Forbidden Donut

I would be quite happy with a victory for Ron Paul or Barack Obama.

Colbert.

QFT. If only Stewart was running with him...

-dan

I love Dr. Paul, but given the latest numbers in iraq Dr. Pauls position might not be the best.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idU...20071022?rpc=92

Mickey Mouse

Mr. T

ron paul.


meh no one really stands out for me aside from him.


maybe if you edited this topic [WCH] as a "ballot" where all the big people can be poll answers.


that way we can see the majority of the communities feelings on the matter without sifting through pages of silly replies /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

if i had to choose someone it would be ron paul. although i agree with chuck when he said noone really stands out.

Colbert the Republican or Colbert the Democrat?

Obama. We agree on just about everything to at least some degree with very few exceptions.

Ron Paul scares me. I admire his consistency and his smarts, but I feel like a lot of the support he's gotten online is from people who have no idea just how far he wants to take his "small government" stance. Most people hear "abolish IRS, no more war, personal freedoms" and think "great!". However, when you stop to think that he wants to abolish the department of education and have people fund public schools completely on their own as well as other such programs, the waters get a little murky for me. I'll be the first to agree that there's a lot of fat that can be trimmed from the budget, but not all public spending is bad.

Poll added.

Poll taken.

anyways I think Ron Paul is what this country needs. We are going out of control. Nothing gets done in government these days because of ultra partisan bitchfighting. Bush hasnt done much but congress has done LESS, and thats amazing to think about it with all the Bush bashing that goes on. Congress dosent do crap these days, they take forever, add pork wherever they can, very partisan it only one way or the other, and when they do pass something, it isnt even something real. (non binding resolution to maybe warn someone about something they may or may not be doing) Stop hating in Bush and start hating on the whole damn government.

i voted for ron paul because i agree more with him rather than disagree, but also if john mccain won i wouldnt be heartbroken either.

for a politician, he seems like a decent guy.

Frankly I disagree with the current education system. We do not need a department of education, at least in its present form.

i just hate to see all our resources being used overseas when there's a myriad of situations and issues that those troops can be addressing here.

for instance. new orleans. holy crap it's still in shambles, ask budlight. he was down there helping out. i just want our shit fixed here in this country before having to worry about bailing israel out of another bind with the rest of the middle eastern countries.

I completely agree with you WCH. The department of education hasn't helped. It's turned into a money pit.

I think that the power should go back to the state. The local governments will be more aware of what their schools need to improve upon. Education has always been a parental concern, so it is not right to move their influence over the issues further away from them.

guys, the thing about Congress is you want them to take a long time in deciding or you get things like the Patriot Act.

Yeah New Orleans was terrible when I was there as you all know from those pictures I posted. But a lot of the responsibility lies with the individuals there. I do not think it is the responsibility of the federal government to build everyone a new house. Here in SD, we get flooded all the time and we dont get government money anywhere close to the level nawlins did or anywhere on the coast would. But then again we take responsibility and understand we shouldn't rely on the government.

I agree that we are using a lot of resources overseas currently. Its hard to use the same resources back here in the states, mostly being military assets. I am very optimistic about the way things are going in iraq lately. Things are getting better (finally) but it still requires some work. Frankly, a massive troop withdrawal right now would cost more and waste more resources than a planned gradual troop reduction.

I like Ron Paul not because I literally support all of his policies, but instead because I support a radical new approach to the federal government. I know that Ron Paul would never be able to institute a lot of his policies, but I also know that he would try very hard to do so and somewhere along the line there would bound to be some compromising between him and congress and things would actually change. More than anything else, I think the absolute biggest threat to America (and the world) at the moment is our own federal government, and I truly believe we need someone with the balls to step up and attempt to put a stop to it. None of the front-runners, democrat or republican, will do anything to challenge that unchecked power we've given the federal government.

im not sure that the common newswatcher knows this, but they built two enormous huge fucking military airbases over there.


i think we've dug in for the long haul, and frankly i worry about that.

We've also been constructing the worlds biggest embassy in iraq...it was supposed to cost around 120 million...they under cut themselves and now it will cost somewhere around 350 million. lovely.

I agree with Court about Ron Paul.

I kinda like Kucinich too and Obama.

i cant believe i belong to a forum that supports ron paul =\ i really disagree with his isolationist stance and to think that america should retreat from its position as global leader would make for a very scary world. only the US can handle the demands of being the sole superpower while at the same time pushing to world forward. if you think the EU or China or Japan or the Middle East can rule the world to the benefit of all then i guess its ok to support ron paul. i see nothing wrong with staying in iraq if it acts as a foothold for democracy in the region and helps reform islam and the middle east away from the middle ages. OH i support Huckabee - he is definitely gaining momentum.

i really don't like any of the candidates. if i had to chose, which i will because everyone should vote, i'd vote for Obama. it's not that i'm a huge fan of his, i just align more with him on the issues. in a perfect world it would be Kucinich, but he has no chance.

Ron Paul is not an isolationist, he is a non-interventionist. America is a constitutional republic, not an empire, and it is not our business to rule the world. The middle east already hates us for meddling in their region over the last 55 years, and South America is beginning to respond in a concertedly anti-american way, due to our constant interventions in that region.

It is not in America's best interest to intervene militarily or financially in the affairs of other nations. American blood should not be shed for the sake of other nations.

And I know a guy who went to high school with huckabee(actually that's EnemyOfTheState's Dad)-- he hates the man.

Why does someone have to "rule the world"? Why not let other countries develop themselves in their own manner?
Western does not mean modern. Although, some would have you believe that. Just because we are the one last Superpower doesn't mean we have to make decisions that affect other countries.

How would you like it if someone came into your house and told you how you were going to/should live. Thats pretty much what America's foreign policy is right now. Democracy is great, and I hope other people get it, but forcing it on people isn't very democratic. If the people want it, they can get it. Democracy is supposed to be about the people that are under it anyway.

America is the last Superpower. So why not lead by example and show the world peace?

As long as Clinton doesn't win (and I have no real reason to believe that she will), I'm happy. Being something of a libertarian, I just want to be left alone. With my guns. And ammunition.

And I'm rather tired of being called a sexist because of that take. I just think she's insane.

Why do you think she's insane?

I specifically disagree with her following points:

She doesn't want to privatize social security.

She supports the creation of laws that require companies to hire women and minorities. I partially disagree; I don't think a company should necessarily have a diverse staff, just an effective one. Let their doom be their own if they want to hire from only a specific pool of people, many of which may be ineffectual.

She has a strong opposition to gun ownership. I disagree, not as just a gun enthusiast, but because police can't protect us until after the crime has been committed (ruling out the law of reasonable suspicion).

She wants to, essentially, raise taxes to pay off the national debt with a budgeting system. I don't think a tax hike is at all necessary, just responsible use of national funds.

For the large part, she opposes public and community welfare; from churches, for example. This is because she thinks it's only short-term help and a larger-scale solution is necessary. Yes, a long-term solution is necessary. But in the same way that the long-term memory is built by additions from the short-term, a long-term system is built on the foundation of a young idea.


Specific dissection of her ideals leads me to this conclusion: she's a socialist. Keep this bitch outta my shit.