Ron Paul: why he could win.

Status
Not open for further replies.
And since when are shrimp producers considered big business? They're about as big and profitable as an average cattle operation. In case you didn't know- my family are cattle producers. We have benefited from earmarks as well in the way of funding for the Texas Cooperative Extension Service and research conducted at two state universities which gives us information. We are not a large operation with a grand whopping total of 27 head of cattle.

Shrimpers are usually operating in a monsterous fleet of 3 - 4 boats (since I live near the Gulf and used to liver even nearer, I know of some of these things) if they are successful. Only a local grocery chain (HEB) operates what I would call a large fleet. Shimpers must do maintenance to nets, engines and boats, pay slip fees, license fees, and holding and transport costs. Not every trip out results in enough catch to justify the fuel and labor investment, so while shrimp and beef are expensive, the producers spend an incredible amount to produce them.

I wouldn't care if they were big business, but if there is anybody out there who may work harder for their dollar than a farmer, I would say it is the shrimpers. I'm glad RP got them the money back that they paid in.
 
Well, I suppose that the beauty of pork is in the eye of the those who receive the pork, right? :cool:

Ron Paul likes his pork, other politicians like their pork, pork money for everyone! So we've established that Ron Paul is no different from any other "socialist-lite" congressmen when it comes to pork spending.
 
Fremmer,
I don't think you're grasping what Earmark and Appropriated funds mean. The bill has already passed at the earmark stage. If my congressman doesn't try to recoup some of the money (even if he voted "no" on the bill itself), and instead allows Massachussets to take the money from Texas, I would be rather upset about it. So yes- if I paid a dollar into the Federal Government I would ideally hope for a dollar back in services to my state. I believe if I recall, last year, Texas got back about 82 cents.

More ideally, the Fedgov would not tax me so much and let my own state tax me for services we can provide ourselves to the degree which we want to provide them.

Can you find me the original bill (appropriation) and whether or not it was voted for by Ron Paul? I haven't looked myself, but I will now.

I know that RP has given back part of his salary to the treasury each year and does not avail himself of the Congressional Pension. I know that he refused to accept medicaid in his private practice (I know, living by example doesn't count), and would rather not get payment. I know he refused to allow his children to take out subsidized student loans for college yet all completed a four year degree and two are physicians themselves.

So perhaps you are right. We are only argueing in degrees. Pick your candidate and decide what degree you like him to be a part of the established mess. I picked what seems like to me the guy who is least a part of the mess and has been pro-gun 100% since the day he first stepped foot on Capitol Hill.

I am a libertarian and that is the world I would like to see some day, but that doesn't mean that I don't live in a quasi-socialist country right now and must play by the rules offered me today and now. Those who don't play by the rules of today eventually end up as headlines (Republic of Texas, Randy Weaver, Branch Davidians et. Al.).
 
If you mean that I'm not accepting a weak excuse, then you're right. So he voted against the appropriations bill. So what? He then took his share of pork from the bill. Wrong is wrong. If the appropriations bill was bad enough to vote against, then the pork from the bill is just as bad, and should have been likewise rejected by Ron Paul.

But RP claimed his share of pork money, just like all of the other democrats and republicans did. So if the current congress is "socialist-lite", then Ron Paul is a member of that big-spending group, too.

It's not the end of the world, folks. Ron Paul did what all of the other politicians in congress did! But let's not pretend that Ron Paul is somehow different from other politicians when it comes to pork spending, because he's not.
 
Fremmer,
I see you're from Nebraska! Maybe we ought to PM about football! Really, given the alternatives on who else I have to choose from in this election, I will choose the man who most closely stands with my beliefs. That means RP or Huckabee in that order. Gun rights and interpretation of the Constitution is the criteria with which I judge them.

You will not find a perfect candidate. Nobody is perfectly aligned with the Democratic, Republican or Libertarian parties. Even Ron Paul goes against the LP in his stand on abortion, Rudy has frequently opposed Republicans on the same, and many others oppose their parties on one thing or another. We didn't form a "perfect union" in 1789, but "a more perfect union."

BTW, Thanks for Bill Byrne!
Gig 'em Aggies!
 
If the appropriations bill was bad enough to vote against, then the pork from the bill is just as bad, and should have been likewise rejected by Ron Paul.
Click to expand...

No thats not right. The money was going to be spent, whether Paul liked it or not. So he spent it on something that he liked.

If you had $100 in your pocket, and a guy with a gun told you to spend that money now, or he was going to take it, would you buy $100 worth of Kotex, or $100 worth of ammo? (please tell me ammo!).
 
Heh, go big red. Or something. Oh well, ya gotta support your team in the good times and in the bad times.

Nobody held a gun to RP's head and forced him to stick his hand in the pork barrel; he did that all by himself. Just like all of the other democrats and republicans in congress.

No, RP's not perfect. Neither are any of the rest of the Republican candidates. I don't have as much of a problem with Ron Paul as I do with some of his supporters, who make absurd comments like the one about how everyone except Ron Paul is "socialist-lite". Please. Ron Paul is Ron Paul. But he's not a perfect, angelic, super-dooper-holier-than-thou conservative, and not all of the other republican candidates are socialist/communist/imperfect-because-they-aren't Ron-Paul evildoers.

Ron Paul may end up with the same problem that Dean had with the Deaniacs. Dean didn't lose the primaries -- it was the Deaniacs who lost them for Dean, because the folks in Iowa and NH were turned off by the constant, incessant, never-ending, cult-like devotion that was being rammed down their throats every second of every minute of every hour, day after day after day. It burns people out and turns them off.
 
I just don't see why you are making such a big deal out of this. The money was going to be spent, and there was nothing he could do to stop it. Are you faulting RP for that? His supporters don't speak for him, and aren't running for office.
 
There was an argument going on like this at another forum. The Fred Heads were attacking Ron Paul on the 2A because he voted against the protection laws for gun manufacturers on constitutional grounds. If you research it you will find that laws were pretty much unconstitutional as they provided special protected status for a targeted industry. While Fred's 2A record is about 60 percent in an about, Dr Pauls is impeccable.. The whole anti Ron Paul thing kind of reminds me of the Jesus and Barabbas. Ron Paul is held to a much higher standard than the POS rino's they are trying top pass off as conservative. So, then you have people nittering and nattering over the great shrimp debacle.:rolleyes:

These forums are fun during the week when I don't get out. The funnest thing to do is get out and pass out Ron Paul slim jims and wave signs on the corner with your meetup group. Alot of effort gets wasted arguing with folks that will never change there mind. But then I guess we all like a little drama.

Also, since someone tossed out a Dec 16, YouTube link here is my shameless plug for My Favorite Doctor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTlPZH_sjbA
 
Paul is held to a higher standard because it's his own supporters who are shining the flashlight his way. Maybe if every time we hear anything about politics, there wasn't some RP fanatic telling us how he's the only true constitutional candidate, we wouldn't try to take some of those claims to the bank by checking him out. When the rest of us have to hear about how great RP is 24/7, don't be surprised when we examine everything he does expecting greatness; or that we are justly skeptical when he turns out less than the perfect candidate the fanatics claim.

It's the same thing about Glocks. It's not the Glocks that are so bad, it's the Glock owners who insist on telling the rest of us how stupid we are for not being a Glock fanatic too. It's not Ron Paul that is annoying, it's his followers that try to turn every thread into a RP worship fest. It turns people off to the whole idea. When you have a bunch of arrogant pricks recommending only one certain gun to you, of course you are subconsciously going to be skeptical of that gun based on their actions. And when you have a bunch of fanatics shoving one candidate down your throat constantly, of course you are going to transfer some of that sense onto the candidate himself, and associate the candidate with lunacy.
 
Crosshair,
The link seems to work okay for me. That's the only copy of that particular video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kll9-nR4uVs

It illustrates the point that the people are donating huge amounts to his campaign and attending his rallies by the thousands. And it's people who vote. The other campaigns use their money to try to mimic the appearance of the support he actually has.
It's all about getting bodies into the booths. He's getting more media attention these days and his base is motivated. People that are walking into the polling places will fall into 2 categories: Paul supporters and Undecideds :D
I predict that a great many people will be shocked when the results come in from Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.
 
And don't mind Fremmer. He's made it his business to try to stem the bleeding of people into the Paul camp however he can. :D
I suspect that if he was really all "burned out" over the Paul threads he wouldn't be clickin' them.
 
No way Reagan or Buchanan endorsed him.:barf:
Click to expand...

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/..._right_--_rudy_or_ron?page=full&comments=true

http://buchanan.org/blog/?p=736

http://buchanan.org/blog/?p=875

Which tells me that you have no idea what Buchanan is about.

And the Reagan stuff is already covered upstream.


I'll sum up your statement and the general anti-Paul hostility in Buchanan's own words:

"Democrats aren't embarassed when a Republican acts like a conservative, but Republicans are."
(edit) In fact... I think this is my new sig quote :D
 
This is funny :D

moneydud.jpg

Screen shot from BarackObama.Com taken this morning.

Now, I understand that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and all, but apparently Barack ain't got the webroots they seem to think they have.
Apparently they need another demonstration of the physics of money bombs. Class will be in session December 16th. :D
teaparty1.jpg


Note to mods: This mention of another candidate is intended strictly for comparative purposes. It is in no way intended to promote said candidate or change the topic to said candidate.
 
Last edited:
Wow, for a candidate who raised $32.5 million in the second quarter and $20 million in the third, a goal of one million is pretty pitiful.
 
mvpel,
What's even more pitiful was the less than 1/2% attainment of even that goal, which was lowered from the actual goal of 5 million.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top