This Is Messed Up : Ron Paul and Fox News

[Blue]

lwo0Iyrh1Zk&feature=player_embedded

[soonercruiser]

Big screw-up, yes! Someone is in trouble.
How did the CPAC straw pole results get reported on the other Drive-By media?
Or, was it reported on at all?

[MR2-Sooner86]

The GOP establishment hates Ron Paul but this isn't new. Fox News has been anti-Ron Paul since the '08 Election when they acted like he didn't exist. Even though he was heading polls and beating up on "their" candidates.

As for that crowd, if you support Mitt Romney over Ron Paul you're a god damn dumb f*ck. Romney isn't worthy to even carry Paul's p*ss bucket.

[Blue]

Yup, the media hates him. Thats a good reason to vote for him right there. Among other reasons.

But Fox got caught red handed here. Just making up the news.

[sooner ngintunr]

holy **** that is ****ed up. Fox News is complete and utter bull****. It has nothing to do with left or right, those are some skeevy mother****ers.

[Boarder]

How did the CPAC straw pole results get reported on the other Drive-By media?
Or, was it reported on at all?

Is there any possible manner in which this story could be reported on MSNBC or CNN that would be satisfactory to you?

[bigfatjerk]

I think the problem with Ron Paul and Fox News and most other conservative areas is that socially he's basically a classic liberal not a real conservative anymore.

He is basically for gay marriage, legalizing drugs, downsizing our military, but his biggest fight is to end the fed.

[Blue]

In this beauty the anchors claim Romney won the last 3, but from watching the first lying video we know Paul won it two years in a row...But who needs facts?

Ive known the media were lying mouthpieces, but they're just gettin sloppy with it.

WJANqN1B9yM&feature=player_embedded

[mgsooner]

An honest mistake, I'm sure. ;)

[Blue]

I think the problem with Ron Paul and Fox News and most other conservative areas is that socially he's basically a classic liberal not a real conservative anymore.

He is basically for gay marriage, legalizing drugs, downsizing our military, but his biggest fight is to end the fed.

That shouldn't mean they can blatantly lie like this. They're scared of him.

[MR2-Sooner86]

he's basically a classic liberal not a real conservative anymore.

He is basically for gay marriage, legalizing drugs, downsizing our military, but his biggest fight is to end the fed.

WRONG! Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! It's called the Constitution and he tries his damnedest to follow it. Think before you speak.

He wants the government out of marriage. Marriage is a religious institution and you shouldn't need a license for it. If he can't get that it should be left up to the states and not the federal government.
He wants to end the federal war on drugs and leave it up to the states on what they want to do about it.
He wants to bring our troops home from overseas and stopping poking money down ratholes (see Egypt/Iraq/Afghanistan).

[bigfatjerk]

Ron Paul basically dissed Fox News and the Neo-cons when they were more of a Neo-con network than they are now. They still have a lot of neo-con on them but Covuto, Stossell, plus the business network which is filled with economic libertarians, and the other networks just getting rid of most of their conservatives that foxnews has taken in.

But here's a vid from 2003 on the floor where Ron Paul just goes after the neo-cons and foxnews. It's rough to watch and almost an hour long. Vid quality is poor.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4156174553630131591#

[bigfatjerk]

WRONG! Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! It's called the Constitution and he tries his damnedest to follow it. Think before you speak.

He wants the government out of marriage. Marriage is a religious institution and you shouldn't need a license for it. If he can't get that it should be left up to the states and not the federal government.
He wants to end the federal war on drugs and leave it up to the states on what they want to do about it.
He wants to bring our troops home from overseas and stopping poking money down ratholes (see Egypt/Iraq/Afghanistan).

I agree with all of this and I agree mostly with Paul. You are trying to talk to a Libertarian. I think he's a little off on our military, but that's about it. I agree 100% with what you say. But his opposition will just crush him in any election because of these views. Even if he's right.

[TIMB0B]

He is basically for gay marriage, legalizing drugs, downsizing our military, but his biggest fight is to end the fed.

I think the problem with most conservatives is they don't understand what true freedom and liberty are. He's not "for" gay marriage or drugs, but individual rights by getting rid of the FEDERAL mandates and letting each state decide on those issues. And he's not for downsizing the military. He doesn't want to cut defense spending at all. He wants to get rid of our militaristic world police foreign policy and bring the troops home. He's for a military DEFENSE, not offense.

[Blue]

I think the problem with most conservatives is they don't understand what true freedom and liberty are. He's not "for" gay marriage or drugs, but rather getting rid of the FEDERAL mandates and letting each state decide on those issues. And he's not for downsizing the military. He doesn't want to cut defense spending at all. He wants to get rid of our militaristic world police foreign policy and bring the troops home. He's for a military DEFENSE, not offense.

He's the best conservative choice out there and Fox is doing their damndest to marginalize him.

I hope Fox gets owned for this.

[picasso]

That or he should distance himself from the Truthers crowd.

Yeah, that would help.

[MR2-Sooner86]

I agree with all of this and I agree mostly with Paul. I think he's a little off on our military, but that's about it. I agree 100% with what you say. But his opposition will just crush him in any election because of these views. Even if he's right.

He has had strong support and financial backing from military personnel. In fact, he had more than all the other GOP candidates. Obviously they like him.

I don't think he's hard on the military. He just wants to bring them home. Instead of having them in some country, have them on our border. We have more than enough military personnel to watch our border.

RW3YRo1H43M&feature

Also, I don't know about the rest of you, but I would LOVE to see him in a presidential debate with Obama and proceed to kick the ever living hell out of him.

[MR2-Sooner86]

That or he should distance himself from the Truthers crowd.

Yeah, that would help.

hGyhlNY0y1k

Next.

[bigfatjerk]

He has had strong support and financial backing from military personnel. In fact, he had more than all the other GOP candidates. Obviously they like him.

I don't think he's hard on the military. He just wants to bring them home. Instead of having them in some country, have them on our border. We have more than enough military personnel to watch our border.

RW3YRo1H43M&feature

Also, I don't know about the rest of you, but I would LOVE to see him in a presidential debate with Obama and proceed to kick the ever living hell out of him.

Again the only problem is that they will basically call him too radical and go after how he would basically make our country an anarchy. I don't agree with that, but that's what the democrats will do and it would probably work for them. I would love to see him as president right now. He would actually lead unlike the current commander in mischief. But I know for a fact that the well oiled machine the democrats have would murder him in an election. Fox News wouldn't even be 100% behind him.

[picasso]

Sorry, my wife and kid are asleep. What's he say in the clip?

If he says the Truthers are a loony bunch then great. What took him so long?

[bigfatjerk]

Sorry, my wife and kid are asleep. What's he say in the clip?

If he says the Truthers are a loony bunch then great. What took him so long?

He basically said he doesn't believe it he won't tell anyone else what to believe. He said that 3 years ago.

[Leroy Lizard]

He's too radical and he would turn our country into an anarchy.

[MR2-Sooner86]

http://fineartamerica.com/images-medium/flame-bait-david-april.jpg

You're slipping. It's too obvious.

[Leroy Lizard]

You're slipping. It's too obvious.

It was sort of meant to be obvious... a joke.

That you ruined.

[Leroy Lizard]

I want this dude as our next Pres.

http://www.getreligion.org/wp-content/photos/1mitt_romney_01.jpg

[MR2-Sooner86]

Still too obvious. If you went with Sarah Palin you might be more believable...and several members on this board would join you.

[Leroy Lizard]

There are people here that don't like Mitt Romney? Wow, I thought this was a fairly conservative board.

[bigfatjerk]

1 word RomneyCare. That's really all you need to know about Romney.

If Chris Christie runs for president he'll win.

[bonkuba]

1 word RomneyCare. That's really all you need to know about Romney.

If Chris Christie runs for president he'll win.

Whether I like Paul or not.....he is not electable.....he is brilliant....then in a split second a kook. If he continues to run he will pull some away from a real candidate and cause obummer to be re-elected........sad but true.

[yermom]

i would have loved to see Paul/McCain or some combination in 2008

i don't think anyone was going to beat Token though

i think Ron Paul is too old now. he needs to be advising someone at this point. he's older than McCain, who would have been older than Ronnie when he was elected if he had won

[MR2-Sooner86]

Whether I like Paul or not.....he is not electable.....he is brilliant....then in a split second a kook.

How?


If he continues to run he will pull some away from a real candidate and cause obummer to be re-elected........sad but true.

Real candidate? He's not a real candidate? Curious, who is more of a "real" candidate than him?


i think Ron Paul is too old now. he needs to be advising someone at this point. he's older than McCain, who would have been older than Ronnie when he was elected if he had won

True but last I heard he was healthy as could be. At this point, I don't care about his age. If worse came to worse I'd love to see him in office a year and so and just see how much he could p*ss off the establishment and really kick 'em in the nuts.

His problem would be getting a good, damn good, vice-presidential candidate. I think the age argument however was made more against McCain because people didn't want to see Palin in office.

[Midtowner]

Many Republicans believe the Earth is six-thousand years old, that Jesus coexisted with dinosaurs, that the founding fathers were all opposed to slavery and that global warming is a hoax.

Facts clearly don't concern some of them.

[SoonerProphet]

He is not electable because the establishment media, the corporatists, both political parties and their hangers on, and the vast majority of four legged creatures that vote have their collective heads shoved up their collective asses.

[JohnnyMack]

He is not electable because the establishment media, the corporatists, both political parties and their hangers on, and the vast majority of four legged creatures that vote have their collective heads shoved up their collective asses.

Heh.

[JohnnyMack]

There are people here that don't like Mitt Romney? Wow, I thought this was a fairly conservative board.

Yeah you need sleep. A fairly weak trolling effort on your part.

[delhalew]

Ron Paul, the only politician in America with the balls to inact ANY of the changes we desperately need.

[3rdgensooner]

I don't ever watch Fox News, what is their beef with Paul?

[Ike]

I don't ever watch Fox News, what is their beef with Paul?

He doesn't read from their talking points?

[jkjsooner]

Ron Paul loses me when he talks about fractional reserve banking. He seems to have a very poor understanding of the entire concept.

The alternative to fractional reserve banking is 100% reserve banking. The enforcement mechanism for this would be that the government would require 100% reserves. To me this would seem to be a very anti-libertarian philosophy as it means tighter controls on how banks do business.

When you hear him speak about it, he seems to have no idea what fractional reserve banking is. It simply means banks must keep x% (in our case 10%) of deposits on reserve. This can lead to a 10 times expansion in the money supply but that is just a consequence of banks doing the business that banks do.

I watched an interview where Paul said, "You give the bank $100 and it can then immediately lend out $190." Sorry, Paul, that is not the way it works. You give the bank $100 and it can lend out $90. Then someone takes that $90 loan and buys some service and the person receiving payment for the service places it back into the bank (or another one) and the bank can then lend out $81, etc., etc. It's not voodoo.

I'd be much happier with Ron Paul if he actually limited his opinions on things that he understands. He makes great points when discussing those things. When he discusses monetary policy and it's clear he has no understanding of it, it makes me very nervous about the possibility of him becoming President.

[Leroy Lizard]

Many Republicans believe the Earth is six-thousand years old, that Jesus coexisted with dinosaurs, that the founding fathers were all opposed to slavery and that global warming is a hoax.

Facts clearly don't concern some of them.

The Earth is 10,000 years old. Get it right.

[soonercruiser]

An honest mistake, I'm sure. ;)

No, a DUMB mistake, when you have plenty of research folks available.
But, FOX is thousands of mistakes and overt omissions behind the "others".
Just look at the news polls.
As O'Reilly has said many times - "FOX now has the responsibility to get it right all the time"!
No excuses here.

[soonercruiser]

Many Republicans believe the Earth is six-thousand years old, that Jesus coexisted with dinosaurs, that the founding fathers were all opposed to slavery and that global warming is a hoax.

Facts clearly don't concern some of them.And, most liberal regressives think Jesus was gay, and/or had children!
:rolleyes:

[TIMB0B]

Whether I like Paul or not.....he is not electable.....he is brilliant....then in a split second a kook. If he continues to run he will pull some away from a real candidate and cause obummer to be re-elected........sad but true.
IF he runs as an Independent, yes, he is not electable.

However, he has a great shot at winning the republican nomination, and if he does, he will win the Presidency. Repubs, libertarians, and some dems will NOT vote for Obama. And they certainly won't vote for him just to spite Ron Paul. Paul will kill Obama in the debates.

[soonercruiser]

1 word RomneyCare. That's really all you need to know about Romney.

If Chris Christie runs for president he'll win.

EXACTLY!

[yermom]

Romney's Mormonism doesn't really go over well either

[JohnnyMack]

Romney's Mormonism doesn't really go over well either

We elected a Muslim, I don't think a Mormon will be as much of a shock.

[soonercruiser]

We elected a Muslim, I don't think a Mormon will be as much of a shock.

:D

[Boarder]

Romney's Mormonism doesn't really go over well either
Why do you think that the LDS church is running all of the "I'm Joe Bob and I'm a Mormon" ads?

[Position Limit]

Many Republicans believe the Earth is six-thousand years old, that Jesus coexisted with dinosaurs, that the founding fathers were all opposed to slavery and that global warming is a hoax.

Facts clearly don't concern some of them.

now thats funny stuff. sad but true.

but lets not forget, fox has the highest ratings of all news networks. OF ALL TIME!!!!! a sad commentary on their viewership i know.

[AlboSooner]

Ron Paul is an idealist, and appeals to idealistic people. I like Paul. Something tells me, his theories wouldn't translate well in reality. Smaller countries with 50 million people who don't care about being the best at everything can afford not to be a major player in the world geopolitics. Some countries even survive on the banking industry alone. This type of model is not favorable for America, who thrives on competition and thrives in trying to be the best in everything, while trying to feed, clothe, employ, entertain, protect 350 million people. Many countries do without a lot of luxuries which we deem as vital.


Paul would gain a lot more supporters if he abandoned the idea of abolition for the idea of moderation. Rather than close all military bases down, why not keep open only those military bases that are vital.

US intervention may have negative blow-backs, but also positive blow-backs. Where the US intervenes it creates an entry point for US companies and their products. I would hope Paul would show the good side of the intervention too.

Can Paul say that US intervention in WWII was a bad thing? Or stopping genocide in the Balkans without losing a US life was a bad thing? Those markets are dominated by pro-US people, and US products.

We all like Paul, but deep down we know too well his ideas do not work in the real world, where a hungry China wants nothing more than to dominate all the markets, and the entire geo-political spectrum. If South Korea comes to President Paul, and tells him, we will give US companies the right to make all of our computer needs, but we need some boots here, and a few ships to keep an eye on China and North Korea....what does President Paul say?


As Obama discovered after the election was over the one-liners, and idealistic speeches of the campaign faint in the light of the daily intelligence report. Abolishment of the IRS, would give way to such corruption that most certainly would turn the US into a giant third world country, like India, and the wealth difference between the classes would be wider than the Grand Canyon. We left the 18th century for a reason.

[C&CDean]

Ron Paul is just the national Randy Brogden. Sorta. He'll never get elected.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

And, most liberal regressives think Jesus was gay, and/or had children!
:rolleyes:
Whats wrong with either

[3rdgensooner]

How exactly does one identify a liberal regressive?

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

How exactly does one identify a liberal regressive?
I don't see how its possible, seems a little contradictory.

[KantoSooner]

Ron Paul is just the national Randy Brogden. Sorta. He'll never get elected.

Well, Randy Brogden with a pulse and measureable IQ.

[Blue]

I guess I should have made a better title here. Whether you like Paul or not, does anybody have a problem with a mainstream media outlet undermining a candidate for president by blatantly using false footage and lying about it to make the candidate look unpopular? Watch the video.

[bigfatjerk]

Ron Paul is an idealist, and appeals to idealistic people. I like Paul. Something tells me, his theories wouldn't translate well in reality. Smaller countries with 50 million people who don't care about being the best at everything can afford not to be a major player in the world geopolitics. Some countries even survive on the banking industry alone. This type of model is not favorable for America, who thrives on competition and thrives in trying to be the best in everything, while trying to feed, clothe, employ, entertain, protect 350 million people. Many countries do without a lot of luxuries which we deem as vital.


Paul would gain a lot more supporters if he abandoned the idea of abolition for the idea of moderation. Rather than close all military bases down, why not keep open only those military bases that are vital.

US intervention may have negative blow-backs, but also positive blow-backs. Where the US intervenes it creates an entry point for US companies and their products. I would hope Paul would show the good side of the intervention too.

Can Paul say that US intervention in WWII was a bad thing? Or stopping genocide in the Balkans without losing a US life was a bad thing? Those markets are dominated by pro-US people, and US products.

We all like Paul, but deep down we know too well his ideas do not work in the real world, where a hungry China wants nothing more than to dominate all the markets, and the entire geo-political spectrum. If South Korea comes to President Paul, and tells him, we will give US companies the right to make all of our computer needs, but we need some boots here, and a few ships to keep an eye on China and North Korea....what does President Paul say?


As Obama discovered after the election was over the one-liners, and idealistic speeches of the campaign faint in the light of the daily intelligence report. Abolishment of the IRS, would give way to such corruption that most certainly would turn the US into a giant third world country, like India, and the wealth difference between the classes would be wider than the Grand Canyon. We left the 18th century for a reason.

I pretty much agree here. The only thing I agree with him is that we shouldn't fund another countries military. If it's in our interest to stay in South Korea, Afghanistan, etc. fine we should stay there. I am for taking away all our bases that are in Germany mostly because of WW2. Most of our bases in Europe make no sense at all.


I think we need more of a Chris Christie before we need a full on libertarian because Christie would basically cut the budget a lot more reasonably. And he would tell it like it is instead of saying a bunch of BS like our last few presidents.

[Boarder]

I can't vote for someone with basically the same first and last name.

[picasso]

now thats funny stuff. sad but true.

but lets not forget, fox has the highest ratings of all news networks. OF ALL TIME!!!!! a sad commentary on their viewership i know.

Yes, because the alternatives are all mistake and idealouge free.

[JohnnyMack]

Yes, because the alternatives are all mistake and idealouge free.

My 4 year old likes to point out that his brother did it too when I get on to him for doing something wrong.

[picasso]

Many Republicans believe the Earth is six-thousand years old, that Jesus coexisted with dinosaurs, that the founding fathers were all opposed to slavery and that global warming is a hoax.

Facts clearly don't concern some of them.

And many liberals believe that only Republicans inside of the Beltway are wealthy and are the only folks who cater to the wealthy.
I could go on but please. The left is one big bag farts also.

[bigfatjerk]

Yes, because the alternatives are all mistake and idealouge free.

MSNBC has become impossible to watch because instead of pushing their view all they do is say republicans are bad. I'm not even sure if they have a real point of view on there anymore. I'll watch CNN once in a while.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

My 4 year old likes to point out that his brother did it too when I get on to him for doing something wrong.

Sounds like half of the political discussions on the SO.

[CrimsonCream]

But, FOX is thousands of mistakes and overt omissions behind the "others".

Always amusing when the Loons cry foul.

[C&CDean]

Newsflash: If you get your "news" from any of the TV stations you're a ****ing idiot. Truth: the SO gives better "news" than anything you can find on the telly.

[3rdgensooner]

Truth: the SO gives better "news" than anything you can find on the telly.
Yes, I rely on cruiser, tuba, rufnek et al for all of my news.

[KantoSooner]

SO and the Penny Saver for economic reporting. Between them two, I'm covered.

[C&CDean]

Not me. I rely on soonerscuba, PDX, and KC for my dose of "fair and balanced."

However, this Midtowner nimrod is beginning to picque my interest...

[soonerscuba]

Not me. I rely on soonerscuba, PDX, and KC for my dose of "fair and balanced."

However, this Midtowner nimrod is beginning to picque my interest...I would cut the middle man and just go the Huffington Post comments section if you want the source of my opinions.

[MR2-Sooner86]

Something tells me, his theories wouldn't translate well in reality.

Such as... Eliminating the Department of Education? Department of Energy? Social Welfare programs? Pulling out of the Middle East, Korea, and Europe? Taking the federal government out of many matters and leaving it up to the states?



Many Republicans believe the Earth is six-thousand years old, that Jesus coexisted with dinosaurs, that the founding fathers were all opposed to slavery and that global warming is a hoax.

Facts clearly don't concern some of them.

You're talking about religious-right neo-cons and not Republicans.

Several founds did support slavery and some didn't. They didn't debate it because the country was so fragile and could have been torn apart easily. They figured it would eventually take care of itself. It did. Can argue how it happened but it did fix itself.

As for global warming, show me we're heading for disaster. Oh you can't? Thanks for playing. Come back when you're not regurgitating Al Gore's talking points which are nothing but politically motivated.


Ron Paul loses me when he talks about fractional reserve banking. He seems to have a very poor understanding of the entire concept.

Can't say I've heard him talk about that per say. Only thing I hear is that he doesn't like the Federal Reserve and thinks we should abolish it and go back to the gold standard.


Rather than close all military bases down, why not keep open only those military bases that are vital.

Which ones are vital? Many of our bases sprung up around the world fighting communism. I mean we have a big base in Germany because it was there to slow down the Soviets in case they started rolling across Poland. Not really necessary now.


US intervention may have negative blow-backs, but also positive blow-backs. Where the US intervenes it creates an entry point for US companies and their products. I would hope Paul would show the good side of the intervention too.

There are many negatives. Any examples of some good examples that would outweigh the bad?


Can Paul say that US intervention in WWII was a bad thing? Or stopping genocide in the Balkans without losing a US life was a bad thing? Those markets are dominated by pro-US people, and US products.

He supports our actions in WW2 and says we were justified in those actions. However, we can't go running around the world saving everybody. It sucks and we can say it's a bad thing but what else can you do besides declaring war and going in there? Where do you stop? Middle East? Africa? Asia? Where were we when China murdered their own people and on their human rights issues? We're still best friends with them and haven't done a thing.


We all like Paul, but deep down we know too well his ideas do not work in the real world, where a hungry China wants nothing more than to dominate all the markets, and the entire geo-political spectrum. If South Korea comes to President Paul, and tells him, we will give US companies the right to make all of our computer needs, but we need some boots here, and a few ships to keep an eye on China and North Korea....what does President Paul say?

Proof his ideas don't work? Besides, what we've been doing the past 50 years sure as sh*t hasn't been working.

As for South Korea, I really don't know. It'd be best to ask him. I think however he'd probably tell them we're not mercenaries.


Abolishment of the IRS, would give way to such corruption that most certainly would turn the US into a giant third world country, like India, and the wealth difference between the classes would be wider than the Grand Canyon. We left the 18th century for a reason.

That's why you enact the Fair Tax, which Paul is for.


Ron Paul is just the national Randy Brogden. Sorta. He'll never get elected.

Who do you elect then on the GOP side? Palin? Romney? Newt? Giuliani? Trump!?

The only other two I'd consider is CC (need more information on him) and Cain.

[AlboSooner]

MR2, I've always enjoyed your posts. I won't convince you and you will not convince me. I like Paul but he needs to find a middle ground. Reality, right now, doesn't seem to support his ideology.

I wanted to pass by you guys an idea about the bases in Germany. I have read that the largest base has a world class hospital, and other rehabilitation facilities. The main reason it has remained open, I think, it's because US forces who fought in Vietnam, Korea needed a base closer than the US homeland to take their wounded soldiers, and give them some time off the war zone. Now we are also fighting two wars in the Middle East and the German base serves many war efforts.

I like the bases in Germany. Germany is a stable country and it is the most US-like country in Europe.

There are many more bases that need to be closed before the German bases:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

[C&CDean]

MR2, I've always enjoyed your posts. I won't convince you and you will not convince me. I like Paul but he needs to find a middle ground. Reality, right now, doesn't seem to support his ideology.

I wanted to pass by you guys an idea about the bases in Germany. I have read that the largest base has a world class hospital, and other rehabilitation facilities. The main reason it has remained open, I think, it's because US forces who fought in Vietnam, Korea needed a base closer than the US homeland to take their wounded soldiers, and give them some time off the war zone. Now we are also fighting two wars in the Middle East and the German base serves many war efforts.

I like the bases in Germany. Germany is a stable country and it is the most US-like country in Europe.

There are many more bases that need to be closed before the German bases:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

What? Have you seen the ****ed up shoes them Germans wear? They ain't ANYTHING like us.

[soonercoop1]

The GOP establishment hates Ron Paul but this isn't new. Fox News has been anti-Ron Paul since the '08 Election when they acted like he didn't exist. Even though he was heading polls and beating up on "their" candidates.

As for that crowd, if you support Mitt Romney over Ron Paul you're a god damn dumb f*ck. Romney isn't worthy to even carry Paul's p*ss bucket.

No way I could ever vote for Romney...former Gov of Mass and romneycare is all I needed to know...honestly Palin is great but has little chance like Paul, Newt is great but has way too much baggage...Herman Cain would be about the only one other than Paul Ryan I would vote for...would love to watch the national liberal/progressive media with Herman Cain as a serious candidate...

[C&CDean]

So, what I'm seeing is that we're all pretty much ****ed.

Business as usual.

[JohnnyMack]

No way I could ever vote for Romney...former Gov of Mass and romneycare is all I needed to know...honestly Palin is great but has little chance like Paul, Newt is great but has way too much baggage...Herman Cain would be about the only one other than Paul Ryan I would vote for...would love to watch the national liberal/progressive media with Herman Cain as a serious candidate...

A Christie/Ryan ticket is really intriguing to me.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

No way I could ever vote for Romney...former Gov of Mass and romneycare is all I needed to know...honestly Palin is great but has little chance like Paul, Newt is great but has way too much baggage...Herman Cain would be about the only one other than Paul Ryan I would vote for...would love to watch the national liberal/progressive media with Herman Cain as a serious candidate...
wat

Palin is clueless, Newt has been borderline fascist and Herman Cain is a nut to put it kindly. What do you see in any of them?

[Curly Bill]

wat

Palin is clueless, Newt has been borderline fascist and Herman Cain is a nut to put it kindly. What do you see in any of them?

They're not Obama, and that's a good starting place. :D

[Sooner5030]

fascist, nutty or clueless.....i don't care....just anyone who can see that deficits of $1,400,000,000,000 followed by $1,500,000,000,000 followed by $1,600,000,000,000 is not um good.

hopium and ipads have kept the herd from realizing that we have a contracting economy y after y covered up by deficit spending.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

fascist, nutty or clueless.....i don't care....just anyone who can see that deficits of $1,400,000,000,000 followed by $1,500,000,000,000 followed by $1,600,000,000,000 is not um good.

hopium and ipads have kept the herd from realizing that we have a contracting economy y after y covered up by deficit spending.
While I'm not fluent in whichever language this post was written in, I believe deficits running in the trillions are quite preferable to fascism and are equal to clueless-ness.

[soonercruiser]

Yes, I rely on cruiser, tuba, rufnek et al for all of my news.

Thank you for the complement! :P
But, I do not suggest that either........:rolleyes:

[Mongo]

A Christie/Ryan ticket is really intriguing to me.

Last time you were intrigued by a political candidate you kinda ****ed over this country even more by voting for him and helping him get elected. :D

[soonercruiser]

They're not Obama, and that's a good starting place. :D

:D :D

[soonercruiser]

now thats funny stuff. sad but true.

but lets not forget, fox has the highest ratings of all news networks. OF ALL TIME!!!!! a sad commentary on their viewership i know.

A sad commentary on the refusenicks!

[Sooner5030]

While I'm not fluent in whichever language this post was written in, I believe deficits running in the trillions are quite preferable to fascism and are equal to clueless-ness.

You quickly throw around words like nutty, fascist and clueless when describing possible candidates from a party. Not sure how they can be so crazy when compared to the folks who have been running the federal show for the last 6-8 years. Read the gubments financial statements and buy yourself some perspective.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

You quickly throw around words like nutty, fascist and clueless when describing possible candidates from a party. Not sure how they can be so crazy when compared to the folks who have been running the federal show for the last 6-8 years. Read the gubments financial statements and buy yourself some perspective.
I don't care about how they compare to how things have been the last 6-8 years, because that could make anyone look sane. Democrats used the same rhetoric when comparing Obama to Bush.

[Curly Bill]

Last time you were intrigued by a political candidate you kinda ****ed over this country even more by voting for him and helping him get elected. :D

LOL...I remember those days. JM was like the Brack campaign manager on the SO.

[cccasooner2]

Ron Paul sounds like a Pope without a Roman numeral.

[jkjsooner]

Can't say I've heard him talk about that per say. Only thing I hear is that he doesn't like the Federal Reserve and thinks we should abolish it and go back to the gold standard.

He was making good points then around 7:50 he gets nutty and shows he has no clue what he's talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyjY7RdQMDQ

[Blue]

While I'm not fluent in whichever language this post was written in, I believe deficits running in the trillions are quite preferable to fascism and are equal to clueless-ness.

You keep saying fascism. What do you think Obamacare is? The GM bailout? The wall Street bailout? The TSA? Homeland Security? All govt meddling in business. The definition of fascism.

[Blue]

He was making good points then around 7:50 he gets nutty and shows he has no clue what he's talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyjY7RdQMDQ

Makes sense to me. Also the jackasses at CNBC are nobody you should listen to. I could post vid after vid of them being owned by Ron Paul and Peter Schiff.

Its too bad the media has successfully brainwashed everybody that the one person who is not a pos puppet for the status quo (ie Romney, Huckabee, Clinton, Palin) and is actually for upholding the constitution is a nutjob and not fit to lead this country.

Who knew following the law of the land was a bad thing? Welcome to 2011.

[soonerscuba]

You keep saying fascism. What do you think Obamacare is? The GM bailout? The wall Street bailout? The TSA? Homeland Security? All govt meddling in business. The definition of fascism.IMO, for something to be fascist, it must be authoritarian, none of which technically meet this criteria as they were deemed in legislation.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

You keep saying fascism. What do you think Obamacare is? The GM bailout? The wall Street bailout? The TSA? Homeland Security? All govt meddling in business. The definition of fascism.
Err socialism =! fascism although I'll agree with the TSA and Homeland Security

[Blue]

IMO, for something to be fascist, it must be authoritarian, none of which technically meet this criteria as they were deemed in legislation.

Well I guess don't buy insurance when it becomes mandatory, say no to a scan or search, challenge wiretaps. See how authoritarian it is. ****ing semantics, dude.

[yermom]

i'll agree that they seem to have structured this healthcare thing in a strange way and bungled it in some ways, but ultimately isn't it just a penalty on your taxes if you don't have insurance? i don't even remember anymore...

but i think the "semantics" on authoritarian is that things like healthcare were passed by a representative group of legislators that we have elected to make decisions for us. we could, in theory, elect people that make decisions we like.

i do like that the Teabaggers gave their rep a bunch of crap after voting for the Patriot Act. people gripe about the Twitterverse, but the pols are plugged into it...

[jkjsooner]

Makes sense to me. Also the jackasses at CNBC are nobody you should listen to. I could post vid after vid of them being owned by Ron Paul and Peter Schiff.



Removing fractional reserve banking makes sense to you? A libertarian pushing for oppresive regulation on banks (which is the only way to remove fractional reserve banking) makes sense to you?

Does Paul's lack of knowledge of fractional reserve banking make sense to you? Do you even understand fractional reserve banking yourself? C'mon, man, the guy said that a bank can take a $100 deposit and immediately loan out $190. Sorry, that isn't the way it works.

His comments on fractional reserve banking show stupidity (not understanding the principle) and inconsistency (holding a position that is not at all in line with libertarian philosophy). How in the world does that make sense to you?

[JohnnyMack]

LOL...I remember those days. JM was like the Brack campaign manager on the SO.

I voted for him. Since he's been elected neither of our lives have changed dramatically. We haven't been rounded up and herded into white slave camps yet and he hasn't turned the White House into a mosque yet, but I'm sure both of things are coming soon.

I've been pleased with some things BHO has done and have been equally (if not a little moreso) disappointed with some of his decisions. But life still moves forward and in 2012 he'll either win another term or another suit will take his place.

*shrugs*

[jkjsooner]

i'll agree that they seem to have structured this healthcare thing in a strange way and bungled it in some ways, but ultimately isn't it just a penalty on your taxes if you don't have insurance? i don't even remember anymore...

It was a result of compromise. Without a single payer system, to remove preexisting conditions from being factored there had to be a strong incentive to keep people from waiting until they're sick to get insurance. The tax code was used to do that. (While I think preexisting condition checks serve a purpose, almost everyone agrees that it has been abused by insurance companies.)

It seems that the courts might just overturn the legislation because of this small penalty. First, the arguments made about "not forcing someone to buy tea" really has no strong constitutional ground if you happen to take a literalist view of the constitution which the conservative justices tend to favor. Secondly, on the federalist front, conservative justices have upheld the governments use of taxing and spending to push social agendas so it's going to be very hard for them to find wriggle room here.

My question is how this is any different than a tax credit for having a child or a mortgage interest deduction for buying a house? Any argument that one rewards an activity whereas the other punishes inactivity seem abritrary and a mere matter of semantics.

I wish they would have just raised everyone's taxes by $x and then allowed you to take an $x credit if you have insurance. It's effectively the same thing, consistent with other tax practices, and would have removed Scalia's ability to wriggle around a few semantics to strike down the law without showing himself to be completely hypocritical.

[delhalew]

MR2, I've always enjoyed your posts. I won't convince you and you will not convince me. I like Paul but he needs to find a middle ground. Reality, right now, doesn't seem to support his ideology.

I wanted to pass by you guys an idea about the bases in Germany. I have read that the largest base has a world class hospital, and other rehabilitation facilities. The main reason it has remained open, I think, it's because US forces who fought in Vietnam, Korea needed a base closer than the US homeland to take their wounded soldiers, and give them some time off the war zone. Now we are also fighting two wars in the Middle East and the German base serves many war efforts.

I like the bases in Germany. Germany is a stable country and it is the most US-like country in Europe.

There are many more bases that need to be closed before the German bases:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

If you would listen you might convinced, because you are wrong on several counts about where Paul stands.

I like crazy ideas like, declaring war if you want to go kill some people. Then we go kill em real good. None of this endangering our guys because we are making them play politics.

[MR2-Sooner86]

MR2, I've always enjoyed your posts. I won't convince you and you will not convince me.

Oh I'm not trying to get into a p*ssing match but I was just curious what you thought.

[MR2-Sooner86]

Fox faces fallout over misleading footage before Ron Paul interview (http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/20110217/ts_yblog_thecutline/fox-airs-misleading-footage-before-ron-paul-interview)


On Tuesday, Fox News anchor Bill Hemmer asked Ron Paul to respond to the chorus of boos that greeted news the insurgent small-government Texas congressman had won the Conservative Political Action Conference's presidential straw poll for the second year in a row. There was just one problem with Hemmer's question: The vocal chorus of boos didn't come from last week's 2011 CPAC as the network claimed; rather those boos were from the 2010 conference.

Paul supporters have claimed that Fox News—which some might expect to promote an establishment Republican over the anti-establishment Paul—intentionally aired the wrong footage to place Paul in a negative light against runner-up Mitt Romney.

Paul's spokeswoman declined to comment to The Cutline.
However, Fox denies any such deception. Michael Clemente, Fox's senior vice president of news, told Mediaite that "we made a mistake with some of the video we aired, and plan on issuing a correction on America's Newsroom tomorrow morning explaining exactly what happened."

Hemmer admitted the error on air today. "It's an honest mistake. We apologize for the error. We look forward to having Representative Paul back on our program very soon," he told viewers.

Still, this isn't the first time Fox has aired the wrong footage in a way that could be perceived as benefiting certain Republicans.

In November 2009, Fox's Sean Hannity had Rep. Michele Bachmann on describing an anti-health care reform rally while airing footage from a significantly larger event led by Glenn Beck a few months earlier. Hannity apologized the next night for the mix-up, which was caught by The Daily Show's Jon Stewart.

Fox again aired the wrong crowd footage during a segment just a week later.
Fox's Greg Jarrett reported that Sarah Palin was "drawing huge crowds" while on a book tour. The footage, however, was actually from a larger 2008 campaign event. Fox's management chalked up the incorrect footage to a "production error." The network hired Palin soon after as a contributor.

[yermom]

i forgot to say "Faux News" before. sorry for the delay :D

[yermom]

It was a result of compromise. Without a single payer system, to remove preexisting conditions from being factored there had to be a strong incentive to keep people from waiting until they're sick to get insurance. The tax code was used to do that. (While I think preexisting condition checks serve a purpose, almost everyone agrees that it has been abused by insurance companies.)

It seems that the courts might just overturn the legislation because of this small penalty. First, the arguments made about "not forcing someone to buy tea" really has no strong constitutional ground if you happen to take a literalist view of the constitution which the conservative justices tend to favor. Secondly, on the federalist front, conservative justices have upheld the governments use of taxing and spending to push social agendas so it's going to be very hard for them to find wriggle room here.

My question is how this is any different than a tax credit for having a child or a mortgage interest deduction for buying a house? Any argument that one rewards an activity whereas the other punishes inactivity seem abritrary and a mere matter of semantics.

I wish they would have just raised everyone's taxes by $x and then allowed you to take an $x credit if you have insurance. It's effectively the same thing, consistent with other tax practices, and would have removed Scalia's ability to wriggle around a few semantics to strike down the law without showing himself to be completely hypocritical.

i guess so they don't "raise taxes" but yeah, that's just semantics, really. i was basically wondering why they didn't do that as i was typing my post.

[yermom]

I voted for him. Since he's been elected neither of our lives have changed dramatically. We haven't been rounded up and herded into white slave camps yet and he hasn't turned the White House into a mosque yet, but I'm sure both of things are coming soon.

I've been pleased with some things BHO has done and have been equally (if not a little moreso) disappointed with some of his decisions. But life still moves forward and in 2012 he'll either win another term or another suit will take his place.

*shrugs*

that's really what i don't get. some numbers in some computer got bigger, but by and large, not much has changed since the anti-Christ took office.

[Blue]

that's really what i don't get. some numbers in some computer got bigger, but by and large, not much has changed since the anti-Christ took office.

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQp3gsv-P22_Y0yhnp4JpwGXQZRsXTVRy-UP_9bGN-HPRGSiz-j&t=1

[Sooner5030]

exhibit A evidencing the main cause of a $14 trillion debt......basically 100% of our GDP:


that's really what i don't get. some numbers in some computer got bigger, but by and large, not much has changed since the anti-Christ took office.

translation: "now that my guy is in office......deficits don't really matter."

[yermom]

i never said he was my guy. in fact, i don't think he's moved away enough from W's mess for me to say that

more to the point i was making is that the vast majority of the people so vocal about Obama sucking loved Bush, but as far as i can tell he hasn't snatched my guns or made me praise Allah yet

[Leroy Lizard]

i never said he was my guy. in fact, i don't think he's moved away enough from W's mess for me to say that

more to the point i was making is that the vast majority of the people so vocal about Obama sucking loved Bush, but as far as i can tell he hasn't snatched my guns or made me praise Allah yet

He hasn't snatched my guns only because we won't let him.

If we let him, he would.

[MR2-Sooner86]

JZ1alAbMrMM&feature

Yeah... :rolleyes:

[Killerbees]

Removing fractional reserve banking makes sense to you? A libertarian pushing for oppresive regulation on banks (which is the only way to remove fractional reserve banking) makes sense to you?

Does Paul's lack of knowledge of fractional reserve banking make sense to you? Do you even understand fractional reserve banking yourself? C'mon, man, the guy said that a bank can take a $100 deposit and immediately loan out $190. Sorry, that isn't the way it works.

His comments on fractional reserve banking show stupidity (not understanding the principle) and inconsistency (holding a position that is not at all in line with libertarian philosophy). How in the world does that make sense to you?

First I am not a Ron Paul fan, I think he has some good ideas and some bad ones. I have never voted for him.

But what he said was
Ron Paul: Yeah, if you put a hundred dollars in the bank today, the bank immediately has $190

which by the way is correct. If person A puts 100 in a checking account today then the bank can immediately loan out 90 to person B. Therefore the bank can push some buttons and be able to meet immediate demand for 190 based on a 100 deposit.

I do not understand how it would be anti-libertarian to change banking regulations from a fractional reserve to a full reserve. But then I am not really a true libertarian I guess. His whole point is that the current system allows banks to artificially inflate the money supply by 10x and he believes that the creation of money should be wholly in the hands of the government instead.

[jkjsooner]

which by the way is correct. If person A puts 100 in a checking account today then the bank can immediately loan out 90 to person B. Therefore the bank can push some buttons and be able to meet immediate demand for 190 based on a 100 deposit.

Fair enough but it still isn't a problem with me. If someone loaned you $100 with the promise that you would keep at least $10 of it in cash, would you have a problem with them loaning out the other $90? That's essentially what you're doing with a checking account. If a person doesn't want their money loaned out then they're welcome to buy a safe deposit box at the bank.

And government does control the money supply. They have it in their calculations that it can grow 10x via fractional reserve banking. I believe some governments and maybe even our's in the past (?) have altered the reserve requirements to expand/contract the money supply. It's not the normal way of doing business but it is another tool they have.

I recognize that libertarians don't like the govt/fed manipulating the economy but since the government doesn't usually change the reserve rate that's really not an issue. I ony mentioned it to point out that the govt is the one who controls the money supply. (Edit: I guess an exception is when banks stop lending and hold more than 10% in reserves...)

On a side note, I'm not exactly sure how an economy would function without lending and any time you have lending you have an expansion of the money supply. Maybe the idea is that one can only lend his own money. That would be a terribly inefficient way to match lenders to buyers and would also expose the lenders to much greater risk.

[soonercruiser]

JZ1alAbMrMM&feature

Yeah... :rolleyes:

Shall we ever see appologies from the LameStream media for thier major gaffes or slanted stories?

http://members.cox.net/franklipsinic/Other/Huffington%20post.jpg

[yermom]

can you show me anything like what Fox does?

they go beyond "gaffe" they knew what they were doing. the anchor was asking Paul about their reaction.

slanting is one thing, deceiving is another.

[Killerbees]

.

On a side note, I'm not exactly sure how an economy would function without lending and any time you have lending you have an expansion of the money supply. Maybe the idea is that one can only lend his own money. That would be a terribly inefficient way to match lenders to buyers and would also expose the lenders to much greater risk.

I agree, not really sure that full reserve banking is an option. I have heard of making checking a full reserve system and savings a fractional reserve system which kind of makes sense to me but I just cant figure out how the economy would function on a wholly full reserve system.

I havent run across any arguments for raising the reserve percentage either. Its either "Fractional reserve banking is criminal! Full reserve banking is rainbows and lollipops" or the exact opposite "Full reserve banking is stupid!"

[soonercruiser]

can you show me anything like what Fox does?

they go beyond "gaffe" they knew what they were doing. the anchor was asking Paul about their reaction.

slanting is one thing, deceiving is another.

By the way - did you personally see the story??? OR THE CORRECTION AND APPLOLGY???
Probably - babbley not!

How about Dan Rather and CBS running with the false document before the Presidential election of George Bush?
Nothing has ever matched that falsehood by the LameStream media! NOTHING!!!!!!!


Memos allegedly from Jerry KillianMain article: Killian documentsThe Killian documents were initially claimed by CBS to have come from the "personal files" of the late Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian, Bush's squadron commander during Bush's Air National Guard service.[36] They describe preferential treatment during Bush's service, including pressure on Killian to "sugar coat" an annual officer rating report for the then 1st Lt. Bush. CBS aired the story amid more releases of Bush's official records by the Department of Defense, including one just the day before as the result of a FOIA lawsuit by the Associated Press.[37] The Killian documents were alleged to be fakes, starting with a Free Republic web posting by Harry MacDougald, a conservative Republican lawyer posting under the blogger name, "Buckhead." MacDougald and multiple fellow bloggers pointed out that the formatting shown in the documents used proportional fonts that did not come into common use until the mid to late 90's and alleged that the documents were therefore likely forgeries.[38][39]

The forgery allegations subsequently came to the attention of the mainstream media, especially after experts also questioned the documents' authenticity and lack of a chain of custody.[40][41][42] The original documents have never been submitted for authentication. The man who delivered the copies, Lt. Col. Bill Burkett, a former officer in the Texas Army National Guard and outspoken Bush critic, claimed that he burned the originals. Burkett admitted lying to CBS and USA Today about where he had obtained the papers and eventually expressed doubts of his own about their authenticity.[43]

CBS and Dan Rather initially defended the documents and the report,[44] but on September 20, 2004 - less than two months before Election Day, CBS News stated that it had been "misled" and that it could not authenticate the documents and should not have used them.[45] CBS then formed an independent panel headed by former U.S. Attorney General Dick Thornburgh and retired Associated Press president Louis D. Boccardi to investigate the story and the handling of the Killian memos.[46] The final report of the panel, while not addressing the authenticity of the documents, faulted many of the decisions made in developing the story, and producer Mary Mapes along with three others were forced to resign from CBS News.[47] Prior to the panel report being completed, Rather announced the date of his retirement,[48] left "60 Minutes Wednesday", stepped down as anchor on March 9, 2006, and then left CBS altogether on June 20, 2006.[49] The CBS news show that had aired the memos, "60 Minutes Wednesday" was canceled on May 18, 2005, allegedly due to poor ratings and not because of the memos broadcast.[50] In September 2007, Rather sued CBS and its former parent company, Viacom, for US$70 million, claiming that he had been made a "scapegoat" over the memos story.[51]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_military_service_controversy


But, this was probably before you were born. :rolleyes:

[yermom]

they got duped by fake documents, that's not nearly the same as trying to dupe people with fake footage for Ron Paul or Sarah Palin like they have been caught doing multiple times

or that cute thing they like to do where they put (D) next to republican politicians caught in scandals

as for seeing it, no i didn't see it aired, i saw it after people on digg caught it, well before they retracted it.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

He has had strong support and financial backing from military personnel. In fact, he had more than all the other GOP candidates. Obviously they like him.

I don't think he's hard on the military. He just wants to bring them home. Instead of having them in some country, have them on our border. We have more than enough military personnel to watch our border.

RW3YRo1H43M&feature

Also, I don't know about the rest of you, but I would LOVE to see him in a presidential debate with Obama and proceed to kick the ever living hell out of him.I would love to see him debate Beary-O, too. I would like to see Beary debate just aabout anyone who has the cajones to stand up to him, and call him out for the *ommie he is.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Whether I like Paul or not.....he is not electable.....he is brilliant....then in a split second a kook. If he continues to run he will pull some away from a real candidate and cause obummer to be re-elected........sad but true.I tend to agree. The MSM will make mincemeat of Paul.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Many Republicans believe the Earth is six-thousand years old, that Jesus coexisted with dinosaurs, that the founding fathers were all opposed to slavery and that global warming is a hoax.

Facts clearly don't concern some of them.Where'd you hear that stuff? Maddow, Jon Stewart, Maher?haha. you are well informed, indeed!

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Romney's Mormonism doesn't really go over well eitherThat's one of those Christian religions. No doubt it doesn't go over well with you, but it's not a hindrance. ROMNEYCARE, however, could well be a hindrance.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

now thats funny stuff. sad but true.

but lets not forget, fox has the highest ratings of all news networks. OF ALL TIME!!!!! a sad commentary on their viewership i know.HOW out of it are you?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Not me. I rely on soonerscuba, PDX, and KC for my dose of "fair and balanced."

However, this Midtowner nimrod is beginning to picque my interest...He doesn't personally insult enough(yet)to make the iggy list.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

No way I could ever vote for Romney...former Gov of Mass and romneycare is all I needed to know...honestly Palin is great but has little chance like Paul, Newt is great but has way too much baggage...Herman Cain would be about the only one other than Paul Ryan I would vote for...would love to watch the national liberal/progressive media with Herman Cain as a serious candidate...You could conceivably vote for Beary-O against somebody?...or, not vote, and thereby give Beary 1/2 vote?