Guiscard wrote:I'm gonna vote Ron Paul!
Me too!
Nov 5th money bomb for Ron Paul
Moderator: Community Team
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
if controlling national debt and rebuilding our economic power is your most important priority for the next president, Ron Paul is not the right Candidate. He may have many innovative and good ideas, but simply cutting spending and federal programs is not the way to rebuild the American economy.
Remember that the Federal government is THE single larges consumer of American goods and services. This is true in every country that has ever existed. Government taxation and spending forces liquidity into the economy. Government spending forces infrastructure development and maintenance, the majority of medical and military research and development, not to mention many education programs and domestic security are funded through federal taxation.
Ron Paul wants to seriously curtail spending in all of these categories, but he has not disclosed in any detail how roads are going to get build, how teachers are going to get paid, or how he will pay to equip our soldiers.
If you want a president who knows how to turn things around go with the candidate that actually has a proven track record. Romney is the obvious choice, he has spent his entire life buying large businesses and turning them around. He did the same thing with the Massachussetts economy and the Winter Olymics. He has a proven track record of fiscal success in both the public sector and the private sector.
If economic health is a major concern, then Romney makes much more sense than Paul. (note, I do not plan on voting for either candidate).
Remember that the Federal government is THE single larges consumer of American goods and services. This is true in every country that has ever existed. Government taxation and spending forces liquidity into the economy. Government spending forces infrastructure development and maintenance, the majority of medical and military research and development, not to mention many education programs and domestic security are funded through federal taxation.
Ron Paul wants to seriously curtail spending in all of these categories, but he has not disclosed in any detail how roads are going to get build, how teachers are going to get paid, or how he will pay to equip our soldiers.
If you want a president who knows how to turn things around go with the candidate that actually has a proven track record. Romney is the obvious choice, he has spent his entire life buying large businesses and turning them around. He did the same thing with the Massachussetts economy and the Winter Olymics. He has a proven track record of fiscal success in both the public sector and the private sector.
If economic health is a major concern, then Romney makes much more sense than Paul. (note, I do not plan on voting for either candidate).
radiojake wrote: Also I just noticed something. Do you not agree with violent protesting? If so, why do own a gun?
No. Unless it is to take back control of the government from a self-imposed leader.
And I didn't know I owned a gun.
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
JESUS SAVES!!!PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
Neutrino wrote:jay_a2j wrote: He follows the constitution
How is this necessilary a good thing? The document is hundreds of years old. The majority of the values of the time that it was created in have been dead since long before the beginning of the 20th century. It has had to be Ammended 27 times (if memory serves) because many of these values are no longer acceptable in western society!
If you want to live in a world with intellectually inferior black people and socially inferior women, then the US Consitiution is the document for you. If you want to give some sort of vague nod to progress, however, then a more up-to-date document might be more your style (or, better yet, don't let a piece of paper dictate your beliefs!)
Sorry, bit busy. Will respond to that big post when I get the time
well really on 17 times and 17 additions to a docuement written over 200 years ago aint a bad record
most people who want to share their veiws with you dont want you to share yours with them
-
xtratabasco
- Posts: 1797
- Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:24 pm
jay_a2j wrote:freezie wrote:On a serious note...Why does politicians need so much money? When they aren't even elected?
To make and run TV ads./Radio ads. Ron Paul is extremely frugal with his campaign donations. And you can bet he will be too with your tax money if elected.... imagine a president who doesn't believe in wasteful spending!
Hopefully he'll abolish all social services.
That would help out.
Norse wrote: But, alas, you are all cock munching rent boys, with an IQ that would make my local spaco clinic blush.
-
xtratabasco
- Posts: 1797
- Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:24 pm
suggs wrote:jay_a2j wrote:freezie wrote:On a serious note...Why does politicians need so much money? When they aren't even elected?
To make and run TV ads./Radio ads. Ron Paul is extremely frugal with his campaign donations. And you can bet he will be too with your tax money if elected.... imagine a president who doesn't believe in wasteful spending!
Hopefully he'll abolish all social services.
That would help out.
yes all Federal ones, but States will be given the ability to make their own social services or cancel them as well, just as the Constitution was written.