pass some test to show you at least understand the very basic issues at stake. Like why voting against abortion may cause you to lose the chance for your soon to be born baby to have health care.
I guess even worse are the people who vote Republican/Democrat because "that how mah daddy did it!"
This election's hot-button issue is the clusterfunk of a war in Iraq.
Well it's mine anyhow.
He's your Ralph Nader for 08. Good luck with that sh1t.
Neither. It's having a thought and a view. now, that doesn't qualify anyone to be President, but it doesn't make you a liar or an insane person. If you paid in my tax bracket, you'd wonder where the level of service you get in return for your dollar was going. I always thought a national sales tax was the way to go because everyone buys stuff and it's equated across social demographics. The greedier you are, the more you pay. Before you say that we need to attend to the poor, in the people's republic of pennsyltucky, we don't pay sales tax on unprepared food and clothing.
The point, I think is this, that the electorate, we the people, not the lobbies, are in a foul mood due to a piss poor economy, a stalled war effort that we should have never have been put in, and typical pull the string and hear em talk responses from the "candidates"
Yeah this guys got some goofy ideas but so did those rebelsback in 1775 that decided it was a good idea to strike out on our own.
He's saying what a lot of people want to hear and geez, the elections a year away and the money party will win, so let's be entertained by all this.
You cannot abolish the IRS and have a functioning government and Functioning infrastructure in 2007 in the United States. Forget about paying off the national debt. It's a pipe dream, and claiming that YOU WILL DO THIS, is insane. It is completely not based in fact. his own web site states that it worked in 1913 so why the hell not now!
Also, I am quite sure I am in a much higher tax bracket from you, being that I reside in Quebec and am in the top tax bracket here (second highest federally). I am just a few % behind sweden when it comes to income tax. 24% Provincially and 26% Federally.
You pay 3.07% to Pa. and maximum of 35% federally, which is less than 28% of your actual income due to the personal deduction.
Also, I am quite sure I am in a much higher tax bracket from you, being that I reside in Quebec and am in the top tax bracket here (second highest federally). I am just a few % behind sweden when it comes to income tax. 24% Provincially and 26% Federally.
You pay 3.07% to Pa. and maximum of 35% federally, which is less than 28% of your actual income due to the personal deduction.
I know, just saying it's a thought..
Wasn't trying to insult you about your income, just establishing a point of reference.
Ya i agree here, it's a thought and a statement that only someone who has no clue would actually believe.
No insult taken, just tired of people complaining about their taxes when they live in the US. a max of 38% is high, but I would jump for joy if my income was taxed at 38%! We get bent over here in Quebec. I complain, and i can still go 2 brackets higher federally???
Ouch.
Yep, that is indeed rough. Makes my 30%ish federal and no state tax and no local income tax look ok.
but as a point of levity, my random quote gadget came up with this a few minutes ago.
"Ron Paul is a congressman and a doctor. He's also a practicing gynecologist.
He's the only presidential candidate to tell women to take off their clothes more times than Bill Clinton."
- Jay Leno
but as a point of levity, my random quote gadget came up with this a few minutes ago.
"Ron Paul is a congressman and a doctor. He's also a practicing gynecologist.
He's the only presidential candidate to tell women to take off their clothes more times than Bill Clinton."
- Jay Leno
And now this thread is back on track.
I'm not saying it is. I am saying that claiming you will abolish the IRS if elected because they didn't need it before 1913 is insane.
You can't abolish the IRS, and it is no longer 1913. If the guy who wants to run the country can't tell that there is a big difference in funds needed to run a country between 2007 and 1913, there's a problem.
My wife and I nearly got a divorce over the 2000 election. She voted for GWB because he was anti-abortion. I tried to talk sense into her at the time and we fought about it for about 3 months. She has since become an educated voter and researches people and issues prior to voting.
She and I now vote together MOST of the time, but she doesn't agree 100% of the time with me on issues, nor does she vote with me because I did.
I've decided to become a single issue voter. Kucinich is nuts but his wife his hot, he will get my vote.
Voter education is key. The media doesn't help here at all, and the electorate is too damn apathetic to bother doing it on their own, unfortunately. Then they have the balls to complain about things.
i miss jack ryan
Vote FLILF! That would be awesome if he won solely on his wifes hotness. You could see what all future politicians would strive for, a hot ass wife.
If they started that years ago today we could have a hot candidate instead of Hilary.
I think it's going to become a "Vote for the candidate who has a wife you wouldn't have to be held at gunpoint to fvck" sort of an election.
Kucinich ftw.
You have to use a sliding scale, you can't compare her ACTUAL hot chicks. Look at the group as a whole, then she becomes quite attractive (think stranded on an island with political wives).
Or just compare her to the real world and not volumes of internet porn.
which season?
giselle had a stupid hotness about her
I was thinking it was more like trying to compare a flag girl to a cheerleader. But I guess that leads to internet porn too.
On FLILFs being the sole qualification, Thompson is my guy. If political opinion is a factor, I would go for Kucinich. Hey, is he short or is she tall? Long and lean... yummy.
Back to that loon with 2 first names, this is an interesting article with his Tonight Show appearance linked in.
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2007/11/06/the-ron-paul-juggernaut
It is good stuff. In the video, he explains a lot of his ideas including why eliminating the income the IRS generates would really only bring the budget back to 2000 levels.
Back to that loon with 2 first names, this is an interesting article with his Tonight Show appearance linked in.
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2007/11/06/the-ron-paul-juggernaut
It is good stuff. In the video, he explains a lot of his ideas including why eliminating the income the IRS generates would really only bring the budget back to 2000 levels.
The USA collected 1 043 908 000 000 last year in income tax. Total receipts were 2 407 254 000 000. Just under half of the national budget is received via income tax.
Where exactly to you plan on getting this money from if there is no more income tax? Will you ever listen to reason?
Oh and just as a fun fact, 1934 receipts (as early as I could find, and a FAR cry from 1913 levels) was 420 000 000 via income tax and 2 955 000 000 overall. Ya, it worked before 1913!
Where exactly to you plan on getting this money from if there is no more income tax? Will you ever listen to reason?
Oh and just as a fun fact, 1934 receipts (as early as I could find, and a FAR cry from 1913 levels) was 420 000 000 via income tax and 2 955 000 000 overall. Ya, it worked before 1913!
That sh*t doesn't even register.
caution, hit piece ahead:
[national review's] mona charen: What Paul Is Running For
just damn.
[national review's] mona charen: What Paul Is Running For
damn.
just damn.
Um. I can only address points 1, 3 and 4.
1. Scooter violated the law and committed treason. This isn't because he has a different political opinion, it is because what he did was treason and he did obstruct justice. Quite a weak argument.
3. How do you know he is not serious? He has seriously said he will do such things and it will be glooorious. You can't eliminate the IRS without cutting some expenses. Massive federal agencies seem like a good start.
4. Ron Paul is bad because of his supporters? Come on now. It is wrong for a candidate who gets little mainstream attention to seek press wherever he can get it? Who is crazy now?
1. Scooter violated the law and committed treason. This isn't because he has a different political opinion, it is because what he did was treason and he did obstruct justice. Quite a weak argument.
3. How do you know he is not serious? He has seriously said he will do such things and it will be glooorious. You can't eliminate the IRS without cutting some expenses. Massive federal agencies seem like a good start.
4. Ron Paul is bad because of his supporters? Come on now. It is wrong for a candidate who gets little mainstream attention to seek press wherever he can get it? Who is crazy now?
Ok one last time, as you appear to be illiterate, or just really, really slow.
RON PAUL WILL NOT ELIMINATE THE IRS BECAUSE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE. HE WILL NOT ELIMINATE THE FBI AND CIA BECAUSE THEY ARE NECESSARY AGENCIES TO THE SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES.
See figures about 3 posts up for why you cannot possibly, abolish the IRS.
Edit: Massive federal agencies. And the interstates. And the military.