GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | RSS | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: Who would you vote for today?  (Read 25963 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31167
  • Manna: 639
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #175 on: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 12:34:58 »
Like Tonka Tim has pointed out, they are probably working to buy nukes rather than develope them, which is no less ominous than them developing them. They still go boom, and they are still a threat to Israel and the region, which will draw in the whole world. They have promised to use them on Israel. The appearance of their Messiah, the Madhi depends on them doing such. Why bother with research when you can go get one ready to go with technical assistance?

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #175 on: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 12:34:58 »

Offline TonkaTim

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2024
  • Manna: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #176 on: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 13:14:58 »
Like Tonka Tim has pointed out, they are probably working to buy nukes rather than develope them, which is no less ominous than them developing them. They still go boom, and they are still a threat to Israel and the region, which will draw in the whole world. They have promised to use them on Israel. The appearance of their Messiah, the Madhi depends on them doing such. Why bother with research when you can go get one ready to go with technical assistance?



Don't twist my words.


I said: Iran is a puppet state of China & Russia. Iran is completely dependent on China & Russia. Iran is not an autonomous rogue nation.

Here are my words:
Still pushing the Iran fear-mongering I see.   Even though though you are aware of the over-whelming evidence to the contrary. That Iran is a puppet state to Russia & China & completely dependent on them for the nuclear & military capability.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jul/5/irans-nuclear-program-helped-by-china-russia/
http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2004/issue1/jv8n1a7.html
http://www.wisconsinproject.org/countries/iran/nuke-miles.htm
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=29604

As you already know any real negotiations or efforts to do anything about a nuclear problem in Iran has to be addressed with China & Russia. They are Iran's nuclear industry. If & when Iran ever gets the 'bomb' it's because Russia & China give it to them. Plus China & Russia has gone on record stating an attack on Iran is an attack on them.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/china-will-not-hesitate-protect-iran-even-third-world-war
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/11/02/is-russia-becoming-irans-diplomatic-godfather/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/13/iran-russia-nato-idUSL6E8CD2XU20120113

So unless US is ready to start WW3 it's all sabre rattling as you well know. Sabre rattling for cover of the economic alliances being built behind the scenes. Which you already know about.

China is working behind the scenes to establish its currency at the reserve currency by taking direct action against the US dollar current status.

Back in October China announced a new bank that would trade in the Yuan with an invitation towards South Korea & more importantly Japan. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/27/us-china-asean-financial-idUSTRE79Q2F520111027

On December 25 China & Japan announced  direct trading with the Yen & the Yuan no longer trading with the US Dollar. Remember Japan is the 2cnd largest consumer of Iranian oil, now they can just buy Iranian oil from China instead of Iran.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-25/china-japan-to-promote-direct-trading-of-currencies-to-cut-company-costs.html

December 25 Japan also announced it would be investing in Chinese Government Bonds as well.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/25/us-japan-china-bonds-idUSTRE7BO06G20111225

December 28 Japan loans India 15 Billion to shore up Rupee against Western/European currency crisis pulling the 3rd largest Asian economy into dependency on the Japan/China alliance and way from the US.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-28/japan-india-seal-15-billion-currency-swap-arrangement-to-shore-up-rupee.html

http://www.bullionstreet.com/news/indias-gold-for-oil-deal-with-iran-to-boost-the-bullion/898
https://rt.com/news/iran-india-gold-oil-543/
http://www.forexcrunch.com/gold-for-oil-india-and-iran-ditch-dollar-report/
"According to a new and yet unconfirmed report, India bought oil from Iran using gold. India certainly has the gold resources to fund the oil,"
"The step joins Russia and Iran’s announcement to begin trading in their own domestic currencies rather than use the US dollar"

These are major steps in China's growing global alliance, especially the moves that are consolidating partnerships with historical US allies such as Japan, South Korea, & India.

It was just two years ago in December that Russia & China agreed on direct trade of currency as well.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/15/business/global/15iht-ruble15.html

These are huge stories with major & lasting impacts you are not hearing discussed on corporate media opinion news.

On December 7 Chinese President Hu Jintao told the Chinese military to "prepare for war"? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-16063607

One Jan 5, 2012 The US announce a new military re-organization plan - Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey said -“All of the trends, demographic trends, geopolitical trends, economic trends and military trends are shifting toward the Pacific. So our strategic challenges in the future will largely emanate out of the Pacific region"
http://articles.boston.com/2012-01-06/news/30598597_1_asia-pacific-defense-secretary-leon-panetta-defense-strategy

Two days later, China just warned us about our newly announced military strategy
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/07/world/asia/chinese-news-agency-xinhua-warns-us-against-militarism.html?_r=1&ref=china

In summation - What the China led economic coalition is doing to the US  is the exact same policy the US is doing to Iran through economics.

These are all the by products of the on going major power shift from the West to the East.

This is the current Japanese view & assessment on the power shift
http://nippon.com/en/currents/d00006/
Currencies and the International Order During a Global Power Shift

It's not like it was not anticipated this article from the CFR's Foreign Affairs magazine, is eight years old.
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/59910/james-f-hoge-jr/a-global-power-shift-in-the-making
A Global Power Shift in the Making

So why do you insist on continuing down the fear-mongering road when you & all in the know understands the whole truth of the situation?



If Iran were to go rogue on China & Russia, Iran would get slammed harder & faster by China & Russia than when we slammed our puppet state Iraq went rogue. Iran would get regime change just like Iraq. It would not take them as long because they do not have the measures that slow military action like the US. Do we forget the call for Iraq regime change was made law in 1998 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act?
« Last Edit: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 14:00:32 by TonkaTim »

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #176 on: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 13:14:58 »

Offline Captain Shays

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
  • Manna: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #177 on: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 17:31:16 »
I guess the people who are advocating for more wars and especiallly one in Iran are playing with a problem that has an iherent ability to begin self expanding until China, Russia, Syria (for sure because of their mutual defense agreement with Iran), Pakistan, Tiawan, North Korea possibly Venezuala, and the rest of the Muslim realms as no doubt Iran's Hezbollah will attempt to bring Israel intot he conflict to inspire even more Muslims. That could fracture our relationships with Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Guttar and others. WWIII anyone?

Do we follow the Prince of Peace....still?

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11701
  • Manna: 169
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #178 on: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 18:10:45 »
God is great, beer is good and people are crazy.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #178 on: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 18:10:45 »
Pinterest: GraceCentered.com

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31167
  • Manna: 639
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #179 on: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 19:17:55 »
Tonka, it is well known that Iran is motivated by their goofy theology whereby, their worldwide mischief brings about the appearance of their messiah the Madhi. They are not that deterrable even by the Russians or Chinese. The Russians and Chinese's motivation is to add to our grief via a surrogate. Nothing would please the Chinese and the Russians more. Where do you think the Iranians learned their techniques with Hamas and Hizbollah and surrogate warfare?
« Last Edit: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 21:34:53 by Jaime »

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #179 on: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 19:17:55 »



Offline Cally

  • I am Christian. The rest is details.
  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4451
  • Manna: 151
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #180 on: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 20:20:15 »
^yes TonkaTim

I don't equate the end of America with the end of the world the way some people do, but if someone doesn't do the kinds of things Ron Paul says he's going to do, you'd best brush up on your Chinese--you're going to need it when China repossesses the country.

You know what else I find absolutely appalling? Again, with all these believers trying to interpret end times, and predicting the dangers of a world government forming, and . . .

. . . oh look, they don't like the presidential candidate that's trying to prevent exactly that. Ron Paul has talked about those trying to make the value of the dollar plummet and call for a world currency.

If said believers are right about their predictions of end times, then how are they not responsible for making it come about?
THANK GOD There are Christians who get it!!!!!
My take is this. Just to amplify what you and TonkaTim are saying. We know the world will fall into a global government/financial hegonomy but we also know that it's not God's plan but Satan's plan instead. For us to take part in it is likke providing bricks for the Tower of Babal that God destroyed just like He will destroy the one world government when our Savior returns. What will I say that I voted for the lesser of two evils despite the fact that lesser evil was an engineer for the constrruction of our modern Tower of Babal in a system that will be responsible for the murder of untold end times Saints?
OK well, there are other prophesies as well. Women will give up their natural effection and burn in lust for one another. That lawlessness will increase and most people's love will wax cold. Should we do nothing but instead take part in those sins as well for lesser of two evils?

Yeah, I am soundly stumped. First it's "Oh no, world government!" But along comes Ron Paul and then it's "Oh no, isolationinst!"

Offline Jett22

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 284
  • Manna: 18
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #181 on: Mon Jan 30, 2012 - 22:02:19 »
Or, he has alot of good views on most of the issues, but he is weird.  maybe a little creepy.

I'd much rather go with the "norm", I just can't support weird and creepy.







It's a well known fact that creepy looking guys make terrible presidents.

 ::doh::      ::frustrated::       ::help::

Offline Captain Shays

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
  • Manna: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #182 on: Thu Feb 02, 2012 - 13:32:08 »
The more the media ignores him or misrepresents his postions the stronger my resolve is to vote for  NO ONE BUT PAUL
« Last Edit: Fri Feb 03, 2012 - 07:55:00 by Captain Shays »

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31167
  • Manna: 639
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #183 on: Thu Feb 02, 2012 - 16:47:49 »
We all know no one IS better than Obama!  rofl
« Last Edit: Fri Feb 03, 2012 - 05:59:36 by Jaime »

Offline Captain Shays

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
  • Manna: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #184 on: Fri Feb 03, 2012 - 07:56:33 »
We all know no one IS better than Obama!  rofl

Well if we don't nominate Ron Paul we WILL get another four years of Obama. There is no doubt about it.

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31167
  • Manna: 639
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #185 on: Fri Feb 03, 2012 - 12:45:29 »
Oh yes there is major doubt. Any of the GOP candidates would be much better than Obama.

Offline Captain Shays

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
  • Manna: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #186 on: Fri Feb 03, 2012 - 15:09:09 »
Better in what way? ALL of them except for Ron Paul are going to get us into more unnecessary wars, allow the Federal Reserve corporation to drive us and our children into the servitude of debt and the government will become more and more authoritarian until we can no longer claim to be a free country. If this country were a train which could only go wherever the tracks take it, with ALL of the other candidates it will be heading in the same direction. One world government, ,war, debt and loss of freedom. If there was a switchman to turn the train to another set of tracks back to the Constitution and the ruls of law then every Christian should support that candidate. There is more thn one or two issues that the media presents to the general population Abortion, terrorism blah blah blah. Christians should also be concerned about who sends us into wars and why. We shoulds be concerned about the freedom of choice that was given to us by our Father. We should be concerned about whether or not we're voting for people who are helping Satan to establish his one world government

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31167
  • Manna: 639
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #187 on: Fri Feb 03, 2012 - 20:16:36 »
I say horse hockey because I couldn't say anything else to dissuade you. I respect your zeal, and I recommend you continue to support your candidate to the best of your ability in the primary then cast a vote in the general election that will count against Obama. 

Offline Consumingfire

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
  • Manna: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #188 on: Sat Feb 04, 2012 - 01:07:25 »
We all know no one IS better than Obama!  rofl

Well if we don't nominate Ron Paul we WILL get another four years of Obama. There is no doubt about it.
Very big overstatement on your part.  A lot of the problems with Obama can be seen in the other candidates but in many, many areas, the other candidates are much better suited to help the country go in the right direction.

Ron Paul has no chance of winning the GOP nomination.  Even if he did win the GOP nomination, he would have no chance of beating Obama. 

If two impossible things happened and he became president, he would never get any of his ideas passed in the senate or congress and he would not overstep his executive powers to overrule the other branches.  He would be a complete lame duck president. 

Offline Jett22

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 284
  • Manna: 18
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #189 on: Sat Feb 04, 2012 - 03:17:44 »
This is one of the main reasons I support Ron Paul.  He stands up for his ideas.  He doesn't stick his finger in the air to determine whats "right".

Don't you want a leader who stands up for his principles even when they are not popular?

This is our country.  We the people.  And we won't get it back without a fight.  And we won't get it back with spineless leaders who don't want to look bad in the media.

We won't get it back with "bought and paid for politicians" like every single candidate except Ron Paul.

Offline Captain Shays

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
  • Manna: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #190 on: Sat Feb 04, 2012 - 18:43:02 »
We all know no one IS better than Obama!  rofl

Well if we don't nominate Ron Paul we WILL get another four years of Obama. There is no doubt about it.
Very big overstatement on your part.  A lot of the problems with Obama can be seen in the other candidates but in many, many areas, the other candidates are much better suited to help the country go in the right direction.

Ron Paul has no chance of winning the GOP nomination.  Even if he did win the GOP nomination, he would have no chance of beating Obama.  

If two impossible things happened and he became president, he would never get any of his ideas passed in the senate or congress and he would not overstep his executive powers to overrule the other branches.  He would be a complete lame duck president.  

It's an accurate and well informed statement.

Ron Paul has more support from the largest demographic in the country, the independents than any other Republican and Obama as well.
He has the highest support of any Republican among non whites
He has more support from active military personnel than ALL the Republicans and Obama multiplied by two.
He has his own supporters who are not likely to cast a vote for one of the corporate controlled, war mongerer candidates. At the very least we're around 10% maybe more.
He would get back those anti war voters who got Obama elected and bring them back into the GOP
He has more support from Democrats than ANY other Republican
He has the highest support from ages 18-25 and from 25-30 of all the other Republicans

If Ron Paul isn't the nominee the other Republican won't get back those anti war votes especially if it's Rock Santorum who already has his finger on the trigger for yet another war.
They won'y get enough Independents to beat Obama
They won't inspire Democrats to come over to the GOP
The youth vote will stay with Obama.
The Ron Paul supporters won't sell out for one of the others who will just like Obama not audit the Federal Reserve corporation, keep us in a constant state of conflict, engage in unnecessary, undeclared wars of agression against countries that never attacked us or threatened us.
We also won't vote for those who like to give corporate welfare (ALL the others and Obama), bailouts and buy outs.
We won't vote for those authoritarians who will grow government in size, spending and intrusiveness into our lives supporting the TSA abuses, Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, NDAA and SOPA and who support all the extra-national trade agreements that have and continue to destroy our production base like IMF, WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA and SPP.

So when I say if we don't nominate Ron Paul we WILL get another 4 yrs of Obama I know what I am saying but if you get your information from the mainstream media you'll never believe me.
« Last Edit: Wed Feb 08, 2012 - 16:08:24 by Captain Shays »

Offline Consumingfire

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
  • Manna: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #191 on: Sun Feb 05, 2012 - 14:47:53 »
We all know no one IS better than Obama!  rofl

Well if we don't nominate Ron Paul we WILL get another four years of Obama. There is no doubt about it.
Very big overstatement on your part.  A lot of the problems with Obama can be seen in the other candidates but in many, many areas, the other candidates are much better suited to help the country go in the right direction.

Ron Paul has no chance of winning the GOP nomination.  Even if he did win the GOP nomination, he would have no chance of beating Obama. 

If two impossible things happened and he became president, he would never get any of his ideas passed in the senate or congress and he would not overstep his executive powers to overrule the other branches.  He would be a complete lame duck president. 

It's an accurate and well informed statement.

Ron Paul has more support from the largest demographic in the country, the independents than any other Republican and Obama as well.
He has the highest support of any Republican among non whites
He has more support from active military personnel than ALL the Republicans and Obama multiplied by two.
He has his own supporters who are not likely to cast a vote for one of the corporate controlled, war mongerer candidates. At the very least we're around 10% maybe more.
He would get back those anti war voters who got Obama elected and bring them back into the GOP
He has more support from Democrats than ANY other Republican
He has the highest support from ages 18-25 and from 25-30 of all the other Republicans

If Ron Paul isn't the nominee the other Republican won't get back those anti war votes especially if it's Rock Santorum who already has his finger on the trigger for yet another war.
They won'y get enough Independents to beat Obama
They won't inspire Democrats to come over to the GOP
The youth vote will stay with Obama.
The Ron Paul supporters won't sell out for one of the others who will just like Obama not audit the Federal Reserve corporation, keep us in a constant state of conflict, engage in unnecessary, undeclared wars of agression against countries that never attacked us or threatened us.
We also won't vote for those who like to give corporate welfare (ALL the others and Obama), bailouts and buy outs.
We won't vote for those authoritarians who will grow government in size, spending and intrusiveness into our lives supporting the TSA abuses, Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, NDAA and SOPA and who support all the extra-national trade agreements that have and continue to destroy our production base like IMF, WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA and SPP.

So when I say if we don't nominate Ron Paul we WILL get another 4 yrs of Obama I know what I am saying but if you get your information from the mainstream media you'll never believe me.
Ron Paul won't get enough republican turn out to beat Obama.  He also will not get anything he wants done passed by the house and senate if he were to take office.  Very few politicians hold the same view as Paul.  From a logical standpoint that is a strongpoint for Paul because his views are so refreshing and pure.  From a practical standpoint, nothing would ever get done. 

Paul supporters tend to think that everyone that does not support him, does not know his stances or are spoon fed by mainstream media.  Many, many people have done their homework and still do not believe he is the best candidate. 

Lehigh

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #192 on: Mon Feb 06, 2012 - 13:28:29 »

 Ommmm,  who do you think?!!

                 

Offline Josiah

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1896
  • Manna: 80
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #193 on: Mon Feb 06, 2012 - 16:59:08 »
Oh yes there is major doubt. Any of the GOP candidates would be much better than Obama.


Amen....


.

Offline Captain Shays

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
  • Manna: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #194 on: Wed Feb 08, 2012 - 16:19:09 »
We all know no one IS better than Obama!  rofl

Well if we don't nominate Ron Paul we WILL get another four years of Obama. There is no doubt about it.
Very big overstatement on your part.  A lot of the problems with Obama can be seen in the other candidates but in many, many areas, the other candidates are much better suited to help the country go in the right direction.

Ron Paul has no chance of winning the GOP nomination.  Even if he did win the GOP nomination, he would have no chance of beating Obama. 

If two impossible things happened and he became president, he would never get any of his ideas passed in the senate or congress and he would not overstep his executive powers to overrule the other branches.  He would be a complete lame duck president. 

It's an accurate and well informed statement.

Ron Paul has more support from the largest demographic in the country, the independents than any other Republican and Obama as well.
He has the highest support of any Republican among non whites
He has more support from active military personnel than ALL the Republicans and Obama multiplied by two.
He has his own supporters who are not likely to cast a vote for one of the corporate controlled, war mongerer candidates. At the very least we're around 10% maybe more.
He would get back those anti war voters who got Obama elected and bring them back into the GOP
He has more support from Democrats than ANY other Republican
He has the highest support from ages 18-25 and from 25-30 of all the other Republicans

If Ron Paul isn't the nominee the other Republican won't get back those anti war votes especially if it's Rock Santorum who already has his finger on the trigger for yet another war.
They won'y get enough Independents to beat Obama
They won't inspire Democrats to come over to the GOP
The youth vote will stay with Obama.
The Ron Paul supporters won't sell out for one of the others who will just like Obama not audit the Federal Reserve corporation, keep us in a constant state of conflict, engage in unnecessary, undeclared wars of agression against countries that never attacked us or threatened us.
We also won't vote for those who like to give corporate welfare (ALL the others and Obama), bailouts and buy outs.
We won't vote for those authoritarians who will grow government in size, spending and intrusiveness into our lives supporting the TSA abuses, Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, NDAA and SOPA and who support all the extra-national trade agreements that have and continue to destroy our production base like IMF, WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA and SPP.

So when I say if we don't nominate Ron Paul we WILL get another 4 yrs of Obama I know what I am saying but if you get your information from the mainstream media you'll never believe me.
Ron Paul won't get enough republican turn out to beat Obama.  He also will not get anything he wants done passed by the house and senate if he were to take office.  Very few politicians hold the same view as Paul.  From a logical standpoint that is a strongpoint for Paul because his views are so refreshing and pure.  From a practical standpoint, nothing would ever get done. 

Paul supporters tend to think that everyone that does not support him, does not know his stances or are spoon fed by mainstream media.  Many, many people have done their homework and still do not believe he is the best candidate. 

First of all, pundits, politicians and so called "experts" have been telling us who is the most electable for this entire season and they have ALL been wrong so far. Most of that notion is mainstream media driven anyway and they can't be trusted AT ALL.
Second, according to FACT Ron Paul actually has THE best chance to beat Obama out of ANY of the other GOP hopefulls. Why? Well for starters it was the anti war voters that got Obama elected in the first place along with a majority of Independents. Many to most of them are now very disappointed and are supporting Ron Paul and would support Ron Paul over Obama. The other Republicans stand little to no chance of getting those anti war voters back, especially since they all seem to have their finger on the trigger for yet another war.
Also, out of all the other Republicans, Ron Paul has more support from Independents than ALL of them and most of those would prefer Obama over any of the other Republicans. Have you seen any of the head to head polls? Romney is just one or two points ahead of Ron Paul against Obama with Gingrich and Santorum way behind.

If Ron Paul got elected the first thing he would do would be to repeal all of the unconstitutional executive orders that previous presidents used to circumvent Congress. If he only did that it would accomplich much. But if we were to get Ron Paul elected it would send the clearest message since our Revolution to politicians that we're serious about reducing the size, scope and spending of the Federal Govt and to stop the globe trotting that the progressives started us on under Wilson and FDR and now the neoconservatives like Romney, Santorum and Gingrich. It would also send a message that we're serious about preserving our freedoms and getting back those that have been taken by an over reaching government and the other polticians would be terrified that we'll un-elect them if they don't also start to uphold their oath to protect and preserve the Constitution. The Tea Party Movement was born out of Ron Paul's campaign in 07 and we've seen the impact all across this country. Of course it has lost a lot of it's appeal since it was hijacked by the neoconservative/progressives but the core of us are still around and very active and the establishment crooked war mongerer, corporate controlled freedom robbers KNOW we're hear and THAT my brother is why the corporate media either ignores Ron Paul or marginalizes him at every chance they can.
Ron Paul has authored Bills to get us out of the UN, to repeal the 16th Amendment and the IRS, to extract us from international trade agreements that both subvert the free market and destroy our production base and our national sovereignty. He has authored Bills that would end abortion on demand without having to wait 100 years for us to nominate enough SC justices to over turn Roe V Wade. He has predicted the economic collapse YEARS before it happened and has the ONLY right solution to restore our economy.
I can't think of another politician who a Christian should vote for.

I for one never implied that you haven't done any research. If you have looked into it and agree that we should remain on a fiat currency ssytem that has driven us into debt, I strongly disagree with you. If you agree with Woodrow Wilson "use the US military to make the world safe for democracy" instead of George Washington "I have always held that no country has a right to inter-meddle in the affairs of another country and if we can maintain a strict neutrality we can preserve peace" and "peace, commerce and friendly relations with all, entangling alliances with none" then I disagree with you and Woodrow Wilson. If you don't have a problem with TSA agents strip searching 84 year old ladies and putting their hands down the pants of little 6 year old girls "to keep us safe" then I disagree with you on that too. If you agree with just any to most of the policies of the progressives instead of the founding fathers then I probably disagree with you on that too because this country has gotten so far of it's path that we're barely recognizable to the founders or the Constitution that they drafted and most of the distortions came at the hands of progressives from both the major marties.

LivingbyFaith61

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #195 on: Wed Feb 08, 2012 - 16:52:05 »
I did not see my choice on the list...NONE OF THE ABOVE!!! The GOP is marching out the same losers from years ago and not one of them care anything about my needs. But they will bend over backwards for the wealthy and business leaders who want to repeal a workers right to form a union or to negotiate labor agreements. Obama is nothing less than a total communist who represents the farthest fringe of the liberal left. I don't want any of these people to serve as our President. And don't get me started on Congress!!   ::doh::

Offline Consumingfire

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
  • Manna: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #196 on: Thu Feb 09, 2012 - 03:17:48 »
I did not see my choice on the list...NONE OF THE ABOVE!!! The GOP is marching out the same losers from years ago and not one of them care anything about my needs. But they will bend over backwards for the wealthy and business leaders who want to repeal a workers right to form a union or to negotiate labor agreements. Obama is nothing less than a total communist who represents the farthest fringe of the liberal left. I don't want any of these people to serve as our President. And don't get me started on Congress!!   ::doh::
You should still vote for one.

Offline Consumingfire

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
  • Manna: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #197 on: Thu Feb 09, 2012 - 03:39:34 »
We all know no one IS better than Obama!  rofl

Well if we don't nominate Ron Paul we WILL get another four years of Obama. There is no doubt about it.
Very big overstatement on your part.  A lot of the problems with Obama can be seen in the other candidates but in many, many areas, the other candidates are much better suited to help the country go in the right direction.

Ron Paul has no chance of winning the GOP nomination.  Even if he did win the GOP nomination, he would have no chance of beating Obama.  

If two impossible things happened and he became president, he would never get any of his ideas passed in the senate or congress and he would not overstep his executive powers to overrule the other branches.  He would be a complete lame duck president.  

It's an accurate and well informed statement.

Ron Paul has more support from the largest demographic in the country, the independents than any other Republican and Obama as well.
He has the highest support of any Republican among non whites
He has more support from active military personnel than ALL the Republicans and Obama multiplied by two.
He has his own supporters who are not likely to cast a vote for one of the corporate controlled, war mongerer candidates. At the very least we're around 10% maybe more.
He would get back those anti war voters who got Obama elected and bring them back into the GOP
He has more support from Democrats than ANY other Republican
He has the highest support from ages 18-25 and from 25-30 of all the other Republicans

If Ron Paul isn't the nominee the other Republican won't get back those anti war votes especially if it's Rock Santorum who already has his finger on the trigger for yet another war.
They won'y get enough Independents to beat Obama
They won't inspire Democrats to come over to the GOP
The youth vote will stay with Obama.
The Ron Paul supporters won't sell out for one of the others who will just like Obama not audit the Federal Reserve corporation, keep us in a constant state of conflict, engage in unnecessary, undeclared wars of agression against countries that never attacked us or threatened us.
We also won't vote for those who like to give corporate welfare (ALL the others and Obama), bailouts and buy outs.
We won't vote for those authoritarians who will grow government in size, spending and intrusiveness into our lives supporting the TSA abuses, Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, NDAA and SOPA and who support all the extra-national trade agreements that have and continue to destroy our production base like IMF, WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA and SPP.

So when I say if we don't nominate Ron Paul we WILL get another 4 yrs of Obama I know what I am saying but if you get your information from the mainstream media you'll never believe me.
Ron Paul won't get enough republican turn out to beat Obama.  He also will not get anything he wants done passed by the house and senate if he were to take office.  Very few politicians hold the same view as Paul.  From a logical standpoint that is a strongpoint for Paul because his views are so refreshing and pure.  From a practical standpoint, nothing would ever get done.  

Paul supporters tend to think that everyone that does not support him, does not know his stances or are spoon fed by mainstream media.  Many, many people have done their homework and still do not believe he is the best candidate.  

First of all, pundits, politicians and so called "experts" have been telling us who is the most electable for this entire season and they have ALL been wrong so far. Most of that notion is mainstream media driven anyway and they can't be trusted AT ALL.
Second, according to FACT Ron Paul actually has THE best chance to beat Obama out of ANY of the other GOP hopefulls. Why? Well for starters it was the anti war voters that got Obama elected in the first place along with a majority of Independents. Many to most of them are now very disappointed and are supporting Ron Paul and would support Ron Paul over Obama. The other Republicans stand little to no chance of getting those anti war voters back, especially since they all seem to have their finger on the trigger for yet another war.
Also, out of all the other Republicans, Ron Paul has more support from Independents than ALL of them and most of those would prefer Obama over any of the other Republicans. Have you seen any of the head to head polls? Romney is just one or two points ahead of Ron Paul against Obama with Gingrich and Santorum way behind.

If Ron Paul got elected the first thing he would do would be to repeal all of the unconstitutional executive orders that previous presidents used to circumvent Congress. If he only did that it would accomplich much. But if we were to get Ron Paul elected it would send the clearest message since our Revolution to politicians that we're serious about reducing the size, scope and spending of the Federal Govt and to stop the globe trotting that the progressives started us on under Wilson and FDR and now the neoconservatives like Romney, Santorum and Gingrich. It would also send a message that we're serious about preserving our freedoms and getting back those that have been taken by an over reaching government and the other polticians would be terrified that we'll un-elect them if they don't also start to uphold their oath to protect and preserve the Constitution. The Tea Party Movement was born out of Ron Paul's campaign in 07 and we've seen the impact all across this country. Of course it has lost a lot of it's appeal since it was hijacked by the neoconservative/progressives but the core of us are still around and very active and the establishment crooked war mongerer, corporate controlled freedom robbers KNOW we're hear and THAT my brother is why the corporate media either ignores Ron Paul or marginalizes him at every chance they can.
Ron Paul has authored Bills to get us out of the UN, to repeal the 16th Amendment and the IRS, to extract us from international trade agreements that both subvert the free market and destroy our production base and our national sovereignty. He has authored Bills that would end abortion on demand without having to wait 100 years for us to nominate enough SC justices to over turn Roe V Wade. He has predicted the economic collapse YEARS before it happened and has the ONLY right solution to restore our economy.
I can't think of another politician who a Christian should vote for.

I for one never implied that you haven't done any research. If you have looked into it and agree that we should remain on a fiat currency ssytem that has driven us into debt, I strongly disagree with you. If you agree with Woodrow Wilson "use the US military to make the world safe for democracy" instead of George Washington "I have always held that no country has a right to inter-meddle in the affairs of another country and if we can maintain a strict neutrality we can preserve peace" and "peace, commerce and friendly relations with all, entangling alliances with none" then I disagree with you and Woodrow Wilson. If you don't have a problem with TSA agents strip searching 84 year old ladies and putting their hands down the pants of little 6 year old girls "to keep us safe" then I disagree with you on that too. If you agree with just any to most of the policies of the progressives instead of the founding fathers then I probably disagree with you on that too because this country has gotten so far of it's path that we're barely recognizable to the founders or the Constitution that they drafted and most of the distortions came at the hands of progressives from both the major marties.
You said pundits and politicians have been telling us who is the most electable.  Yes, they have done this by showing polls against Obama.  You later went on to mention that Paul is doing well against Obama, thus giving some validity to said pundits and politicians.  Also, you cannot claim it is a FACT that he is the most electable.  You gave examples of a type of voter that you cannot even put a number to and also ignored the ones that are completely against his policies.  It is hard to claim that as a fact and then discount actual polls (In which he has never been the most electable, although he has been consistent)  Personally, I do not think the anti-war vote will outweigh the lack of voter turnout in the case that he is gets the nomination.  Many conservatives see him in the same light as Obama (Which is ridiculous I know, but this is the case) and would not vote for either.

Your second paragraph is why I earlier mentioned him not being able to get much done.  He just simply would not have support.  These corrupt people that you have mentioned in congress undoubtably against what Paul is for.  If the people really rallied behind Paul, they could put some pressure on but then we would be looking at huge conflicts that could lead to government shutdowns.  Paul is not big on executive orders and he will not override the house and the senate, even if they are completely in the wrong and bullheaded.  Also, I could not disagree anymore with your last sentence about who Christians should vote for.  His foreign policy (Which I could debate with you on for hours) is not the approach we need right now.  He is extremely ignorant when it comes to the statements, beliefs, and mindset of millions and millions and Muslims that surround Israel.  He is a very smart man but he is grossly uneducated and ignorant in this regard.  He approaches even extreme Muslims like they operate in a very similar fashion to the rest of the world.  He cannot even begin to see that their religion is first a form of Government and secondly a personal belief system.  It would behoove him to learn the beliefs of these people is what dictates their actions towards other people and nations, as is undoubtabley the case.  

I love MANY of his ideas.  In fact, I am in favor of the vast majority of them.  I also think his foreign policy has a time and place but just not at this very moment.  Embracing Paul would essentially require me to turn my back on Israel which is something as a Christian, that I could NEVER do.  Even without the religous implications it is ridiculous to even consider policies that could lead to us losing our most important ally.  

Offline the_last_gunslinger

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 725
  • Manna: 8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #198 on: Thu Feb 09, 2012 - 11:08:04 »
Quote
I did not see my choice on the list...NONE OF THE ABOVE!!! The GOP is marching out the same losers from years ago and not one of them care anything about my needs. But they will bend over backwards for the wealthy and business leaders who want to repeal a workers right to form a union or to negotiate labor agreements. Obama is nothing less than a total communist who represents the farthest fringe of the liberal left. I don't want any of these people to serve as our President. And don't get me started on Congress!!   Doh!

I can totally relate to your sentiments. I voted for Obama in 2008 (though I really preferred Clinton) but I think four years of him has been enough. He's done such a poor job that for the first time in my life I won't be voting strait-ticket Democrat.

Then on the Conservative side, guys like Newt and Santorum are too far to the right and are just flat out unlikeable. Ron Paul has some good ideas and I like his honesty and humor, but I'm leery of his foreign policy, and I know that Republicans prefer small government, but I think he might want to shrink it a little too much.

That leaves for me Mitt Romney, and even he has some flaws, namely his inconsistencies and the fact that he doesn't seem in tune with the plight of the middle and lower class. Still, I figure he's the most equipped for the job and is smart enough to be a competent president, and I'm sure the country would be better with him. Still, not the best crop of candidates to pick from. And if Romney doesn't win the nomination, I really don't know how to cast my vote.

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31167
  • Manna: 639
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #199 on: Thu Feb 09, 2012 - 12:40:33 »
Quote
I did not see my choice on the list...NONE OF THE ABOVE!!! The GOP is marching out the same losers from years ago and not one of them care anything about my needs. But they will bend over backwards for the wealthy and business leaders who want to repeal a workers right to form a union or to negotiate labor agreements. Obama is nothing less than a total communist who represents the farthest fringe of the liberal left. I don't want any of these people to serve as our President. And don't get me started on Congress!!   Doh!

I can totally relate to your sentiments. I voted for Obama in 2008 (though I really preferred Clinton) but I think four years of him has been enough. He's done such a poor job that for the first time in my life I won't be voting strait-ticket Democrat.

Then on the Conservative side, guys like Newt and Santorum are too far to the right and are just flat out unlikeable. Ron Paul has some good ideas and I like his honesty and humor, but I'm leery of his foreign policy, and I know that Republicans prefer small government, but I think he might want to shrink it a little too much.

That leaves for me Mitt Romney, and even he has some flaws, namely his inconsistencies and the fact that he doesn't seem in tune with the plight of the middle and lower class. Still, I figure he's the most equipped for the job and is smart enough to be a competent president, and I'm sure the country would be better with him. Still, not the best crop of candidates to pick from. And if Romney doesn't win the nomination, I really don't know how to cast my vote.

My needs are met by my job that I have working for some rich guys. I have never worked for any poor people.

Offline Captain Shays

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
  • Manna: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #200 on: Fri Feb 10, 2012 - 08:25:31 »
Ron Paul Vs Rick Santorum on Abortion

Small | Large
!

Offline Captain Shays

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
  • Manna: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #201 on: Fri Feb 10, 2012 - 10:07:35 »

"You said pundits and politicians have been telling us who is the most electable.  Yes, they have done this by showing polls against Obama.  You later went on to mention that Paul is doing well against Obama, thus giving some validity to said pundits and politicians"

The polls I referenced are NOT usually mentioned on live televised broadcasts but are IGNORED. In head to head polls since May of last year Ron Paul is either at the top or a very close second to Romney against Obama. I give no credibility to ANY of the mainstream media outlets or their pundits. All they have done since the beginning of this campaign is distort, ignore and misrepresent information relative to Ron Paul and the more they do it the stronger my resolve is to vote for NO ONE BUT PAUL

"Also, you cannot claim it is a FACT that he is the most electable.  You gave examples of a type of voter that you cannot even put a number to and also ignored the ones that are completely against his policies"

I was quoting a poll just three months ago on Drudge. I wrote down the Independents and non whites only. We can easily find those who voted for Obama because of his anti war position but do we really need to? doesn't everyone KNOW that it was the independents and anti war sentiment that got Obama elected?

                        Independents       Non Whites  
Paul                            48%               25%

Bachmann                   38%               18%

Gingrich                       41%               15%

Romney                       46%              20%

Santorum                     35%               17%

Yes I do claim it to be a FACT that Ron Paul is THE most electable against Obama again for good reason. If you doubt what I say that it was mainly the anti war vote and the Independents that got Obama elected then PLEASE set me straight with some FACTS.

" It is hard to claim that as a fact and then discount actual polls (In which he has never been the most electable, although he has been consistent)"

 Ron Paul moves into second nationally (let's see if this is mentioned on Fox)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/07/us-usa-campaign-poll-idUSTRE81514720120207

"I do not think the anti-war vote will outweigh the lack of voter turnout in the case that he is gets the nomination.  Many conservatives see him in the same light as Obama (Which is ridiculous I know, but this is the case) and would not vote for either."

Are you saying that conservatives won't vote for Ron Paul if he''s on the ticket against Obama? I would like to see your numbers on that while you're criticising my numbers. I will say this about those who won't come out and vote for the GOP nominee if it isn't Ron Paul. We already have websites set up for that purpose. Go to No One But Paul.com. We have T-shirts, mugs, bumper stickers and money bombs. We have thousands of pledges to support No One But Paul. Make sure to watch the video while you're there.
I know a lot of people who wouldn't vote if it wasn't for Ron Paul. I have friends who have changed their voter registration to Republican just so they can vote for Ron Paul who voted for Obama in the last election. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens. But if you think any other GOP nominee can win against Obama without us Ron Paul supporters, my guess is that you'll find out in November that you were horribly mistaken.

"Your second paragraph is why I earlier mentioned him not being able to get much done.  He just simply would not have support.  These corrupt people that you have mentioned in congress undoubtably against what Paul is for.  If the people really rallied behind Paul, they could put some pressure on but then we would be looking at huge conflicts that could lead to government shutdowns.  Paul is not big on executive orders and he will not override the house and the senate, even if they are completely in the wrong and bullheaded"

It would do us all good if they got less and less done. The more they do the more they screw things up, and more it costs us and the more freedom we lose. If he did nothing else but repealed the unconstitutional executive orders it would be enough for me. Ron Paul stands on principle. He always has. Whatever he says he would do, he WILL do. Whatever he says he won't do he WILL NOT do. We have 30 years of that man standing on principle and not wavering so on that, so he's by far the most trust worthy of ANY.

"Also, I could not disagree anymore with your last sentence about who Christians should vote for."

Then I couldn't disagree with you more! If you believe in bible prophesy then you should KNOW that it's not our Lord's plan to allow this fallen world system to coalesce into a one world government. That is Satan's plan and when it does the antichrist will administer his global cashless financial system that is being engineered right now by international bankers including our Federal Reserve and will FORCE every man woman and child to receive the mark of the beast. Since Jeus told us it will happen in the context of our modern reality we know that, it will come about through the United Nations. Ron Paul has authored bills to get us out of the UN. He has authored bills to audit the Fed and Repeal the Fed. The other candidates actually have no problem with going to war to enfoce UN resolutions like we did in Iraq under Bush ignoring our Constitution and the founding fathers who gave that authority only to Congress. Not the UN. Not NATO. Not the president.

Since Christians should follow the Christian Just War Principles based in scripture which allows killing in only four instances

1) capital punishment
2) by accident
3) self defense
4) defense of your family

And that Christians should also follow the rule of law Article I section 8 clause 11 of our Constitution REQUIRES that Congress and ONLY Congress has the authority to send us into a war and ONLY by declaring war which also follow the Christian Just War Principles it is only Ron Paul who speaks of and adheres to both the Constitution AND the Christian Just War Principles.

Since it was God Who gave us freedom of choice and never put that choice into the hands of government on things like what we say, think, what to eat, drink or smoke or who to give charity to and the Constitution NEVER gives that authority to the government it is ONLY Ron Paul who repsects both the bible and the Constitution on those things. So yes, I totally disagree with you. Ron Paul seems to be the best possible choice for Christians.

His Sanctity of Life Bill would also end abortion on demand with a simple majority vote. All the others will never get it ended by their stupid method of waiting to get enough SC justices nominated and then waiting for another case to come up to overturn Roe V Wade.

"His foreign policy (Which I could debate with you on for hours) is not the approach we need right now.  He is extremely ignorant when it comes to the statements, beliefs, and mindset of millions and millions and Muslims that surround Israel.  He is a very smart man but he is grossly uneducated and ignorant in this regard.  He approaches even extreme Muslims like they operate in a very similar fashion to the rest of the world.  He cannot even begin to see that their religion is first a form of Government and secondly a personal belief system.  It would behoove him to learn the beliefs of these people is what dictates their actions towards other people and nations, as is undoubtabley the case."

Really? Why don't you start by debating Michael Scheuer who created and ran the bin Laden unit in Afghanistan for 12 years? Who was mentioned in the 911 Commission Report at least a dozen times. Who gave the Clinton administration 5 oppportunities to kill bin Laden and 2 opportunities to capture him?
He along with most of the other intelligence officers who have been assigned to counter-terrorism efforts along with the VAST majority of our active servicemen support Ron Paul by a HUGE majority over ALL his competitors COMBINED. So you not only disagree with me, you disagree with the intelligence community and the active military personnel who by a HUGE majority support Ron Paul over Obama and ALL the other GOP hopefuls COMBNED
 http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-12-30/iowas-choice-dr-paul-or-u-s-bankruptcy-more-wars-and-many-more-dead-soldiers-and-marines/


"I love MANY of his ideas.  In fact, I am in favor of the vast majority of them.  I also think his foreign policy has a time and place but just not at this very moment.  Embracing Paul would essentially require me to turn my back on Israel which is something as a Christian, that I could NEVER do.  Even without the religous implications it is ridiculous to even consider policies that could lead to us losing our most important ally."

Supporting Ron Paul hasn't caused me to renounce my support for Israel and I too am a Christian. In fact, Ron Paul would be THE best friend Israel ever had from this country.

Since the days of Jimmy Carter we have been subsidizing Israel to the tune of $3.5 Billion per year. We have been subsidizing Israel's enemies who on three seperate occassions surrounded them and attacked them to the tune of $7.5 Billion per year. In 2002 our subsidies built a school for Palestinians which they named after a suicide bomber.
Ron Paul wants to end ALL foreign aid to ALL countries and if we did, Israel would right off the top be much better off.
 
Back when Israel attacked Iraq's nuclear facility Ron Paul was one of two or three who went against the vast majority of Congress in condemning Israel.

Our subsidies to Israel also leads to the notion that we have some authority to inform them on how they deal with their neighbors. Recently our government issued a stern warning to Israel not to initiate attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities. What? Ron Paul was outraged as ANY Christian should be. They should have all the authority they want as a sovereign nation to defend their people.

But it goes further.

During the Oslo Accords the negotiations came to an impasse. Yasser Arafat was demanding that Israel release 1,000 prisoners ALL who had Israeli blood on their hands. Clinton put pressure on Barrak and Israel capitulated and released those prisoners.
ALL of them went on to murder more innocent Israeli's in the infantada. Among them was Mohammod Atta one of the hijackers who flew a plane into the World Trade center on 911.

Still want to meddle in the affairs of other countries?

But even without this progressive Woodrow Wilson style of foreign policy that causes us to meddle in the affairs of other countries, as Christians we should KNOW that to apply to anything or anyone the attributes of God is blasphemy. To say or even suggest that Israel would be destroyed without the United States is not only against everything that our bible says, it's blasphemy.
NOWHERE in our bible does it say that once Israel comes back into their own country will they EVER AGAIN be destroyed. To ignore the Christian Just War Principles in some errant notion that we're Israel's protector while committing blasphmey is something we will have to answer to God for some day. Friend. We have been lied to about the USA's relationship with Israel. The bible is very clear. Good and ONLY God is the protector of Israel. To say otherwise is blasphemy.

« Last Edit: Fri Feb 10, 2012 - 12:27:33 by Captain Shays »

Offline Captain Shays

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
  • Manna: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #202 on: Fri Feb 10, 2012 - 10:08:48 »
THIS is Ron Paul's foreign policy

John Quincy Adams on U.S. Foreign Policy (1821)
October 2001
And now, friends and countrymen, if the wise and learned philosophers of the elder world, the first observers of mutation and aberration, the discoverers of maddening ether and invisible planets, the inventors of Congreve rockets and Shrapnel shells, should find their hearts disposed to enquire what has America done for the benefit of mankind?
Let our answer be this: America, with the same voice which spoke herself into existence as a nation, proclaimed to mankind the inextinguishable rights of human nature, and the only lawful foundations of government. America, in the assembly of nations, since her admission among them, has invariably, though often fruitlessly, held forth to them the hand of honest friendship, of equal freedom, of generous reciprocity.
She has uniformly spoken among them, though often to heedless and often to disdainful ears, the language of equal liberty, of equal justice, and of equal rights.
She has, in the lapse of nearly half a century, without a single exception, respected the independence of other nations while asserting and maintaining her own.
She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart.
She has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of that Aceldama the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right.
Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be.
But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.
She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all.
She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.
She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.
She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom.
The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force....
She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit....
[America's] glory is not dominion, but liberty. Her march is the march of the mind. She has a spear and a shield: but the motto upon her shield is, Freedom, Independence, Peace. This has been her Declaration: this has been, as far as her necessary intercourse with the rest of mankind would permit, her practice.
When John Quincy Adams served as U. S. Secretary of State, he delivered this speech to the U.S. House of Representatives on July 4, 1821, in celebration of American Independence Day.


I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation had a right to inter-meddle in the internal concerns of another; and that, if this country could, consistent with its engagements, maintain a strict neutrality and thereby preserve peace. George Washington - Letter to James Monroe, August 25, 1796


Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all. ...The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. George Washington - Farewell Address, September 17, 1797

Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none should be our motto. Thomas Jefferson - First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801

If there be one principle more deeply rooted than any other in the mind of every American, it is that we should have nothing to do with conquest. Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) Letter to William Short, 1791

We certainly cannot deny to other nations that principle whereon our own government is founded, that every nation has a right to govern itself internally under what forms it pleases, and to change these forms at its own will. Thomas Jefferson - To Thomas Pinckney, December 30, 1792

Europe, by her arms and by her negotiations, by force and by fraud, has extended her dominion over them all, Africa, Asia, an America have successively felt her domination. The superiority she has long maintained has tempted her to plume herself as the Mistress of the World, and to consider the rest of mankind as created for her benefit.*
Alexander Hamilton on Colonialism, The Federalist Papers 1787

My ardent desire is to keep the United States free from political connections with every other country, to see them independent of all and under the influence of none. George Washington (Letter to Patrick Henry, October 9, 1795)


Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11701
  • Manna: 169
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #203 on: Fri Feb 10, 2012 - 12:46:53 »
Have you noticed that RP supporters keep posting polls that shows he can beat anyone except Jesus yet he has not been able to win a single primary. rofl rofl 

LivingbyFaith61

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #204 on: Fri Feb 10, 2012 - 13:15:37 »
I've been an admirer of RP for many years...only because of his voting record speaks volumes about his support of the U.S. Constitution. But even if he is a nice guy, supports the constitution and all...he still is not best suited for running the country in the 21st century. The reason Obama is in there now is because millions of people in this modern age thought he represented them...or so they thought. So, who best represents an understanding of the issues facing a 21st century America? If my only choice is Ron Paul, or Obama...well...I might just stay home that day!

There must be better choices for this country, or we are doomed!!!

p.rehbein

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #205 on: Fri Feb 10, 2012 - 13:40:23 »
Quote
I did not see my choice on the list...NONE OF THE ABOVE!!! The GOP is marching out the same losers from years ago and not one of them care anything about my needs. But they will bend over backwards for the wealthy and business leaders who want to repeal a workers right to form a union or to negotiate labor agreements. Obama is nothing less than a total communist who represents the farthest fringe of the liberal left. I don't want any of these people to serve as our President. And don't get me started on Congress!!   Doh!

I can totally relate to your sentiments. I voted for Obama in 2008 (though I really preferred Clinton) but I think four years of him has been enough. He's done such a poor job that for the first time in my life I won't be voting strait-ticket Democrat.

Then on the Conservative side, guys like Newt and Santorum are too far to the right and are just flat out unlikeable. Ron Paul has some good ideas and I like his honesty and humor, but I'm leery of his foreign policy, and I know that Republicans prefer small government, but I think he might want to shrink it a little too much.

That leaves for me Mitt Romney, and even he has some flaws, namely his inconsistencies and the fact that he doesn't seem in tune with the plight of the middle and lower class. Still, I figure he's the most equipped for the job and is smart enough to be a competent president, and I'm sure the country would be better with him. Still, not the best crop of candidates to pick from. And if Romney doesn't win the nomination, I really don't know how to cast my vote.

My needs are met by my job that I have working for some rich guys. I have never worked for any poor people.

Admin's gonne be real happy to find out he's a "rich guy!"   ::noworries::

(uh, oh, no, wait, you wern't referring to your job as Global Moderator?................oh snap,  ::doh::, well, nevermind............)

Offline the_last_gunslinger

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 725
  • Manna: 8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #206 on: Fri Feb 10, 2012 - 22:08:23 »
Quote
My needs are met by my job that I have working for some rich guys. I have never worked for any poor people

Most definitely. I never stated otherwise, and I am in complete agreement. I'm not that well to do financially and I can't hire a single soul. And I definitely don't favor excessively taxing the rich to try and curb the current economic turmoil.

That being said, I still feel that there needs to be a political climate that can help create jobs and opportunities for the lower and middle classes. Just because the rich are the only ones that hire people doesn't mean that the government should only help them.

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31167
  • Manna: 639
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #207 on: Fri Feb 10, 2012 - 22:18:27 »
Quote
My needs are met by my job that I have working for some rich guys. I have never worked for any poor people

Most definitely. I never stated otherwise, and I am in complete agreement. I'm not that well to do financially and I can't hire a single soul. And I definitely don't favor excessively taxing the rich to try and curb the current economic turmoil.

That being said, I still feel that there needs to be a political climate that can help create jobs and opportunities for the lower and middle classes. Just because the rich are the only ones that hire people doesn't mean that the government should only help them.

It's not a matter of passing out rewards willy nilly. Tax breaks and such are to STIMULATE growth, that means more jobs, not to create class warfare. Government can cut my taxes and get nada for the economy, or they can cut corporate taxes and the taxes of the rich business owners and more than likely get economic growth. Handing money out stimulates nothing. Trickle down does work. Trickle up poverty of the Democrat party succeeds in just garnering votes.

Offline the_last_gunslinger

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 725
  • Manna: 8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #208 on: Fri Feb 10, 2012 - 22:27:05 »
Quote
It's not a matter of passing out rewards willy nilly. Tax breaks and such are to STIMULATE growth, that means more jobs, not to create class warfare. Government can cut my taxes and get nada for the economy, or they can cut corporate taxes and the taxes of the rich business owners and more than likely get economic growth. Handing money out stimulates nothing. Trickle down does work. Trickle up poverty of the Democrat party succeeds in just garnering votes.

Again, I think we are mostly in agreement, maybe differing a little in how much help should be given to the poor. I know that the rich are the only ones that have the ability to create jobs, and the government should run in such a way that would allow them to create jobs. On the other hand, I would disagree slightly about the veracity of trickle down economics. In theory it's a good practice, problem is, once you factor in greed, it all falls apart. I would have no problem giving companies huge tax breaks, but contingent only on creating jobs here, rather than overseas. I just don't have enough faith in some corporations that they will increase pay/add jobs in the United States if it is too easy to establish their businesses in foreign countries for a fraction of the cost.

Just for the record, I am not in favor of taxing the rich more, since they pay the majority of the taxes anyways, and the class warfare/fair share argument is one of the primary reasons I'm breaking party allegiances in the upcoming elections.


Offline Captain Shays

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 181
  • Manna: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #209 on: Fri Feb 10, 2012 - 23:24:10 »
Have you noticed that RP supporters keep posting polls that shows he can beat anyone except Jesus yet he has not been able to win a single primary. rofl rofl 

Ron Paul has the best chance to beat Obama but the worst chance of getting past the establishment Republicans who still love big government, progressive foreign policy and Keynsian economics. Yep. All the sorts of things that got us in this mess we're in

 

     
anything