Page 2 of 3
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Mon May 14, 2012 11:26 pm
by speedsix
...this reminds me of something in "The Patriot"...he wasn't going to get involved...wasn't going to fight...it wasn't his problem...till his sons started being killed...then it became personal...and he did what he'd said he wouldn't do...
...this election's not about foreign policy, abortion, gun control, or other important issues like these...it's about getting the worst president we've ever suffered under out from behind the wheel...before he kills us all...after that, we can decide where we're going and make course corrections...a colossal defeat of the incumbent would wake up politicians better than a trumpet...
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 7:03 am
by Heartland Patriot
speedsix wrote:...this reminds me of something in "The Patriot"...he wasn't going to get involved...wasn't going to fight...it wasn't his problem...till his sons started being killed...then it became personal...and he did what he'd said he wouldn't do...
...this election's not about foreign policy, abortion, gun control, or other important issues like these...it's about getting the worst president we've ever suffered under out from behind the wheel...before he kills us all...after that, we can decide where we're going and make course corrections...a colossal defeat of the incumbent would wake up politicians better than a trumpet...
BINGO! Exactly correct...
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 7:15 am
by Purplehood
I was planning on voting for Ron Paul in the Primaries and then voting for whoever the powers-to-be select for me in the General...
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 7:59 am
by RPB
Purplehood wrote:I was planning on voting for Ron Paul in the Primaries and then voting for whoever the powers-to-be select for me in the General...
That way we send a message to both GOP
AND Democrat candidates.
If consensus is that Robamaney is the GOP nominee, I want to at least voice displeasure at not getting to have any input at all until after the nominee is "chosen by the elite"...
Everyone in Texas should be offended and let it be shown
in the Primary
IF you vote in the Primary, you'll send a message.
My message is
not "I'm a LEMMING, YOU know what's best for me, so
let us all praise HE WHO WAS SELECTED for us without our input"
My message is
"Hey, Romney,(ye chosen one) you'll be nominee, but watch your step, if elected, you'll need to prove yourself by acting on your recent words instead of past track record because you don't have all our confidence yet.
I'm voting for someone who has not yet sold-out and endorsed you"
It's a PRIMARY not "the election"
Either a primary matters, or it does not matter.
BOTH PARTIES seem to hope that the delayed TEXAS primary does not matter, maybe it doesn't matter in choosing a nominee any more ...but it can send a message.
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 8:22 am
by Oldgringo
Purplehood wrote:I was planning on voting for Ron Paul in the Primaries and then voting for whoever the powers-to-be select for me in the General...
That's us, our absentee ballots will go into the mail today.
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 11:33 am
by hi-power
Jeez how old is that video? Here's today's comment from W.:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... tt-romney/
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 11:49 am
by Dave2
Dunno, but I'd guess it's from Bush Sr's run.
Hmm... A quick glance through Wikipedia doesn't show anyone from MA running against Bush Sr, so now I'm back to dunno.
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 1:19 pm
by hi-power
Dave2 wrote:
Dunno, but I'd guess it's from Bush Sr's run.
Hmm... A quick glance through Wikipedia doesn't show anyone from MA running against Bush Sr, so now I'm back to dunno.
I'll bet you were right about it being G.H.W.B.'s 1988 run against Mike Dukakis...two-time Governor of Massachusetts.
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 1:54 pm
by sjfcontrol
Heartland Patriot wrote:Oldgringo wrote:Does the name Ross Perot ring any bells anywhere...anyone?
Yes sir, it does...and thus William Jefferson Clinton got to meet Monica Lewinsky!
Ahhhh, those were the good-old-days...
When a president could be a real cad, without everybody having to fear that he would seriously wreck the nation.
Never thought I'd wax nostalgic about WJC!
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 5:49 pm
by Jim Beaux
Our politicians & our political system are corrupt. The rats will scurry off to the dark corners & some will even be sent home ; but they will quickly be replaced by those just as bad waiting for the smoke to clear.
On January 1, 2012 there were around 40,000 new laws that took effect in the U.S. Our government is no longer motivated to enact & enforce law for just cause, but for special interests & revenue.
Americans now willingly submit to invasive body searches at the airports; & daily New Yorkers on their way to work are stopped & frisked without cause. We are forced to wear seat belts because it is for "our own good". Our parental authority is being eroded by big brother for the "good" of our children. Our thoughts & opinions are suppressed by the guards of political correctness; & the concept of being stopped on the streets & being forced to submit to a prostrate exam (for our own good of course) is not such the insane notion as it once was.
We are no longer free, our government doesnt serve us, we serve it. We've lost our country & nothing will bring it back.
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 6:44 pm
by seeker_two
I still plan to vote for Paul in the Texas primary....as well as voting against any current incumbent....they're the ones who got us in this mess, after all.....
....in the general election.....I don't know....definitely NOT Obama.....maybe I'll vote for Mitt.....if he wins, it might not be that bad.....it'll be like having Bush41 back in office....
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 8:16 pm
by GeekDad
Ron Paul did not drop out.
He is not campaigning for the left over primary states due to lack of 10s of millions of dollars cause he is funded be the general public, not goldman sachs.
He is putting his money toward the states that are pending their delegates votes for the state convention where he is kicking butt and taking names!
This a prime example of the MSM blatant bias toward Ron Paul.
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Mon May 21, 2012 8:07 pm
by APynckel
RP 2012 got my vote in the primary, as well as Ted Cruz for the senate seat.
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Mon May 21, 2012 9:43 pm
by The Mad Moderate
Jim Beaux wrote:
On January 1, 2012 there were around 40,000 new laws that took effect in the U.S. Our government is no longer motivated to enact & enforce law for just cause, but for special interests & revenue.
Not even close.
http://www.politifact.com/texas/stateme ... ks-first-/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Ron Paul ends his hunt for votes
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 5:24 pm
by DEB
The Mad Moderate wrote:Jim Beaux wrote:
On January 1, 2012 there were around 40,000 new laws that took effect in the U.S. Our government is no longer motivated to enact & enforce law for just cause, but for special interests & revenue.
Not even close.
http://www.politifact.com/texas/stateme ... ks-first-/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Thank you, good catch. But with that said, the site does state 3000 to 4000 federal regulations are put in place in a single year. If it is 1000 new laws/regulations put in place each and every year or 40,000 it is all the same to me. I am not smart enough to remember even 1000 new laws/regulations put into place yearly, so 40,000 or 100,000 and up means the same to me. Is there really that much going on that we require 3000 to 4000 new federal regulations every year? When I read this site, I initially thought that it was a total count, but in fact they minimized the remark, by the statement of that only 3000 to 4000 new federal regulations are put in place in a single year. Is there an entity that can enforce these new regulations? Shoot as Law Enforcement just make up a statement that such and such is illegal, it probably is true, or if not right now, wait till next year. Here comes another 3000 to 4000 new regulations...
