Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Keynsian economics is bogus. That anyone ever took that marxist retard seriously is beyond me. He was wrong about he new deal, wrong about mises critique of central planning and money theory, and wrong about demand. Bu they, he liked central planning and economic intervention

OR IN OTHER WORDS...

more power for the government

so of course lovers of the state will drag his name with them to the end.

Ron Paul is a fool with lofty, incredibly unrealistic goals.

He's also a pal of racist groups and lunatic conspiracy theorists.

-> He's a fringe candidate with no chance of being elected.

-> They get our minds off of the lemming frontrunners and talking about issues that wouldn't be brought up otherwise.

What's not to like?

At 11/27/07 05:18 PM, TehChahlesh wrote: He's also a pal of racist groups and lunatic conspiracy theorists.

I keep hearing this. What conspiracies does he support?

Being pal to racist groups is news to me......

At 11/27/07 06:24 PM, Imperator wrote:
I keep hearing this. What conspiracies does he support?

Being pal to racist groups is news to me......

His column was run in Don Black's newspaper regularly. Don Black is the proprietor of the website "Sotrmfront" and is the former head of the KKK.

He has appeared several times on Alex Jones' radio show, and never once has he objected to something Alex Jones has said to him while on the show.

At 11/27/07 06:29 PM, TehChahlesh wrote: His column was run in Don Black's newspaper regularly. Don Black is the proprietor of the website "Sotrmfront" and is the former head of the KKK.

Is it his choice whether his column gets put on that website?
If not then he's not supporting racist groups, THEY'RE supporting HIM. Slight difference......

He has appeared several times on Alex Jones' radio show, and never once has he objected to something Alex Jones has said to him while on the show.

No answer is an admission of guilt. Gotcha.....

At 11/22/07 08:03 PM, Abele wrote: Anyone else notice how the Ron Paul support base is an almost cult-like organization? 99% of them are crazed youths with delusions of grandeur (well, delusions of doom- seeing how they project our future). I see them pop up all over the place. I was driving under a bridge last week and saw a "Ron Paul: Revolution" sign hanging from it. What the fuck?

Yeah dude, I'm thinking that if Paul doesnt get the primary vote they may commit a mass suicide or something!

At 11/27/07 06:58 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: pff who cares anymore thier arent enough poor asses, or racist and conspiracy groups to back up ronpaul anyways so who cares he doesnt have a chance in hell wining he will lose like he did in the 80s as one of those canidante losers.

however if he runs for a different party, he could pretty much guarantee a democrat victory.

At 11/27/07 06:44 PM, Imperator wrote: Is it his choice whether his column gets put on that website?
If not then he's not supporting racist groups, THEY'RE supporting HIM. Slight difference......

So, the fact that he made no attempt to distance himself from them means nothing? His column was run in the newspaper, and he was paid for it. That sends a pretty clear message, does it not?

No answer is an admission of guilt. Gotcha.....

No, he has openly agreed with what Alex Jones has said when he has appeared on his show.

At 11/27/07 07:12 PM, TehChahlesh wrote: So, the fact that he made no attempt to distance himself from them means nothing? His column was run in the newspaper, and he was paid for it. That sends a pretty clear message, does it not?

What do you want him to do? Wear shirts that say "I'm not associated with these freaks" everywhere he goes? News to me anyways.

No, he has openly agreed with what Alex Jones has said when he has appeared on his show.

Well that's a different claim entirely. And it's news to me.

At 11/27/07 07:20 PM, Imperator wrote:
What do you want him to do? Wear shirts that say "I'm not associated with these freaks" everywhere he goes? News to me anyways.

Michael Medved invited Ron Paul to publicly disavow any relationship he might have with them.

Curiously, Paul has failed to respond.

Well that's a different claim entirely. And it's news to me.

After the 2006 election, Ron Paul appeared on Jones's radio show. Jones asked the congressman if the victory for the Democrats was a "rejection of neo-fascist imperialism." Paul replied, "Yeah . . . This was a healthy election as far as I'm concerned."

At 11/26/07 08:26 PM, greyface01 wrote: Inflation is a tax on the American people, for our gross overspending on overseas occupation and policing.

Wrong, inflation is a natural part of any expanding and healthy economy.

:The govt is saying now Iraq will be a similar situation to South Korea, permanent residency. Thats part (if not all) of the reason the region hates us anyway. They dont hate us because "we like freedom".

Links for the permanant residency the governments telling us about please.

:With inflation, the Federal Reserve has to print more money (loaned, at interest) to trade for the same amount of goods.

The Federal Reserve does NOT print more money to deal with inflation. Take an economics class PLEASE.

:The working and lower classes, (which make up most of America, its not a cult) usually suffer the most from inflation. Inflation usually always rises much faster than minimum wages, and also the general standard of living cant keep up with inflation in alot of the country.

Most people are not paid minimum wage, and, if they are, it is by no fault of anyone but themselves. I'm 17, not graduated from high school and i can still make a few bucks over minimum wage. When inflaton rises, even sticky wages increase eventually.

..I belive the gap between rich and poor is widening faster, making harder to go from working class to upper class. Im not saying its impossible, but its hard to work full time for low wages, pay bills and go to college (ever rising tuition fees), not to mention if someone has medical problems. I belive soon there will be 2 classes, rich and poor, and the rich will do everything in their power to preserve their ways of life, no matter what the cost. (aaahhhhh!!!! im crazy, im a crazy conspiricy theorists because I belive big corporations are working with big govt, holy shit!!!! fuck!!@!)
VOTE RON PAUL!!!!!!!!!

Well this makes entirely no sense. There is a healthy middle class in existence and its not disappearing anytime soon. I myself plan on rising above my parents status by attending college and anyone with ambition can do the same. I can't afford to go to college and I will receive no help from my parents, yet I will take out loans and pay them myself. Medical problems has nothing to do with this argument at all... Ceteris Paribus

At 11/27/07 01:27 AM, iiREDii wrote: Keynsian economics is bogus. That anyone ever took that marxist retard seriously is beyond me. He was wrong about he new deal, wrong about mises critique of central planning and money theory, and wrong about demand. Bu they, he liked central planning and economic intervention

Actually Keynsian economics is much more 'real world' orientated. Classical economics consist of what would happen in a perfect world.

OR IN OTHER WORDS...

more power for the government

so of course lovers of the state will drag his name with them to the end.

Umm.. State lovers want less central government (less government in general). Retard.

Hell Fuck Yes

Big news for Ron Paul. Breaking fucking records. Glad to know I'm not the only one who's sick fuck tired of the dishonesty and games that are played in our political system.

At 11/29/07 01:32 AM, Imperator wrote: Hell Fuck Yes

Big news for Ron Paul. Breaking fucking records. Glad to know I'm not the only one who's sick fuck tired of the dishonesty and games that are played in our political system.

You're welcome to address my argument whenever you can.

At 11/29/07 03:27 PM, TehChahlesh wrote:
You're welcome to address my argument whenever you can.

You have to have one first Mr. Angry Face.

At 11/29/07 04:56 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote:
dude that is fucking old news from 2 weeks ago

Who cares, hes bringing it up because it relates to Ron Paul.

At 11/29/07 05:16 PM, Humbucker740 wrote:

At 11/29/07 04:56 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote:
dude that is fucking old news from 2 weeks ago

Who cares, hes bringing it up because it relates to Ron Paul.

And because it didn't look like it was brought up before.

Bringing new information into a front page Ron Paul topic.

Take notes NG, THIS is how you bump topics.

At 11/29/07 05:34 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote:

Take notes NG, THIS is how you bump topics.

what notes?

Wow.....

about a senile old man who doesnt have a chance in hell will get the nomination oh please you people are wasting your money on this idiot

You know what? You assailing him makes my support of Ron that much stronger.....

At 11/29/07 05:51 PM, Imperator wrote: You know what? You assailing him makes my support of Ron that much stronger.....

He is still an idiot,

wants us to pull out of NATO
wants us to pull out of UN
wants to end war on drugs

More then enough for me not to waist by first vote on him

At 11/29/07 05:56 PM, LordJaric wrote: He is still an idiot,

wants us to pull out of NATO

Protect American business.

wants us to pull out of UN

Which we do not have the support of, and, we were not originally in (league of nations). As a world power we probably shouldn't be in it anyway.

wants to end war on drugs

Costs us much more than the benefit we get for it. MUCH much more.
http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm

More then enough for me not to waist by first vote on him

Waste* my*

wants to end war on drugs

Jesus H. Christ......

At 11/29/07 06:09 PM, Humbucker740 wrote:

At 11/29/07 05:56 PM, LordJaric wrote:

wants us to pull out of NATO

Protect American business.

All nations need allys, even us.

wants us to pull out of UN

Which we do not have the support of,

Just because of the Iraq war, once that is over we can rebuild our influence in it.

and, we were not originally in (league of nations).

I believe Congress had a reason (can't remember what it was) for not wanting to be in it.

:As a world power we probably shouldn't be in it anyway.

As a world power we should be in in.

wants to end war on drugs

Costs us much more than the benefit we get for it. MUCH much more.

And if we don't have it, more drugs will get into our country.

At 11/29/07 06:24 PM, LordJaric wrote:

At 11/29/07 06:09 PM, Humbucker740 wrote:

At 11/29/07 05:56 PM, LordJaric wrote:

wants us to pull out of NATO

Protect American business.

All nations need allys, even us.

All they do is pull us into other affairs which costs us more and more money, and more and more men. And look how they helped us in Iraq!

wants us to pull out of UN

Which we do not have the support of,

Just because of the Iraq war, once that is over we can rebuild our influence in it.

We don't NEED their support. For anything. At all. "All they do is pull us into other affairs which costs us more and more money."

and, we were not originally in (league of nations).

I believe Congress had a reason (can't remember what it was) for not wanting to be in it.

As a world power we probably shouldn't be in it anyway.

As a world power we should be in in.

What do you think Congress' reason was?

wants to end war on drugs

Costs us much more than the benefit we get for it. MUCH much more.

And if we don't have it, more drugs will get into our country.

Yeah, maybe 1% more drugs. Not enough for me to shell out billions for.

At 11/29/07 09:17 PM, Humbucker740 wrote: All they do is pull us into other affairs which costs us more and more money, and more and more men. And look how they helped us in Iraq!

Thats what happens in all alliances and Iraq doesn't fall under NATO for obvious reasons.

We don't NEED their support. For anything. At all. "All they do is pull us into other affairs which costs us more and more money."

Obviously you miss the point behind the UN.

What do you think Congress' reason was?

Tell me.

At 11/29/07 09:35 PM, LordJaric wrote:

At 11/29/07 09:17 PM, Humbucker740 wrote: All they do is pull us into other affairs which costs us more and more money, and more and more men. And look how they helped us in Iraq!

I meant Afghanistan.

Wikipedia:
"the organization established a system of collective defence whereby its member states agree to mutual defence in response to an attack by any external party."

Thats what happens in all alliances and Iraq doesn't fall under NATO for obvious reasons.

We don't NEED their support. For anything. At all. "All they do is pull us into other affairs which costs us more and more money."

Obviously you miss the point behind the UN.

You mean that they expect us to throw our entire military force behind whatever they want and not help us at all?

What do you think Congress' reason was?

Tell me.

I thought it was obvious that we wanted to keep our power and not associate ourselves with Russia.