Mrkim Report This Comment Date: November 05, 2007 02:03PM
Hope this one dudn get jerked like the others that have been posted here of
late (with no explanation for why!)
Here's a link to a vid that gave me a chuckle too : [
www.youtube.com]
Like President Reagan said years ago "one of the scariest things an
American can hear is "I'm from the government and I'm here to help
you."
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 05, 2007 03:26PM
Here, he has already made over ONE MILLION DOLLARS, so far, thats Nov 5th,
12am to 9am!
Donate Today, Nov 5th or any day!
Look at Straw Poll Results, the bottom of the list is more 2nd, 3rd and 4th
place, now check the top again, 1! Sure are lots of 1's........
[
www.ronpaul2008.com]
[
72.14.207.107]
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 05, 2007 03:46PM
Ron Paul, the last, True Patriot..... it's long but read as much as you can
from a speech that Ron Paul gave before the "U.S. House of Representatives,
May 22, 2007"......
Jefferson would be proud!
"Patriotism" By Ron Paul
Madam Speaker, for some, patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. For
others, it means dissent against a government's abuse of the people's
rights.
I have never met a politician in Washington or any American, for that matter,
who chose to be called unpatriotic. Nor have I met anyone who did not believe he
wholeheartedly supported our troops, wherever they may be.
What I have heard all too frequently from various individuals are sharp
accusations that, because their political opponents disagree with them on the
need for foreign military entanglements, they were unpatriotic, un-American
evildoers deserving contempt.
The original American patriots were those individuals brave enough to resist
with force the oppressive power of King George. I accept the definition of
patriotism as that effort to resist oppressive state power.
The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility and out of
self-interest for himself, his family, and the future of his country to resist
government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience
to the state. Resistance need not be violent, but the civil disobedience that
might be required involves confrontation with the state and invites possible
imprisonment.
Peaceful, nonviolent revolutions against tyranny have been every bit as
successful as those involving military confrontation. Mahatma Gandhi and Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr., achieved great political successes by practicing
nonviolence, and yet they suffered physically at the hands of the state. But
whether the resistance against government tyrants is nonviolent or physically
violent, the effort to overthrow state oppression qualifies as true
patriotism.
True patriotism today has gotten a bad name, at least from the government and
the press. Those who now challenge the unconstitutional methods of imposing an
income tax on us, or force us to use a monetary system designed to serve the
rich at the expense of the poor are routinely condemned. These American patriots
are sadly looked down upon by many. They are never praised as champions of
liberty as Gandhi and Martin Luther King have been.
Liberals, who withhold their taxes as a protest against war, are vilified as
well, especially by conservatives. Unquestioned loyalty to the state is
especially demanded in times of war. Lack of support for a war policy is said to
be unpatriotic. Arguments against a particular policy that endorses a war, once
it is started, are always said to be endangering the troops in the field. This,
they blatantly claim, is unpatriotic, and all dissent must stop. Yet, it is
dissent from government policies that defines the true patriot and champion of
liberty.
It is conveniently ignored that the only authentic way to best support the
troops is to keep them out of dangerous undeclared no-win wars that are
politically inspired. Sending troops off to war for reasons that are not truly
related to national security and, for that matter, may even damage our security,
is hardly a way to patriotically support the troops.
Who are the true patriots, those who conform or those who protest against wars
without purpose? How can it be said that blind support for a war, no matter how
misdirected the policy, is the duty of a patriot?
Randolph Bourne said that, "War is the health of the state.'' With war, he
argued, the state thrives. Those who believe in the powerful state see war as an
opportunity. Those who mistrust the people and the market for solving problems
have no trouble promoting a "war psychology'' to justify the expansive role
of the state. This includes the role the Federal Government plays in our lives,
as well as in our economic transactions.
Certainly, the neoconservative belief that we have a moral obligation to spread
American values worldwide through force justifies the conditions of war in order
to rally support at home for the heavy hand of government. It is through this
policy, it should surprise no one, that our liberties are undermined. The
economy becomes overextended, and our involvement worldwide becomes prohibited.
Out of fear of being labeled unpatriotic, most of the citizens become compliant
and accept the argument that some loss of liberty is required to fight the war
in order to remain safe.
This is a bad trade-off, in my estimation, especially when done in the name of
patriotism. Loyalty to the state and to autocratic leaders is substituted for
true patriotism; that is, a willingness to challenge the state and defend the
country, the people and the culture. The more difficult the times, the stronger
the admonition comes that the leaders be not criticized.
Because the crisis atmosphere of war supports the growth of the state, any
problem invites an answer by declaring war, even on social and economic issues.
This elicits patriotism in support of various government solutions, while
enhancing the power of the state. Faith in government coercion and a lack of
understanding of how free societies operate encourages big-government liberals
and big-government conservatives to manufacture a war psychology to demand
political loyalty for domestic policy just as is required in foreign
affairs.
The long-term cost in dollars spent and liberties lost is neglected as immediate
needs are emphasized. It is for this reason that we have multiple perpetual wars
going on simultaneously. Thus, the war on drugs, the war against gun ownership,
the war against poverty, the war against illiteracy, the war against terrorism,
as well as our foreign military entanglements are endless.
All this effort promotes the growth of statism at the expense of liberty. A
government designed for a free society should do the opposite, prevent the
growth of statism and preserve liberty.
Once a war of any sort is declared, the message is sent out not to object or you
will be declared unpatriotic. Yet, we must not forget that the true patriot is
the one who protests in spite of the consequences. Condemnation or ostracism or
even imprisonment may result.
Nonviolent protesters of the Tax Code are frequently imprisoned, whether they
are protesting the code's unconstitutionality or the war that the tax revenues
are funding. Resisters to the military draft or even to Selective Service
registration are threatened and imprisoned for challenging this threat to
liberty.
Statism depends on the idea that the government owns us and citizens must obey.
Confiscating the fruits of our labor through the income tax is crucial to the
health of the state. The draft, or even the mere existence of the Selective
Service, emphasizes that we will march off to war at the state's pleasure.
A free society rejects all notions of involuntary servitude, whether by draft or
the confiscation of the fruits of our labor through the personal income tax. A
more sophisticated and less well-known technique for enhancing the state is the
manipulation and transfer of wealth through the fiat monetary system operated by
the secretive Federal Reserve.
Protesters against this unconstitutional system of paper money are considered
unpatriotic criminals and at times are imprisoned for their beliefs. The fact
that, according to the Constitution, only gold and silver are legal tender and
paper money outlawed matters little. The principle of patriotism is turned on
its head. Whether it's with regard to the defense of welfare spending at home,
confiscatory income tax, or an immoral monetary system or support for a war
fought under false pretense without a legal declaration, the defenders of
liberty and the Constitution are portrayed as unpatriotic, while those who
support these programs are seen as the patriots.
If there is a war going on, supporting the state's effort to win the war is
expected at all costs, no dissent. The real problem is that those who love the
state too often advocate policies that lead to military action. At home, they
are quite willing to produce a crisis atmosphere and claim a war is needed to
solve the problem. Under these conditions, the people are more willing to bear
the burden of paying for the war and to carelessly sacrifice liberties, which
they are told is necessary.
The last 6 years have been quite beneficial to the health of the state, which
comes at the expense of personal liberty. Every enhanced unconstitutional power
of the state can only be achieved at the expense of individual liberty. Even
though in every war in which we have been engaged civil liberties have suffered,
some have been restored after the war ended, but never completely. That has
resulted in a steady erosion of our liberties over the past 200 years. Our
government was originally designed to protect our liberties, but it has now,
instead, become the usurper of those liberties.
We currently live in the most difficult of times for guarding against an
expanding central government with a steady erosion of our freedoms. We are
continually being reminded that 9/11 has changed everything.
Unfortunately, the policy that needed most to be changed, that is, our policy of
foreign interventionism, has only been expanded. There is no pretense any longer
that a policy of humility in foreign affairs, without being the world's
policemen and engaging in nation building, is worthy of consideration.
We now live in a post-9/11 America where our government is going to make us safe
no matter what it takes. We are expected to grin and bear it and adjust to every
loss of our liberties in the name of patriotism and security.
Though the majority of Americans initially welcomed the declared effort to make
us safe, and we are willing to sacrifice for the cause, more and more Americans
are now becoming concerned about civil liberties being needlessly and
dangerously sacrificed.
The problem is that the Iraq war continues to drag on, and a real danger of it
spreading exists. There is no evidence that a truce will soon be signed in Iraq
or in the war on terror or the war on drugs. Victory is not even definable. If
Congress is incapable of declaring an official war, it is impossible to know
when it will end. We have been fully forewarned that the world conflict in which
we are now engaged will last a long, long time.
The war mentality and the pervasive fear of an unidentified enemy allows for a
steady erosion of our liberties, and, with this, our respect for self-reliance
and confidence is lost. Just think of the self-sacrifice and the humiliation we
go through at the airport screening process on a routine basis. Though there is
no scientific evidence of any likelihood of liquids and gels being mixed on an
airplane to make a bomb, billions of dollars are wasted throwing away toothpaste
and hair spray, and searching old women in wheelchairs.
Our enemies say boo, and we jump, we panic, and then we punish ourselves. We are
worse than a child being afraid of the dark. But in a way, the fear of
indefinable terrorism is based on our inability to admit the truth about why
there is a desire by a small number of angry radical Islamists to kill
Americans. It is certainly not because they are jealous of our wealth and
freedoms.
We fail to realize that the extremists, willing to sacrifice their own lives to
kill their enemies, do so out of a sense of weakness and desperation over real
and perceived attacks on their way of life, their religion, their country, and
their natural resources. Without the conventional diplomatic or military means
to retaliate against these attacks, and an unwillingness of their own government
to address the issue, they resort to the desperation tactic of suicide
terrorism. Their anger toward their own governments, which they believe are
coconspirators with the American Government, is equal to or greater than that
directed toward us.
These errors in judgment in understanding the motive of the enemy and the
constant fear that is generated have brought us to this crisis where our civil
liberties and privacy are being steadily eroded in the name of preserving
national security.
We may be the economic and the military giant of the world, but the effort to
stop this war on our liberties here at home in the name of patriotism is being
lost.
The erosion of our personal liberties started long before 9/11, but 9/11
accelerated the process. There are many things that motivate those who pursue
this course, both well-intentioned and malevolent, but it would not happen if
the people remained vigilant, understood the importance of individual rights,
and were unpersuaded that a need for security justifies the sacrifice for
liberty, even if it is just now and then.
The true patriot challenges the state when the state embarks on enhancing its
power at the expense of the individual. Without a better understanding and a
greater determination to rein in the state, the rights of Americans that
resulted from the revolutionary break from the British and the writing of the
Constitution will disappear.
The record since September 11th is dismal. Respect for liberty has rapidly
deteriorated. Many of the new laws passed after 9/11 had, in fact, been proposed
long before that attack. The political atmosphere after that attack simply made
it more possible to pass such legislation. The fear generated by 9/11 became an
opportunity for those seeking to promote the power of the state domestically,
just as it served to falsely justify the long-planned invasion of Iraq.
The war mentality was generated by the Iraq war in combination with the constant
drumbeat of fear at home. Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, who is now likely
residing in Pakistan, our supposed ally, are ignored, as our troops fight and
die in Iraq and are made easier targets for the terrorists in their backyard.
While our leaders constantly use the mess we created to further justify the
erosion of our constitutional rights here at home, we forget about our own
borders and support the inexorable move toward global government, hardly a good
plan for America.
The accelerated attacks on liberty started quickly after 9/11. Within weeks, the
PATRIOT Act was overwhelmingly passed by Congress. Though the final version was
unavailable up to a few hours before the vote, no Member had sufficient time to
study it. Political fear of not doing something, even something harmful, drove
the Members of Congress to not question the contents, and just voted for it. A
little less freedom for a little more perceived safety was considered a fair
trade-off, and the majority of Americans applauded.
The PATRIOT Act, though, severely eroded the system of checks and balances by
giving the government the power to spy on law-abiding citizens without judicial
supervision. The several provisions that undermine the liberties of all
Americans include sneak-and-peek searches, a broadened and more vague definition
of domestic terrorism, allowing the FBI access to library and bookstore records
without search warrants or probable cause, easier FBI initiation of wiretaps and
searches, as well as roving wiretaps, easier access to information on American
citizens' use of the Internet, and easier access to e-mail and financial records
of all American citizens.
The attack on privacy has not relented over the past 6 years. The Military
Commissions Act is a particularly egregious piece of legislation and, if not
repealed, will change America for the worse as the powers unconstitutionally
granted to the executive branch are used and abused. This act grants excessive
authority to use secretive military commissions outside of places where active
hostilities are going on. The Military Commissions Act permits torture,
arbitrary detention of American citizens as unlawful enemy combatants at the
full discretion of the President and without the right of habeas corpus, and
warrantless searches by the NSA. It also gives to the President the power to
imprison individuals based on secret testimony.
Since 9/11, Presidential signing statements designating portions of legislation
that the President does not intend to follow, though not legal under the
Constitution, have enormously multiplied. Unconstitutional Executive Orders are
numerous and mischievous and need to be curtailed.
Extraordinary rendition to secret prisons around the world have been widely
engaged in, though obviously extralegal.
A growing concern in the post-9/11 environment is the Federal Government's list
of potential terrorists based on secret evidence. Mistakes are made, and
sometimes it is virtually impossible to get one's name removed even though the
accused is totally innocent of any wrongdoing.
A national ID card is now in the process of being implemented. It is called the
REAL ID card, and it is tied to our Social Security numbers and our State
driver's license. If REAL ID is not stopped, it will become a national driver's
license ID for all Americans. We will be required to carry our papers.
Some of the least-noticed and least-discussed changes in the law were the
changes made to the Insurrection Act of 1807 and to posse comitatus by the
Defense Authorization Act of 2007. These changes pose a threat to the survival
of our Republic by giving the President the power to declare martial law for as
little reason as to restore public order. The 1807 act severely restricted the
President in his use of the military within the United States borders, and the
Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 strengthened these restrictions with strict
oversight by Congress. The new law allows the President to circumvent the
restrictions of both laws. The Insurrection Act has now become the
"Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act.'' This is hardly a
title that suggests that the authors cared about or understood the nature of a
constitutional Republic.
Now, martial law can be declared not just for insurrection, but also for natural
disasters, public health reasons, terrorist attacks or incidents, or for the
vague reason called "other conditions.'' The President can call up the
National Guard without congressional approval or the Governors' approval, and
even send these State Guard troops into other States.
The American Republic is in remnant status. The stage is set for our country
eventually devolving into a military dictatorship, and few seem to care. These
precedent-setting changes in the law are extremely dangerous and will change
American jurisprudence forever if not revised. The beneficial results of our
revolt against the King's abuses are about to be eliminated, and few Members of
Congress and few Americans are aware of the seriousness of the situation.
Complacency and fear drive our legislation without any serious objection by our
elected leaders. Sadly, though, those few who do object to this self-evident
trend away from personal liberty and empire-building overseas are portrayed as
unpatriotic and uncaring.
Though welfare and socialism always fails, opponents of them are said to lack
compassion. Though opposition to totally unnecessary war should be the only
moral position, the rhetoric is twisted to claim that patriots who oppose the
war are not supporting the troops. The cliché "Support the Troops'' is
incessantly used as a substitute for the unacceptable notion of supporting the
policy, no matter how flawed it may be.
Unsound policy can never help the troops. Keeping the troops out of harm's way
and out of wars unrelated to our national security is the only real way of
protecting the troops. With this understanding, just who can claim the title of
"patriot''?
Before the war in the Middle East spreads and becomes a world conflict for which
we will be held responsible, or the liberties of all Americans become so
suppressed we can no longer resist, much has to be done. Time is short, but our
course of action should be clear. Resistance to illegal and unconstitutional
usurpation of our rights is required. Each of us must choose which course of
action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even
peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes.
But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of
the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as
unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is
to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the
magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully
realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes
from a society respectful of individual liberty.
This is the Ron Paul site.... [
www.lewrockwell.com]
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 05, 2007 04:00PM
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 05, 2007 05:10PM
We already know you're a lazy bastard "ZZZZZZ boy"!
You'd better wake up!
People don't even care what laws are passed and what those laws are doing and
have done, "Politicians" are not on your side, see.....
[
www.lewrockwell.com]
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 05, 2007 09:01PM
I support the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party in not wanting to have
Bleu Hitler getting busted for not wanting contrived Governor Appreciation Award
and faked contrived College Degrees ! It must be Government Plot with others to
deprive him of his freedom in Amerika ! Guten Abend !- Foreword by Dr. Susan
Block -Beverly Hills , Educators , and Medical Professionals , and duped Law
Enforcement -Guten Nacht ! -Sieg , Kegel Beer !
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 12:54AM
what is it with asswipes that feel it's their duty to "inform"
everyone of their political beliefs?
quit jacking everyone elses threads and create your own.... if you have any
imagination left
ORLANDO399 Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 01:03AM
ding ding round one coming up
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 01:54AM
fossil, is that all you can do is BITCH, is it that time of the month for you,
anytime real information around here is passed out you come in and start your
little act, if your job is to "change subjects", you suck at it.
fossil = shit-talker
Oh yeah and mind your own fucking business!
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 02:19AM
my own business? hahahaha! wtf do you think all this talk of ron paul is going
to do you? anything? ron paul wants to immediately pull out of Iraq leaving the
Iraqui people with their dicks in their hands to be over-run by Iran and every
other asshole terrorists to what? come home and lock down our borders to prepare
for the terrorists to come over here and bomb our shit on our own turf
hmmmmmmmm.and who says that a doctor has any foreign policy experience
whatsoever? we might as well put a psycologist in the white house! hell thy know
how to run a country.
DAMN SON! take your Ron Paul and shove him up your ass!
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 02:20AM
and by the way...if you havent noticed, I LIVE HERE!
all ron paul is good for is taking votes away from the dumbass liberals
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/11/2007 02:23AM by fossil_digger.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 02:30AM
he might get as many votes as dumbass ross perot
Mrkim Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 05:03AM
Geez dude, what happened to the idea this was a forum to espouse thoughts and
beliefs along with the pics ? BTW, who the fuck put sand in the vaseline jar on
the fossil night stand this mornin ?
I'll tell anyone with a brain to take a look at the ideologies Ron Paul uses as
a basis for his platform in hopes that some measure of sanity just might be
imparted into the coming election, and that even if one chooses NOT to vote for
Ron Paul that they will at least temper the choice they make with some of the
constitutional reasoning he brings with him in his campaign!
This country has gone so far astray of the rights belonging to our citizenry
along with what the federal governments role is supposed to be as outlined
within the Constitution that to me it's time to wake the fuck up and set a
course to right our path or just take the big sleepin pill the establishment
would prefer we all take and simply become comfortably numb as they go about the
business of eliminating the rest of our freedoms while they rape our working
class in the process.
If you think any of the other Republicans or most assureadley ANY of the
Democratic candidates are sane choices, more power to ya buddy. For my $$ there
ain't but one that even comes close to tryin to bring the sanity that's needed
to the table as a president aside from Ron Paul and that's Fred Thompson.
While it's easy to sit on the sidelines and take pot shots at candidates ideas
without presenting an alternative, my question is, WTF's the point in that form
of mental masturbation ? Either present a rational dissenting opinion with a
candidate choice positioned to embrace that ideology or stay outta the fray!
Lastly if you think our current ideologies on the war in Iraq or our posturing
towards an invasion of Iran are good ideas and that Ron Pauls ideas are
irrational I suggest you study a bit more about human nature, the roots of
terrorism and look at one very curious aspect of support his campaign has
mustered. Ron Paul is currently receiving a major share of his funding from
retired and former military personnel, reportedly more so than ANY other
candidate. If his war ideologies are so misguided would this seem a reasonable
outcome of his position in those folks eyes ??
Keep on hawkin whatever platform and candidate you desire to align yourself
with, but please do so from a posture of educated empowerment, not just spewing
more of the same misguided crap that's already plentiful in every other
candidates camp about Ron Paul.
I will say that if you agree with the concept of "nation building" in
Iraq or anywhere else on the globe by the US I'd like to invite you to cite even
ONE SINGLE example of success in such an endeavor in this century by the US
government.
In truth all we seem to achieve in such efforts from my perspective is the
generation of MORE enemies, not fewer of them, and if that seems like some form
of protection for the American people I'm sorry to say we'll simply have to
agree to disagree ol buddy
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 06/11/2007 06:50AM by Mrkim.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 03:39PM
Anonymous Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We already know you're a lazy bastard "ZZZZZZ
> boy"!
>
> You'd better wake up!
>
> People don't even care what laws are passed and
> what those laws are doing and have done,
> "Politicians" are not on your side, see.....
>
> [
www.lewrockwell.com]
Hey poster, are you and Ron Paul Butthole buddies ?
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 04:59PM
hey Kim man, i don't give a rats ass what anyone's political or religious
beliefs are. and neither should you. you of all people should know what this guy
stands for, after all he represents our great state. he has no want whatsoever
to work with the existing government to rectify any of the problems out there,
only to shove his own agenda down the throats of the American people and the
world. all he does is act like a complete overhaul on the system is needed and
claims that he is the man to do it. sounds just like every other bull shit
politicians campaign slogan crap. as soon as he gets in office (which will never
happen) he will fall right into line sacrificing everything he
"promised" he would change in his "run for the gold".
you people aren't sheep, don't act like one unless you want me to kick you in
the nuts.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 07:10PM
What classic fossil (liar) shit-talk.....
vvvvvvvvvvvvvv There are other posts where fossil says Ron Paul has good
views,BUT, he's not gonna win. Here's 1! fossil, were you on vacation?
[
plus613.net]
Here, just in case that one disappears....
[
uabiAMfPXgJ:plus613.net/forum/read.php%3F15,1176190041,older+ron+paul+f
or+president+plus613&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1" rel="nofollow"
>72.14.207.107]
It's simple, check Ron Pauls records, he votes the way he speaks, fossil knows
that, BUT, now Ron continues to move forward, so, now it's time to attack him,
propaganda101.
Why don't any of fossils apostles speak up, usually he shit-talks and you
egomaniacs chime in and laugh, he handles you followers very well, just like a
Bush Jr. Jr., I know, you guys don't want to disappoint fossil when you don't
agree so you just keep your mouths shut, see............. it works..... on
you!
[
www.sourcewatch.org]
[
www.sourcewatch.org]
[
www.sourcewatch.org]
[
www.youtube.com]
Ron Pauls only agenda is FREEDOM, not the good kind, not the bad kind, just
freedom!
Don't believe a word I say about Ron Paul, look up some official stuff and dig
in, his history will provide you with his view of the future!
And Mrkim, Fred Thompson (CFR Member/Big Business)!....... he is the opposite of
Ron Paul!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
[
www.ronpaul2008.com]
Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record:
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S.
treasury every year.
Show me another Politician that can even PROVE
(not say) 50% of those things. You can't!
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 09:29PM
i like ron paul don't get me wrong, BUT AS USUAL I DON'T COMPLETELY AGREE WITH
HIM OR ANYONE ELSE. I HAVE MY BELIEFS AND YOU HAVE YOURS. SO WHAT. but as usual
you anonymice think you could change someones mind with a buncha "you
stooge" videos? GIMME A FUCKIN BREAK! are you idiots that fucking stupid? i
sure hope not.
also i do not read long winded comments or for that matter watch any dumbass
videos trying to change my mind or anyone elses.
shit talk? lmfao! what do you call all the shit you post? fact? hahahaha fuck
you!
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 10:10PM
hahahaha!i couldn't resist clicking your link to this site.
because i said,"good man.
" i'm supposed to completely agree with what he is
and believes? hell i even helped him get elected (my vote) to a state position
NOT a presidential seat, nor do i think there is a possibility that he
would be even close to good president/commander in chief. he proved that with
his want to withdraw immediately from Iraq (the worst course of action for the
US and the world in general)
all this talk of he didn't do this or that proves nothing as to whether or not
he would be a good pres. but on the other hand proves that if by some incredible
long shot he does get elected that he would not get anything at all done, and
proves that absolutely nothing would get done at all. total gridlock in the
house and senate.
if we pull out of Iraq, we will be doomed to several 9/11's, and i for 1 will be
blaming everyone of you dipshits for the mayhem and destruction to come.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/11/2007 10:13PM by fossil_digger.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 06, 2007 10:15PM
oh i forgot, be sure to post some more videos, i can't quit laughing at your
poor excuse for an arguement.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 01:08AM
no snappy comeback anonymouse?
kim?
anyone?
reality sucks huh?
Mrkim Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 03:51AM
Sorry to take so long gettin back here, long day at the shop.
Response ? Still waitin on your example of successful nation building myself.
Found one yet ?
Fossil, I do have to capitulate a lot of your points, yet it's only the reality
of a totally fucked up congress in general that would make achieving his stated
platform goals a difficulty. As I'm sure you're aware the Administative branch
only has so much juice and all things would of congressional necessity require
being run through the congress for approval, so on that point we're in
agreement.
I do feel he's enough of man of his stated word that his goals are not only
right in their intended purpose, a return of our federal government to its
Constitutionally outlined purposes and away from the rights and freedoms robbing
tactics it currently employs, but that he would work diligently to achieve them
while in office, no matter how hard the fight with congress might be.
Back to the topic of our foreign policy I'd really like to know why anyone
thinks this ill fated "world policeman" shit we've been involved in
for the best part of the past century and now into another one is a reasonable
or even worthy course of action ?
If people outside our shores do things our government takes issue with it seems
like it's really none our fuckin business to me ! When the countries within
Africa decide to have civil wars and annihilate one another I really don't get
how that's any of our business as a country, and the same can be said of South
American countries or even the shit in Bosnia/Serbia or anywhere else.
But, let's try lookin at this all from the devils advocate side of things in an
attempt to drive this point home Ok ?
In all the world the only possible adversaries capable of imposing their will
against the US would be China or Russia, but just for a hypothetical agrument,
let's suppose these 2 countries banded together and decided they took serious
issue with the actions of our President or government and decided to slap on the
"world cop" hat and launched a military campaign on OUR shores to
impose THEIR agendas on us as a nation.
Such a combined foe would certainly be a helluva lot to handle, even for the
mighty US military and the citizenry and all the weapons and ammo we as a people
currently hold, but you can bet your ass we'd be fighting tooth and nail to save
OUR country and acquiesence to the intended plan by our enemies would be the
farthest thing from most Americans minds, right ?
So ... there we'd be as a nation doin every subversive activity ever known to
combat. US military operations would abound with civilian troops right at their
sides, IEDs would abound, sabotage of everything possible against our aggressors
troops would be undertaken and even suicide missions would be a part of it all
too because we as a people BELIEVE in the rights of OUR country and the freedoms
we enjoy and embrace and we'd FIGHT LIKE HELL to keep 'em, most especially if we
had foreign troops on OUR soil !
The point here is that if the shoe were on the other foot and WE were the ones
being overrun by foreign forces trying to impose THEIR will on US we would react
no differently than do people in other countries where OUR government and
military attempt to impose OUR will/ agenda on THEM.
With this ideology in mind is it really so hard to realistically envision how
we've made so many enemies internationally and how people all over the world who
have experienced these actions by our forces and our government hold us as a
nation in such great contempt ? Does this type of activity still realisically
seem like a rational course of action if you view this issue in this light?
Bring our troops home from Iraq ? Fuckin A ! We already deposed Saddam and he's
dead now too, and not even by our hands, which is a BIG plus as that would have
only made him a martyr and our struggles there even MORE dificult if we had
killed him.
Honestly though I don't see that we needed to have even gone that far since his
actions only effected his own people and neighbors, which, last time I looked,
none of 'em were on our shores anyway, so what right did we have to invade their
contry anyway other than the seemingly misguided claim of WMDs that have never
materialized and the claims that we would be protecting ourselves from future
aggressions by attempting to take out terroristic forces harbored within
Iraq.
Though we've helped people in Iraq by removing an oppressive dictator and by
working to rebuild some of their infrastructure, we also had a great deal to do
with having a need to rebuild their shit 'cause WE blew it up to begin with. And
we've likely alienated thousands if not hundreds of thousands or millions of the
Iraqi by the death and destruction we've dealt their country in our attempts at
"freeing" them. My bet is we have more enemies in Iraq today than we
had before the 1st American soldier set foot there and I fail to see that as
good for the US and I damned sure can't envision this shit as progress by any
stretch of the imagination
So ... forgive my seeming misguided attempts (in your thoughts anyway) at
installing a President who's not bent on continuing such a path.
ORLANDO399 Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 05:11AM
I'm to busy wanking off to this
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 03:41PM
Looks like a Tranny...
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 04:27PM
probably 'cause you've never had a real woman. plastic and rubber don't count.
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 04:33PM
kim i think you and i agree on just about all those points except that ron paul
is the one to fix things. working against the grain will get us nowhere fast.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 05:20PM
We're already nowhere! Why?! Because the general population already "went
with the grain" (Bush Grain - Lies - Propaganda) .
Mrkim, hopefully you were just, "not stooping down to his level", with
your response, hopefully it wasn't ass kissing, he went off like this
and downright told you how to be and
you crawled back in
....... We'll see.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 05:23PM
I guess fossil hates George Carlin now too.....
[
www.youtube.com]
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 06:06PM
Anybody that talks shit about Ron has an agenda, watch this and tell me why you
wouldn't vote for him!
[
youtube.com]
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 07:12PM
Anybody that talks shit about Bush has an agenda, watch this and tell me why
you wouldn't vote for him!
[www.eatshit.com]
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 07:16PM
fossil_digger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> probably 'cause you've never had a real woman.
> plastic and rubber don't count.
Darn!, what about chickens ?
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 07, 2007 09:39PM
strange that people wamt to influence my political decisions. do i really hold
some sorta clout somewhee? let me know where, i'd like to visit some day.
and i do like george carlin. i assume the link you posted (i didn't look.
surprised?) is the one where he says that "politicians don't give a fuck
about you not one bit". yes i've seen it before.
when Ron Paul gets drilled in the polls he can start up a "watchdog"
group or something constructive.
Mrkim Report This Comment Date: November 08, 2007 01:54PM
I have no desire to sway anyone in any particular direction. What I do enjoy
however is attempting to allow others a differing viewpoint that possibly could
enable a more rounded perspective for one to view issues from
To whomever anon above who queried the possibility that I would partake in some
form of ass kissing ..... surely you jest. As one schooled early on in the
finer points of debate I was taught that stooping to name calling or involving
emotion into such enterprises immediately hands the opposing camp a victory.
Debate is an intellectual exercise that must remain free of such things to have
any opportunity for success.
The only ass kissin I ever involve myself in is with my G/F and in such cases
it's a literal rather than figurative action
Mrkim Report This Comment Date: November 08, 2007 02:11PM
fossil_digger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> kim i think you and i agree on just about all
> those points except that ron paul is the one to
> fix things. working against the grain will get us
> nowhere fast.
I adopted a view on such things some time back that follows : Positive
progress always comes from making difficult choices involving forethought and
will. Forging such a path is often fraught with challenging obstacles and hard
choices, yet the easiest path to follow is seldom the best choice one can make
when attempting change
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 09, 2007 02:23AM
fossil_digger Report This Comment Date: November 09, 2007 04:30AM
imagine....
[
www.youtube.com]
[
www.youtube.com]
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/11/2007 04:37AM by fossil_digger.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: November 09, 2007 10:11PM
whatever! I liked John Lennon, not his Bitch wife though.
It'd be nice, but that shit doesn't work, it's been..........
well...........proven....look around, all that peace and love and it's worse
than it's ever been......."the system" is king......
[
www.youtube.com]
[
www.youtube.com]
[
www.youtube.com]
[
www.youtube.com]
[
www.youtube.com]
ORLANDO399 Report This Comment Date: November 10, 2007 03:37AM
John lennon[imagine]..one of the best ever
