So let me get this straight.Saddam "bombs his own people" and we spend a trillion bucks and kill a million of his own people to "liberate" them.Saakashvili "bombs his own people" and we send HIM a billion bucks and say he is a great democratic leader in the region.Hmm. Now let me think about this for a minute.
You misunderstand his argument about our government giving money to the poor. Knowing Ron Pauls ideals, he was probably just oversimplifying the idea of improving conditions by keeping our wealth within our own country. You are right to question his stance based on those words alone, but I'd bet every cent I have that he doesn't actually endorse government stealing money and redistributing it. I think he was just pressed for time and used a more simple argument against specifically the redistribution of wealth to a belligerent nation, not redistribution in general.
Ron Paul has an amazing track record of consistency with his many years serving in Congress. You can pretty much know what his position is on a topic before he even speaks on it.Cant' say that about many politicians.
That sounds good and I agree with your daddy.How then does one explain the behavior of those who proclaim the virtues of keeping "charity at home", yet holler and scream and cry about "welfare!!! welfare!!!" when it is? Notice these bobbleheads NE-E-E-E-E-E-ver bitch about welfare for Fannie, Freddie, or any other of wall street's illegitimate children
These, fat, useless tax-thieving, cows are destroying this country. We are NOT humanitarians; we are inflamers and provocateurs. We must STOP this interventionist-policy that is ripping the money we DON'T have away from our already broken economy.
brickbatSep 11, 2008
So let me get this straight.Saddam "bombs his own people" and we spend a trillion bucks and kill a million of his own people to "liberate" them.Saakashvili "bombs his own people" and we send HIM a billion bucks and say he is a great democratic leader in the region.Hmm. Now let me think about this for a minute.
kyanSep 11, 2008
It's easy to be left speechless when your interlocutor is voicing asinine arguments.
kaelyiestaSep 11, 2008
You misunderstand his argument about our government giving money to the poor. Knowing Ron Pauls ideals, he was probably just oversimplifying the idea of improving conditions by keeping our wealth within our own country. You are right to question his stance based on those words alone, but I'd bet every cent I have that he doesn't actually endorse government stealing money and redistributing it. I think he was just pressed for time and used a more simple argument against specifically the redistribution of wealth to a belligerent nation, not redistribution in general.
Closed AccountSep 12, 2008
Thirsty? Have some more McAid
digdugdiggerSep 12, 2008
Ron Paul has an amazing track record of consistency with his many years serving in Congress. You can pretty much know what his position is on a topic before he even speaks on it.Cant' say that about many politicians.
hanielperigueuxSep 18, 2008
That sounds good and I agree with your daddy.How then does one explain the behavior of those who proclaim the virtues of keeping "charity at home", yet holler and scream and cry about "welfare!!! welfare!!!" when it is? Notice these bobbleheads NE-E-E-E-E-E-ver bitch about welfare for Fannie, Freddie, or any other of wall street's illegitimate children
jonahtrainerOct 18, 2008
Ron Paul is great and fights for the Individual. We need to eliminate the central bank so the State can't tax without representation. Good thing there is a alternative sound monetary system: <a class="user" href="http://www.runtogold.com/Run_To_Gold/Videos/Entries/2008/10/12_GoldMoney.html">http://www.runtogold.com/Run_To_Gold/Videos/Entrie ...</a>
jasonsieckmannNov 21, 2008
These, fat, useless tax-thieving, cows are destroying this country. We are NOT humanitarians; we are inflamers and provocateurs. We must STOP this interventionist-policy that is ripping the money we DON'T have away from our already broken economy.