Ron Paul'ers? Explain plz.

[Lason]

LOL. Based on the system of how they pass bills, in order to get anything past they attach a bunch of earmarks which pretty much ties anyones hands who wants to pass something without voting yes on some earmark that has nothing to do with the original bill. You can say that about every politician. Of course his bill was going to have earmarks, which is why he wanted to ban earmarks in the first place.

PS. Don't get all butthurt when Obama wins in 2012 because the Conservatives go with some dillrod to represent them. Ron is the only one that has any shot IMO. The reason being is because the Right is going to vote anti-Obama irregardless of who is running against him. In order to sway the other voters you need someone like Ron and not some extreme right wing nut.

All that is moot. My point was he says one thing and does another. Kind of the opposite of your original point.

And Obama WILL win in '12. I hate to be the realist but the current batch of GOP canidates are a joke and Obama has the administration to make him some serious campain money and the Bin Laden thing will help him if he can hold onto it that long. Its still early though so who knows for sure but I dont like what I see out of the GOP right now.

[Baron Von Crowder]

There will be some votes to whomever is running against Obama just for the simple fact that they aren't Obama.

I should run with that as my campaign slogan. Who's with me?

[Geor!]

All that is moot. My point was he says one thing and does another. Kind of the opposite of your original point.

And Obama WILL win in '12. I hate to be the realist but the current batch of GOP canidates are a joke and Obama has the administration to make him some serious campain money and the Bin Laden thing will help him if he can hold onto it that long. Its still early though so who knows for sure but I dont like what I see out of the GOP right now.

The photographs will appear sometime between August and early November next year. Just saying "remember what I did?"

[Geor!]

Couldn't be further from the truth. He's the only one to stick to his guns and not go from one extreme to another to appease the population like every other politician. I blows my mind how a politician can be 99% percent for what someone wants, but if they are against one thing like abortion, they would rather shoot themselves in the foot and vote for the other person who is for abortion but against every other thing. This is why Obama will win the next election. In the primaries the only ones voting are the far right, so the candidate they pick will be completely far right. When the general election is held, the public realizes what a nutjob the guy is and doesn't vote for him.
Who knows though maybe Ron can figure it out like Lois did and win the primary by saying what everyone wants to hear.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YOh-...eature=related

I wasn't referring to the political spectrum. I was referring to some of the stupid shit he spouts off. One such being that he wouldn't have done a raid on Osama.

[Lason]

yep I thought the same thing when he announced the photos werent being released. About 2 months before voting day they will come out.

[Geor!]

yep I thought the same thing when he announced the photos werent being released. About 2 months before voting day they will come out.

He's too smart to have anybody in his administration release them -- simply for the fact that it would look exactly like what it is: a cheap political move. More than likely, the New York Times will "somehow happen" to come across them.

[Avery'sDad]

There will be some votes to whomever is running against Obama just for the simple fact that they aren't Obama.

I should run with that as my campaign slogan. Who's with me?

That's the whole point. Sure you'll get all the conservatives to vote for you, question is how are you going to sway the undecideds? Not gonna happen with the current lineup of potential candidates. You need someone like Ron who is a little different. What sounds crazy to you might not seem so crazy to someone else. Think about it, these are the same voters that bought "Change" hook, line and sinker.

[8mpg]

I dont understand how anyone can think that killing OBL has changed anything. Whether or not that guy is alive has no recourse on our country's situation. We have things that are a million times more important than some d-bag that committed a crime against us 10 years ago. Though it was a very tragic event and Americans wanted justice, we cannot shift our attention to something so irrelevant.

While I dont agree or disagree with Ron Paul on whether or not we should have killed OBL, we need to move past this with a quickness. Who cares about Osama?




and for the record... I dont think Obamas goal was to even kill OBL. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I believe that OBL was already dead when they stormed the place (killed by his guards) or the seals just killed him because they wanted to (which Im all for). The white house cannot come out with a single consistent story about the situation which leads me to believe they are covering shit up.

[SMEGMA STENCH]

I hate to say it but just offing bin laden wasn't really the right thing to do. We should have put him on trial for all his crimes over the years, with evidence. Just like they did with all the Nazis that they managed to catch without killing. Then after the short trial and with nearly no waiting period, put him to death. That way the world could see what was done to him and for what reasons. And we'd also have him dead where he belongs. Just showing up and killing him makes us look like we'll just do that to anybody we deem necessary. Have the trial be in some other country and not known to our media or anyone outside the trial until he was put to death. Then release the tapes and say that it was the right of that country and those people to have him tried there.

[no4njnk]

Bin laden was executed, don't kid yourself.

This is not the time to have a person in the WH who thinks national security is a joke. Now is not the time to be defensive, take care of the problem before it starts. He talks a good fiscal game but his history shows his inconsistency.

[Forever_frost]

I hate to say it but just offing bin laden wasn't really the right thing to do. We should have put him on trial for all his crimes over the years, with evidence. Just like they did with all the Nazis that they managed to catch without killing. Then after the short trial and with nearly no waiting period, put him to death. That way the world could see what was done to him and for what reasons. And we'd also have him dead where he belongs. Just showing up and killing him makes us look like we'll just do that to anybody we deem necessary. Have the trial be in some other country and not known to our media or anyone outside the trial until he was put to death. Then release the tapes and say that it was the right of that country and those people to have him tried there.

Problem with a trial, is there is always the possibility that OBL would get off. There's always that possibility and Holder knew that, that's why he wants terrorists tried. So they walk and cannot be tried again.