great to hear this. that is one of the few positive clips I've seen on Ron Paul. Let's hope others in the media pick up on this.

That's awesome, I hope he wins the nomination and I hope the republican party understands they won't win with a pro-war candidate. Pro-war constituents are getting harder to find these days.

I like a lot of what Ron Paul says, and I like his honesty, but I don't really like his policy as far as dismantling the federal government. I think it's more efficient to have federal agencies like the National Science Foundation supporting basic research in our country than a patchwork of state agencies. The same goes for most federal agencies. I also support some basic level of socialized medicine in the US. I also support some level of gun control. I'm also weakly pro-choice. I don't advocate withdrawing from the United Nations. I don't support a constitutional amendment allowing voluntary school prayer (a right that already exists).

So really on a policy level I'm less than 50% in agreement with him.

I don't think you really believe "federal agencies" on the whole are "efficient". In theory yes...but not in reality. Besides...people have to remember that the President isn't King and things won't be so just because the President says so. Ron Paul has a lot of good ideas...a new way of doing things...these things will not happen over night...many of them probably will never happen because there is too much corruption in government and too much power to be lost for him to get full support for his ideas. But I think at the very least he will able to stop any further growth and waste of the federal government. I think he will make us safer with his foreign policies and help our economy by getting us out of unfair trade agreements.

Why would anyone in the liberal drive-by media (CNN aka "FOX for liberals") spare a kind word for R. Paul, who believes in small government?

Answer: to Nader votes away from conservatives and put unqualified socialist pig hillary in the White House.

Is it really like they say, QM? Is it really bliss? "Drive-by media" is so 2006. Rush and company have moved on to other creative sound bytes and bullet points for you to obsess on and regurgitate. Is your radio broke?


Ron Paul is refreshing to listen to, but, like rychan, I disagree with him on too many things. Unfortunately, the only two Democrats I like don't have a chance in hell of getting the nomination, so, for me, I think it will be a "best of a bad lot" type of election, yet again.

'I don't think you really believe "federal agencies" on the whole are "efficient". In theory yes...but not in reality.'

In general I'm sure there's a lot of room for improvement. But it seems to me that making 51 smaller versions of every federal agency can only increase the amount of bureaucracy.

Upvote for "Dick" from Florida: "He certainly has a 'new direction'".
Ahahah..

QM

while your are welcome to express views counter to my own, I think it would be doing yoruself (and your point of view) a favor not to include adhominem attacks against those with whom you disagree. I myself am trying to adhere to this tactic.

"unqualified socialist pig hillary"

can you see how VS's threads could easily be delrailed be personal attacks? why not stick to facts and figures to back up well thought-out arguements ?

Qruel

Qruel,

I have noticed you're fairly civil in your replies, but you're in the minority there. I, too, try to keep it civil as well, but sometimes it ain't possible and I have to Tase some of these bros.

Since hillary isn't on VS, her feelings won't be hurt. Most of her supporters already know she's a socialist, since they are too.

The flaw in your plea for well thought-out, researched opinions is that liberals don't listen to facts, don't use facts and don't respond to facts. With the left you either believe what they believe or you are labeled a killer of children and rapist of Mother Earth.

Why do you think liberals running for office always hide their radical agenda? In broad daylight it'll burn up like an albino in a tanning bed.

I'm not just picking on libs, almost everyone here is spoiling for a fight. VS is Jerry Springer with keyboards and the subtly condescending need me to establish a baseline for their lunacy.

It's a glorious feeling to be doomed yet need others for warmth.

-------------------

P.S. to Fletch. "Drive-by media" remains a fresh, truthful term. Liberal media (which doesn't exist, according to he liberal media) shoot into a crowd with biased half-truths and haul ass, reveling in the chaos. FOX deserves its high ratings after 40 years of liberal bias from the once-Big 3 networks.

I've not forgotten your replies on other posts either, Harlequin. Have a math day.

I liked Skillary Clitless, m'self-
Ad hom for celebs is aok with celebs...with comedians, with all the fans of Jon Stewart and Bill Mhaharar, why is is suddenly off limits? If I say Richard is a dick, and if richard puts his ugly ass on TV?, he's fair game, dick or not he be.

All in the delivery and delivered to. Hillary deserves it. George Bush deserves it, and QM, after all the kind and not so kind words dished by you and on your behalf, you deserve it. At least you came back this time to retort, after yer drive-by.

god knows Rush Lameboy deserves it...that guy's time in the sun is waaay over, even with concervative and republican types...What sells in radio today? Up-Beat, wannabe clever personalities, making up a topic and letting all the Cletus Slack-Jhaws, call in to give 2 cents....that and crappy syndicated mealworms with microphones, dima a dozen shlock jock crap.

(maybe you should watch the viddy, choggie, now that yer fingers are numb)

rychan wrote:

In general I'm sure there's a lot of room for improvement. But it seems to me that making 51 smaller versions of every federal agency can only increase the amount of bureaucracy.

quantumushroom wrote:

Answer: to Nader votes away from conservatives and put unqualified socialist pig hillary in the White House.

QM, "conservatives" are guilty of everything you just threw at "liberals" and neither group really exists except in your woefully polarised mind.

>>>>Why do you think liberals running for office always hide their radical agenda? In broad daylight it'll burn up like an albino in a tanning bed.

errr... how about that george bush campaigning as a noninterventionist before engaging in illegal war?

>>>>liberals don't listen to facts, don't use facts and don't respond to facts. With the left you either believe what they believe or you are labeled a killer of children and rapist of Mother Earth.

Whereas "conservatives" only ever deal in facts, such as WMD and Bin Laden's computer controlled air conditioned mountain bunkers and Saddam's ability to launch nukes in 45minutes, and anyone who questions these "facts" is welcomed by "conservatives" as a healthy part of a necessary debate?

I expect now I have attacked "conservatives" you think i must be a "liberal" and i expect because i live in europe i must be a "socialist" and i expect because i am male i must like sports. DAymn man, your simplicity fascinates me.

I guess Ron Paul confuses the hell out of you, being pro legalisation of drugs and anti war AND a republican candidate... like WHOAH how the fuck is THAT possible in your tiny artificial toy version of the world which you keep in your blackandwhite brain?

Sorry this video is *dead. You may have others that are dead on this play list.
http://www.videosift.com/playlists/eric3579/dead

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by eric3579.

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by geo321.