TimC Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 Then I will now bless you my son . . . If you were Ted Kennedy, a much cooler username would've been Chappequi Dick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted January 6, 2010 Author Share Posted January 6, 2010 If you were Ted Kennedy, a much cooler username would've been Chappequi Dick. very nice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 When news of his little hobby gets out, his political career will be OVER. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 that is exactly it sure, it's better having a currency backed only by the tree it was sliced from... wood > gold : Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 The full backing of the US Government will mean less and less to China, etc in the future when they have overtaken us economically while we're digging out from the poor house. But hey, the charts are also based off the fact that, for the most part, companies aren't out to screw everyone, gamble away their investments on junk and then get a free pass...which is no longer true either. Ron Paul is correct that Americans are living in a dream world based on falsehoods and lies when it comes to our economy now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 Hey, WV, did you notice in the original link that Ron Paul's son is called Rand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Hey, WV, did you notice in the original link that Ron Paul's son is called Rand? Didn't read the original link... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Didn't read the original link... Kinda interesting name for an offspring of a man of Paul's mindset though, isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Kinda interesting name for an offspring of a man of Paul's mindset though, isn't it? Meh, you never can tell. It might be an old family name or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 (edited) [/b] We are more interested in how our elected officials appear on TV, and who can get the best sound bite, slogan, or zinger, and not on their actual voting record and their history. That is the reason we are where we are today. We've been voting style over substance for some time now, and for that we deserve what we get. you're silly dude. there is no greater parrot of talk radio, fox news and repuiblican hate emails on this board than you. You fall for every scare tactic, propaganda piece, reason to hate and cry victim and for months proceeded to post these things sometimes at a rate of three per day. The things you posted had nothing to do with substance or fact and were cut from the same mold from the things you say you hate so much. I am by no means defending politics as they are today as I think I have gone on the recond several times saying so. I've a problem with the right and left and pretty much every media outlet. I am simply pointing out a delicious bit of hypocracy in your denoucement of image and propaganda Edited January 7, 2010 by Duchess Jack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 you're silly dude. there is no greater parrot of talk radio, fox news and repuiblican hate emails on this board than you. You fall for every scare tactic, propaganda piece, reason to hate and cry victim and for months proceeded to post these things sometimes at a rate of three per day. The things you posted had nothing to do with substance or fact and were cut from the same mold from the things you say you hate so much. I am by no means defending politics as they are today as I think I have gone on the recond several times saying so. I've a problem with the right and left and pretty much every media outlet. I am simply pointing out a delicious bit of hypocracy in your denoucement of image and propaganda So were you just taking that as an opportunity to personally attack me, or did you disagree with something I wrote? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 So were you just taking that as an opportunity to personally attack me, or did you disagree with something I wrote? I think the whole system is broken. I cannot possibly take what you wrote without the context of what you have written and said in the past. Perhaps I went about this the wrong way. Please explain to me how your point of view jives with you jumping on whatever rumor you can find - credible or not - to tear down people whose political views you disagree with. Isn't a machine designed to destroy somebody's image falcely so people don't listen to them, trust them or believe them just as - if not more damaging as somebody getting too much credit for their image? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 I think the whole system is broken. I cannot possibly take what you wrote without the context of what you have written and said in the past. Perhaps I went about this the wrong way. Please explain to me how your point of view jives with you jumping on whatever rumor you can find - credible or not - to tear down people whose political views you disagree with. Isn't a machine designed to destroy somebody's image falcely so people don't listen to them, trust them or believe them just as - if not more damaging as somebody getting too much credit for their image? Show me where I posted something that is false in the last year. If I have it was definitely unintentionally. I do believe that all politicians should be scrutinized. And your last sentence seems to be what most of the liberals on this board continue to do to FOX News, and what you whether knowingly or not were doing with me in your previous post. I welcome scrutiny of anything I post. I'd love to think that all that I post is factual, but if I'm wrong I am willing to admit it. I'm a actually trying to look beyond the style at the substance, you it would appear would rather disregard anything that is not complimentary to the current administration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 you're silly dude. there is no greater parrot of talk radio, fox news and repuiblican hate emails on this board than you. You fall for every scare tactic, propaganda piece, reason to hate and cry victim and for months proceeded to post these things sometimes at a rate of three per day. The things you posted had nothing to do with substance or fact and were cut from the same mold from the things you say you hate so much. I am by no means defending politics as they are today as I think I have gone on the recond several times saying so. I've a problem with the right and left and pretty much every media outlet. I am simply pointing out a delicious bit of hypocracy in your denoucement of image and propaganda + a kajillion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 (edited) you it would appear would rather disregard anything that is not complimentary to the current administration. So how am I suddently a hack for the current administration? I lean a bit to the left but I view myself as an indipendant. I have almost as many right wing views as I do left wing views. I cannot stand the democratic leadership and I cannot stand the republicans playbook. With that said - what does the current administration have to do with any of this? I thought we were talking about the dangers of image over substance or was your post more or less a poorly veiled dig on the way you percieve Obama? If its the latter, it would go far in explaining why you seemed so hypocratical to me. as for having to waste time quoting all the rumors you tried to paint as fact - I am just going to have to take that back. if I thought there was the slightest chance that it could afford you some self reflection - it might be worth the effort, but I don't think that's the case. it would just be a waste of my time and your time. so once again - I retract what I said and you have my apologies. Edited January 8, 2010 by Duchess Jack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Sacrebleu Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 saw ron paul being interviewed by rachel maddow last night, and if his policies weren't completely and totally out of whack with mine I would be a ron paul backer. it's nice to hear someone being interviewed who can actually express his thoughts and vision clearly and succinctly, doesn't condescend or infantilize his public. Of course I do not beleive in style over substance, so I could never vote for him in say a presidential election. But I could see voting for him as congressman where his ability to get his policies implemented are close to zero, but where he can be a great force for reason amongst his peers. BTW I would love for all those right wing pundits who called for the impeachment/imprisonment of anyone who voiced opposition to the Bush admin in regards to the war on the grounds of treason to have the honesty to examine some of Cheney's statements. Coulter, Rush, Hannity et all did some serious musing about treason and the left. What then should they call Cheney's actions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 my number one choice for president at this point would be Mike Bloomberg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 BTW I would love for all those right wing pundits who called for the impeachment/imprisonment of anyone who voiced opposition to the Bush admin in regards to the war on the grounds of treason to have the honesty to examine some of Cheney's statements. Coulter, Rush, Hannity et all did some serious musing about treason and the left. What then should they call Cheney's actions? I largely agree with you on this, though I don't recall the pundits saying anyone who criticized the Bush admin about 9/11 were treasonous, I'll take your word on it that they did. I do recall (or at least think I do) them saying anyone that didn't support Bush in the war effort was treasonous, which I feel is stupid. Fact of the matter is both Obama and Bush have to go on the information they are given, the failure isn't theirs but the person or more than likely he people that determine what is a legitimate threat. While I don't think it is treasonous I do feel it is in bad taste to criticize either over that. Now it is legit to criticize policies. I haven't heard what Cheney has said lately, but a lot of his criticism of Obama is legit, particularly his criticism over GITMO and enhanced interrogation. Normally I would say it is in bad taste for a former VP to criticize the next administration, but Obama has largely brought that on himself with all his "inherited crap", which IMO is just as bad if not worse than what Cheney has been doing. Again, I haven't heard Cheney speak on the recent incident, and he may be way over the top on it, so I really can't speak to that, but too what he has been doing for the last 9 months or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 saw ron paul being interviewed by rachel maddow last night, and if his policies weren't completely and totally out of whack with mine I would be a ron paul backer. it's nice to hear someone being interviewed who can actually express his thoughts and vision clearly and succinctly, doesn't condescend or infantilize his public. Of course I do not beleive in style over substance, so I could never vote for him in say a presidential election. But I could see voting for him as congressman where his ability to get his policies implemented are close to zero, but where he can be a great force for reason amongst his peers. BTW I would love for all those right wing pundits who called for the impeachment/imprisonment of anyone who voiced opposition to the Bush admin in regards to the war on the grounds of treason to have the honesty to examine some of Cheney's statements. Coulter, Rush, Hannity et all did some serious musing about treason and the left. What then should they call Cheney's actions? Isn't the above just a different way to spell Obama? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 So how am I suddently a hack for the current administration? You're a hack if you don't carry a doll of Obama's head on a stick 24/7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil_gop_liars Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 There's been a coup, have you heard? It's the CIA coup. The CIA runs everything, they run the military. They're the ones who are over there lobbing missiles and bombs on countries. ... And of course the CIA is every bit as secretive as the Federal Reserve. ... And yet think of the harm they have done since they were established [after] World War II. They are a government unto themselves. They're in businesses, in drug businesses, they take out dictators ... We need to take out the CIA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 . Have to agree here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Ron Paul is an idiot. he's far from an idiot. he just has a mild case of the bat-schit crazy. but still I probably agree with him more often than not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 (edited) he's far from an idiot. he just has a mild case of the bat-schit crazy. but still I probably agree with him more often than not. Edited January 22, 2010 by westvirginia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 he's far from an idiot. he just has a mild case of the bat-schit crazy. but still I probably agree with him more often than not. He has a long way to go to reach the batchit crazy levels of Michelle Bachmann. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.