Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 12/15/07 12:23 AM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote: But I guess if your talking to me I will, I choose my words as I please, your rudeness has lost you any credibility you have ever had, I'd advise you not to persist with me because you will look like an asshole in front of everyone.

How was I rude?

Dennis Kucinich is the right guy for president, try and argue with that.

You give me no points to examine and thus agree or disagree with...therefore by the rules of your game I cannot argue against you.

I think Kucinich is an alright guy in all honesty. I'd like to share a cup of green tea with him and talk politics. However, I do not think he's the right guy for president.

Why?

Wouldn't it be fantastic if Ron Paul was running against Dennis Kucinich, and people would actually have to consider real issues and the relative stances of the candidates before they voted?

At 12/15/07 12:45 AM, Elfer wrote: Wouldn't it be fantastic if Ron Paul was running against Dennis Kucinich, and people would actually have to consider real issues and the relative stances of the candidates before they voted?

yes, good reply, the only thing i dont like about Ron is that he wants to keep the richer n not distribute the wealth.

I've yet to hear of a person who agreed 100% with Ron Paul.

And I've yet to hear of a person who let that stop them from voting for Ron Paul.

He'll pull some surprising numbers, and hopefully force some changes in politics and how we're viewing the country and the people in it.

In the best of worlds he'll win.

Wouldn't Dennis Kucinich make a good VP if Ron does win?

At 12/15/07 12:51 AM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote:

At 12/15/07 12:45 AM, Elfer wrote: Wouldn't it be fantastic if Ron Paul was running against Dennis Kucinich, and people would actually have to consider real issues and the relative stances of the candidates before they voted?

yes, good reply, the only thing i dont like about Ron is that he wants to keep the richer n not distribute the wealth.

That's because the rich use their wealth to provide the rest of us jobs so that we can have wealth too. The free market system constrained by limited regulation does a pretty good job of redistributing the wealth.

Think about it this way Shaggy...to whom do most people apply for jobs? The Federal Govt or a corporation? Also look at private charities, when a scandal rocks one what is their first concern? That their donors will pull out...causing them to collapse. What happens when a bureaucracy has a systemic collapse of morals? Management is fired and/or jailed and the corruption continues because the government has created a law that the corrupt institution must be funded...

Now, when the Soviet Union tried the government redistributing the wealth under Lenin (to the extent currency was abolished)...it was an abject failure. Same thing in China, N. Korea, Cuba, etc.

Time and time again, governmental wealth redistribution has proven to be a failure (the pilgrims even attempted it)...

Time and time again, governmental wealth redistribution has proven to be a failure (the pilgrims even attempted it)...

Bingo. Which is why we need to learn to take care of ourselves now, rather than later, when the system folds on itself (see Social Security for details).

At 12/15/07 12:51 AM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote:

At 12/15/07 12:45 AM, Elfer wrote: Wouldn't it be fantastic if Ron Paul was running against Dennis Kucinich, and people would actually have to consider real issues and the relative stances of the candidates before they voted?

yes, good reply, the only thing i dont like about Ron is that he wants to keep the richer n not distribute the wealth.

Same here, and I think it's really a shame that people like Ron Paul don't realize you wouldn't have to distribute all excess wealth and become a socialist society in order to for more people to have the opportunity to succeed in life. Ron Paul, whether he does it intentionally, passively, or unwittingly, advocates for a wealth gap and a good percent of the public in poverty, which is fine for capitalism, but being on the constant alert for a socialist society to suddenly materialize... It's nonsensical. If Ron Paul was more concerned with the external threat of downfall for America, instead of a translucent and barely discern able internal one, then maybe he would get more support than he will.

Eh, the only candidate I liked was the Mormon guy for his stance on gay rights.

Beyond that, I figure the dems'll be the lesser of two evils, since for reasons I cannot understand, the republicans have become equated with "furthering the Christian motives".

Being a Satanist, I have ample reason to disagree with those goals...

Lol Barack Obama, he'd be an awesome president.

I'd say Newt Gingrich, but since he might not win maybe McCain or Romney.

But dude, what if we collapsed the corporations from within where the people actually are corrupt and getting rich off it, replace them with good people and run it like its supposed to.

More investigation and alertness to wealthy people abusing the law to gain more wealth is what we really need. Wealthy people don't need more wealth either dude, the government simply taking the money from them as taxes, moderating and monitoring the effect would be crucial, a corporation can't just make themselves go out o business just because they don't have as much wealth anymore, they'd be bankrupt and poor by the end since they wouldnt be able to corrupt any other corporations.

In simple terms if I may have confused people, take wealth from the wealthy, and try to give it back to the people in like tax breaks for the poor, Dennis's Universal health care plan would take care of everyone so there would be no more medicare fraud or whatever other shitty health care things there are. Use the money to create more jobs like the frigin alternative fuel things they're gonna have now ya know? Wealthy people don't need more wealth.

At 12/16/07 04:31 AM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote: In simple terms if I may have confused people, take wealth from the wealthy, and try to give it back to the people in like tax breaks for the poor, Dennis's Universal health care plan would take care of everyone so there would be no more medicare fraud or whatever other shitty health care things there are. Use the money to create more jobs like the frigin alternative fuel things they're gonna have now ya know? Wealthy people don't need more wealth.

1) To do healthcare reform right now would be bad...very bad. The federal budget is screwed up and we have an irresponsible tax & spend policy that both Republicans and Democrats have given us. If we do not fix our current social entitlement programs the budget and then the economy is going to collapse and we're going to have MANY MORE poor people.

2) The government is not going to make alternative energy technology...the private sector will. Technological advancement comes from the private sector, so yeah the wealthy people need more wealth.

I think you need to take an economics course or two my friend...

Paul and Kuchinich are both extremists. We've seen enough of that these last 8 years. I like Obama, honesty is something you don't find often in politics.

At 12/15/07 08:05 PM, King-Drake wrote:

Being a Satanist, I have ample reason to disagree with those goals...

It's doubtful the candidates plays Runscape.

Jesus, Paul just got something like 4.5 mil today. I guess that tea party thing worked out. But it still doesn't mean shit if he doesn't do anything with it.

At 12/12/07 12:28 PM, skatin-andy wrote: For the democrats I'm leaning towards Barack Obama or Bill Richardson. For the Republicans I'm leaning towards Ron Paul or John McCain.

If I go third party it will be Daniel J. Imperato from the Libertarian Party. That party is the closest to my personal beliefs.

Of the two main parties, I'd only choose Ron Paul. He'd be the only time I'd ever vote for a major party candidate. However, if he doesn't get the nod (the Tea Party money bomb won't buy votes, but it does get media attention) and if he doesn't accept the Libertarian Party's invitation to seek their nomination, I'd end up choosing Imperato (provided he gets the nod).

The only battlefield Ron Paul will ever win is the internet.

Where people like to think unrealistically.

At 12/16/07 06:40 PM, TheMason wrote:

2) The government is not going to make alternative energy technology...the private sector will. Technological advancement comes from the private sector, so yeah the wealthy people need more wealth.

I think you need to take an economics course or two my friend...

I think you should know that a huge amount of technological advancement came from the military, hell even the first video game, Pong, came from the military.

My bad, widely considered the first video arcade game, but Computer Space came out a year earlier. A military scientist screwed around with an oscilloscope to create the first Pong game.

At 2/6/08 07:27 PM, AfroShine wrote: I think you should know that a huge amount of technological advancement came from the military, hell even the first video game, Pong, came from the military.

Came is the operative word here; not how it is in the past tense. Nowadays, everything is contracted out to private industry. Furthermore, internal combustion, the lightbulb, radio, telephones, etc all came from the private sector.

Right now the main scientists working on the problem of alternative is the auto industry. Furthermore, this is going to sound naive, but oil is also researching this because guess what...they stand to market alternative energy and make another shit-ton of money.

Until it is perfected in the civilian market, this technology is not going to be significantly studied by the military.

Lol, alot of ppl like Ron paul but hes not getting any votes lol, well, i don't mind him, keeps on voting. I'm all for 08ama lol