Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ron Paul vs Ralph Nader = finally sensible choices for voters
- Thread starter merrill
- Start date
Two asswipes stuck on 5%. yeah, great choices. Electability is the answer, fringe candidates are a waste of ballot space.
WatertheTree
Senior Member
- Sep 9, 2011
- 1,804
- 171
- 48
Two asswipes stuck on 5%. yeah, great choices. Electability is the answer, fringe candidates are a waste of ballot space.
Ive been waiting on a shitbag corporate liberal to pull this card out agian. Thanks for playing.
George Bush Foreign Policy in 2000 Presidential Campaign. - YouTube
You can kiss your military spending goodbye. You can kiss your corporate welfare goodbye. You can kiss your subsidy's goodbye.
Unelectable my fucking ass. No more compromise. No more legal plunder. No more stealing and handing to the rich.
- Thread starter
- #5
Either of these two choices would bring fiscally responsible change to government.
Elect another republican will more than likely bring another financial fraud scandal. Totaling 3. Thus far Reagan/Bush and Bush/Cheney have put 20 million working class citizens out of :
* jobs
* out of medical insurance
* out of life savings
* out of retirement plans
* many of them out of their homes
The nation cannot afford any more Bush thinking republicans!
Elect another republican will more than likely bring another financial fraud scandal. Totaling 3. Thus far Reagan/Bush and Bush/Cheney have put 20 million working class citizens out of :
* jobs
* out of medical insurance
* out of life savings
* out of retirement plans
* many of them out of their homes
The nation cannot afford any more Bush thinking republicans!
Couldn't get much better....
just like spy vs spy...
except it would be megalomaniac vs megalomaniac
- Thread starter
- #7
Couldn't get much better....
just like spy vs spy...
except it would be megalomaniac vs megalomaniac
Better yet it would be a campaign based on the issues.
Repubs will turn this election into their RINO circus aka character assassination pushing the substantial issues wayyyyyyyyy to the back burner only to be forgotten. There is at least 31 years of this documented practice on the books.
Another repub admin will bring another financial fraud scheme thus bringing the total to 3.
- Thread starter
- #8
Today, however, hundreds of thousands of our fighting men and women have been stretched thin all across the globe in over 135 countries – often without a clear mission, any sense of what defines victory, or the knowledge of when they’ll be permanently reunited with their families.
Acting as the world’s policeman and nation-building weakens our country, puts our troops in harm’s way, and sends precious resources to other nations in the midst of an historic economic crisis.
Taxpayers are forced to spend billions of dollars each year to protect the borders of other countries, while Washington refuses to deal with our own border security needs.
Congress has been rendered virtually irrelevant in foreign policy decisions and regularly cedes authority to an executive branch that refuses to be held accountable for its actions.
Far from defeating the enemy, our current policies provide incentive for more to take up arms against us.
National Defense*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
Acting as the world’s policeman and nation-building weakens our country, puts our troops in harm’s way, and sends precious resources to other nations in the midst of an historic economic crisis.
Taxpayers are forced to spend billions of dollars each year to protect the borders of other countries, while Washington refuses to deal with our own border security needs.
Congress has been rendered virtually irrelevant in foreign policy decisions and regularly cedes authority to an executive branch that refuses to be held accountable for its actions.
Far from defeating the enemy, our current policies provide incentive for more to take up arms against us.
National Defense*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #9
Nader would cut the bloated, wasteful military budget.
The proposed military budget represents 58 cents out of every dollar spent by the U.S. government on discretionary programs - the items that Congress gets to vote up or down on an annual basis.
The Democrats and Republicans have been silent about this rapid escalation in military expenditures, despite many critical reports by the Government Accountability Office and Pentagon auditors.
In fact, they want to increase them.
As budget analyst William Hartung points out "the United States is already spending more for defense than all the other nations in the world combined."
Hartung points out that tens of billions of dollars are being wasted on systems like the F-22 fighter plane, the V-22 Osprey (a helicopter that can be transformed into a conventional aircraft), the Virginia class submarine, and an unworkable and unnecessary missile defense system.
Right now, the military budget is being used to fuel wasteful, reckless, destabilizing foreign interventions that violate constitutional and international law.
Nader would cut the military budget to a level needed to protect the country.
Military Budget -- Ralph Nader for President in 2008
The proposed military budget represents 58 cents out of every dollar spent by the U.S. government on discretionary programs - the items that Congress gets to vote up or down on an annual basis.
The Democrats and Republicans have been silent about this rapid escalation in military expenditures, despite many critical reports by the Government Accountability Office and Pentagon auditors.
In fact, they want to increase them.
As budget analyst William Hartung points out "the United States is already spending more for defense than all the other nations in the world combined."
Hartung points out that tens of billions of dollars are being wasted on systems like the F-22 fighter plane, the V-22 Osprey (a helicopter that can be transformed into a conventional aircraft), the Virginia class submarine, and an unworkable and unnecessary missile defense system.
Right now, the military budget is being used to fuel wasteful, reckless, destabilizing foreign interventions that violate constitutional and international law.
Nader would cut the military budget to a level needed to protect the country.
Military Budget -- Ralph Nader for President in 2008
Couldn't get much better....
Family Guy - Stewie "Say WHAAAT?" (HD) - YouTube
Yeah...for Mr. Obama...this is utopia.
Two asswipes stuck on 5%. yeah, great choices. Electability is the answer, fringe candidates are a waste of ballot space.
They may not win, but they can cost elections, like Nader did in '00. If only half his NH tally voted for Gore, Florida wouldn't have mattered and Al would have been president.
- Oct 7, 2011
- 38,401
- 4,162
- 1,130
Nader's a good man but i couldn't support him. He's just too much into that Big Government Nanny State thing. I'm not sure he would be much better than the Socialist Nanny Staters in there right now. But i do agree,these two men are trustworthy honorable men.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #15
Ron Paul says shut down the Fed! Yes to that!
Nader says Jail Time NOT Baillout Time - YES to that!!!
Jail Time Not Bail Time - Stop the Bailout -- Ralph Nader for President in 2008
Nader says Jail Time NOT Baillout Time - YES to that!!!
Jail Time Not Bail Time - Stop the Bailout -- Ralph Nader for President in 2008
Voters who think "choosing" between Republican or Democrat in the voting booth changes anything for Wall Street or the Pentagon are a waste of Democracy. Had Nader been elected in 2000 there would have been no illegal invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. (And possibly no 9/11) Had he been reelected four years later, hundreds of Wall Street executives would have been indicted for control fraud. It's never too late.Two asswipes stuck on 5%. yeah, great choices. Electability is the answer, fringe candidates are a waste of ballot space.
FLUSH the DC toilet in 2012!
Nader v. Paul with the loser serving as VP?
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #17
Very interesting concept...
As it is the two controlling parties dictate who the candidates of their choice will be.
Not to mention that cozy private corporation brought forth by both parties that dictates who can participate in the presidential debates.
So how does any of the above spell democracy?
As it is the two controlling parties dictate who the candidates of their choice will be.
Not to mention that cozy private corporation brought forth by both parties that dictates who can participate in the presidential debates.
So how does any of the above spell democracy?
Couldn't get much better....
just like spy vs spy...
except it would be megalomaniac vs megalomaniac
I think he was trying to say, can't get much worse..
I'm not sure where the $ fits into the spelling of "democracy", but it's been clear for decades (at least) how the 1% determine who our choices will be long before election day. Richard Reeves has the following perspective on our current "five political parties:"Very interesting concept...
As it is the two controlling parties dictate who the candidates of their choice will be.
Not to mention that cozy private corporation brought forth by both parties that dictates who can participate in the presidential debates.
So how does any of the above spell democracy?
"Moderate to liberal Democrats, led by a president tangled in a country still unable to provide jobs for many of its people. Read Barack Obama.
"Liberal Democrats, who believe the president is too moderate and too willing to compromise with an intractable Republican opposition. Read Matt Damon and other celebrities who think life is a movie with a happy ending.
"Semi-moderate Republicans, looking for a candidate with a chance to defeat Obama in November. Read Mitt Romney.
"Socially conservative Republicans, interested in only two pieces of literature—the Bible and the Constitution, though they understand neither. Read Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann.
"Libertarian Republicans, who deeply believe the less government the better, and that includes isolationism. Read, of course, Ron Paul."
Republicans AND Democrats have controlled DC since 1860.
Maybe it's time for Real Change?
Richard Reeves: America’s 5 Political Parties - Truthdig
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #20
Then comes along the dominating influence of the repub party which I believe neither Nader nor Paul support.
That dominating influence looks like this:
Top 1% economics: Over four generations, the Bush family has been involved with more than 20 securities firms, banks, brokerage houses and investment management firms, ranging from Wall Street giants like Brown Brothers Harriman and E.F. Hutton to small firms like J. Bush & Co. and Riggs Investment Management Corp.
This relentless record of handling money for rich people has bred a vocational hauteur. In their eyes, the economic top 1% of Americans are the ones who count. Investors and their inheritors are favored a good explanation of why George W. Bush has cut taxes on both dividends and estates, where most of the benefit goes to the top 1%.
Over the course of George H.W. Bush's career, he was close to a number of the merger kings and leveraged-buyout specialists of the 1980s who came from Oklahoma and Texas: T. Boone Pickens, Henry Kravis and Hugh Liedtke. "Little guy" economics has almost no niche in the Bush economic worldview.
Debt and deficits: Whenever a Bush is president, private debt and government deficits seem to grow. Middle- and low-income Americans borrow to offset the income squeeze of recessions. The hallmark of Bush economics during both presidencies has been favoritism toward capital over workers.
Federal budget deficits have soared because of a combination of upper-bracket tax favors, middle-income job shrinkage, big federal spending to hype election-year economic growth, huge defense outlays and overseas military spending for the wars in Iraq and elsewhere. Imperial hubris costs a lot of money.
Politically, over four generations the Bush past has been prologue. Despite George W. Bush's new good ol' boy image cowboy boots and born-again ties to the religious right his basic tendencies go in the same directions oil, crony capitalism, top 1% economics and military-industrial-establishment loyalties that the previous Bush and Walker generations have traveled.
The old biases and loyalties seem ineradicable; so, too, for old grudges, like the two-generation fixation on Saddam Hussein.
Bush Family Values: War, Wealth, Oil
That dominating influence looks like this:
Top 1% economics: Over four generations, the Bush family has been involved with more than 20 securities firms, banks, brokerage houses and investment management firms, ranging from Wall Street giants like Brown Brothers Harriman and E.F. Hutton to small firms like J. Bush & Co. and Riggs Investment Management Corp.
This relentless record of handling money for rich people has bred a vocational hauteur. In their eyes, the economic top 1% of Americans are the ones who count. Investors and their inheritors are favored a good explanation of why George W. Bush has cut taxes on both dividends and estates, where most of the benefit goes to the top 1%.
Over the course of George H.W. Bush's career, he was close to a number of the merger kings and leveraged-buyout specialists of the 1980s who came from Oklahoma and Texas: T. Boone Pickens, Henry Kravis and Hugh Liedtke. "Little guy" economics has almost no niche in the Bush economic worldview.
Debt and deficits: Whenever a Bush is president, private debt and government deficits seem to grow. Middle- and low-income Americans borrow to offset the income squeeze of recessions. The hallmark of Bush economics during both presidencies has been favoritism toward capital over workers.
Federal budget deficits have soared because of a combination of upper-bracket tax favors, middle-income job shrinkage, big federal spending to hype election-year economic growth, huge defense outlays and overseas military spending for the wars in Iraq and elsewhere. Imperial hubris costs a lot of money.
Politically, over four generations the Bush past has been prologue. Despite George W. Bush's new good ol' boy image cowboy boots and born-again ties to the religious right his basic tendencies go in the same directions oil, crony capitalism, top 1% economics and military-industrial-establishment loyalties that the previous Bush and Walker generations have traveled.
The old biases and loyalties seem ineradicable; so, too, for old grudges, like the two-generation fixation on Saddam Hussein.
Bush Family Values: War, Wealth, Oil
Similar threads
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 48
- Replies
- 90
- Views
- 1K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 53
- Views
- 154
- Replies
- 686
- Views
- 6K
- Replies
- 162
- Views
- 902
- Replies
- 1
- Views
- 9
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8047
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 469
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-