Author Topic: Saddle up, Texas! (Read 17497 times)

Jamisjockey · « **on:** January 17, 2012, 08:12:27 AM »

At least here in Texas, I think we've decided enough bullshit.
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/01/14/ron-paul-wins-texas-presidential-straw-poll/

Fly320s · « **Reply #1 on:** January 17, 2012, 08:20:04 AM »

When is the Texas primary?

RevDisk · « **Reply #2 on:** January 17, 2012, 08:42:10 AM »

Quote from: Fly320s on January 17, 2012, 08:20:04 AM

When is the Texas primary?

April 3rd

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2012_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries

Tallpine · « **Reply #3 on:** January 17, 2012, 08:45:34 AM »

Kick down the barn doors

roo_ster · « **Reply #4 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:21:41 AM »

Maybe 03apr, maybe not.

The Holder doj, under the 196x voting wrongs act, disapproved of the tx redistricting plan, so tx went to federal court for relief.

Everything is still tbd.

Regards,
roo_ster

agricola · « **Reply #5 on:** January 17, 2012, 11:32:25 AM »

Fox (at least our version of it) seems to be virulently anti-Paul at the moment... does this mean he is winning?

Jamisjockey · « **Reply #6 on:** January 17, 2012, 11:40:21 AM »

Quote from: agricola on January 17, 2012, 11:32:25 AM

Fox (at least our version of it) seems to be virulently anti-Paul at the moment... does this mean he is winning?

It means he is challenging the partisan status quo, which is what the media relies on (especially fox), for it's "nooz"

roo_ster · « **Reply #7 on:** January 17, 2012, 01:43:26 PM »

Quote from: JamisJockey on January 17, 2012, 11:40:21 AM

It means he is challenging the partisan status quo, which is what the media relies on (especially fox), for it's "nooz"

This.

I have seen and heard folk I always thought as reasonable, rational commentators go completely apeshiite over Ron Paul.

I then look into the reason for the primate poo-plosion and wonder what the big whoop is? Every time one of the usual commentators goes emotionally incontinent over Ron Paul, it makes me want to support him just a little more. If he is causing this level of scrotal torque among so many of the self-appinted elite/establishment, RP must be doing something right.

MechAg94 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 17, 2012, 02:17:33 PM »

I was never a big Ron Paul for President supporter, but I keep thinking he has to be better than Obama and likely Romney also. At the very least, it would be 4 years of no new laws. I could live with the few things I don't care for.

makattak · « **Reply #9 on:** January 17, 2012, 02:43:51 PM »

Quote from: MechAg94 on January 17, 2012, 02:17:33 PM

I was never a big Ron Paul for President supporter, but I keep thinking he has to be better than Obama and likely Romney also. At the very least, it would be 4 years of no new laws. I could live with the few things I don't care for.

Ron Paul is dangerously naive in most of his policies. I believe he is one of the worst choices we could have for President.

However, since I think Obama and Romney are worse, I'm likely voting for Ron Paul in the VA primary. (All other choices having been kept off the ballot.)

MicroBalrog · « **Reply #10 on:** January 17, 2012, 03:01:12 PM »

Quote from: makattak on January 17, 2012, 02:43:51 PM

Ron Paul is dangerously naive in most of his policies. I believe he is one of the worst choices we could have for President.

However, since I think Obama and Romney are worse, I'm likely voting for Ron Paul in the VA primary. (All other choices having been kept off the ballot.)

We have tried the common brand of 'realism'. It did not work.

RoadKingLarry · « **Reply #11 on:** January 17, 2012, 06:21:37 PM »

Quote from: MechAg94 on January 17, 2012, 02:17:33 PM

I was never a big Ron Paul for President supporter, but I keep thinking he has to be better than Obama and likely Romney also. At the very least, it would be 4 years of no new laws. I could live with the few things I don't care for.

Not to take away anything from RP but a rusted out, bent up trash can would be better than Obama.
Unless things change he will get my vote in the OK primary.

Jamisjockey · « **Reply #12 on:** January 17, 2012, 06:51:11 PM »

Quote from: makattak on January 17, 2012, 02:43:51 PM

Ron Paul is dangerously naive in most of his policies. I believe he is one of the worst choices we could have for President.

However, since I think Obama and Romney are worse, I'm likely voting for Ron Paul in the VA primary. (All other choices having been kept off the ballot.)

What's dangerously naive about following the constitution and intent of the founding fathers? Let me guess.... Thomas Jefferson would totally nuke Iran?

roo_ster · « **Reply #13 on:** January 17, 2012, 09:27:12 PM »

Quote from: JamisJockey on January 17, 2012, 06:51:11 PM

What's dangerously naive about following the constitution and intent of the founding fathers? Let me guess.... Thomas Jefferson would totally nuke Iran?

No, Tunisia.

seeker_two · « **Reply #14 on:** January 17, 2012, 09:31:49 PM »

If Obama & company get their way, the Texas primary will be held on Nov. 3rd......

MicroBalrog · « **Reply #15 on:** January 17, 2012, 09:32:10 PM »

Quote from: roo_ster on January 17, 2012, 09:27:12 PM

No, Tunisia.

That bastard would not even ask for Congressional authorization.

You'd wake up one day and Tunis is a smoking hole in the ground.

makattak · « **Reply #16 on:** January 17, 2012, 09:34:49 PM »

Quote from: JamisJockey on January 17, 2012, 06:51:11 PM

What's dangerously naive about following the constitution and intent of the founding fathers? Let me guess.... Thomas Jefferson would totally nuke Iran?

What's naive is his lack of a plan to incrementally wean the United States off of the welfare state. What is naive is his thoughts that if only we weren't supporting our allies, our enemies would not hate us. What is naive is his thought that a gold standard is a cure-all.

And, yes, if Iran attacked us, TJ wouldn't hesitate to nuke Iran.

MicroBalrog · « **Reply #17 on:** January 17, 2012, 09:37:27 PM »

Quote from: makattak on January 17, 2012, 09:34:49 PM

What's naive is his lack of a plan to incrementally wean the United States off of the welfare state.

John Brown didn't have a plan to incrementally abolish slavery either.

Quote

What is naive is his thought that a gold standard is a cure-all.

It's not possible to fix the welfare state without destroying state-issued fiat currency. Ron Paul knows this.

makattak · « **Reply #18 on:** January 17, 2012, 09:40:58 PM »

Quote from: MicroBalrog on January 17, 2012, 09:37:27 PM

John Brown didn't have a plan to incrementally abolish slavery either.

It's not possible to fix the welfare state without destroying state-issued fiat currency. Ron Paul knows this.

Forgive me if I'm not eager to replicate the results from not incrementally ending slavery. Care to scale up the casualties to current population?

makattak · « **Reply #19 on:** January 17, 2012, 09:42:56 PM »

Quote from: MicroBalrog on January 17, 2012, 09:37:27 PM

John Brown didn't have a plan to incrementally abolish slavery either.

It's not possible to fix the welfare state without destroying state-issued fiat currency. Ron Paul knows this.

Also, I note John Brown was never elected president. I guess there's another similarity to Ron Paul.

MicroBalrog · « **Reply #20 on:** January 17, 2012, 09:44:19 PM »

Quote from: makattak on January 17, 2012, 09:40:58 PM

Forgive me if I'm not eager to replicate the results from not incrementally ending slavery. Care to scale up the casualties to current.t population?

How many people died as a result of the end of slavery in England? Which was not incremental.

I don't remember there being many casualties after 13th Amendment either (and we all know the war was not, to the North, mainly about slavery).

Besides, I doubt you'd have this view if you were a plantation slave.

MicroBalrog · « **Reply #21 on:** January 17, 2012, 09:44:54 PM »

Quote from: makattak on January 17, 2012, 09:42:56 PM

Also, I note John Brown was never elected president. I guess there's another similarity to Ron Paul.

Slavery ended up being abolished outright, not gradually done away with.

De Selby · « **Reply #22 on:** January 17, 2012, 10:14:15 PM »

Ron Paul says things that are logical, and not corpo-politically approved. This drives everyone in the establishment nuts, because they've created an environment where any challenge to their power is an outrage to be condemned as ludicrous.

What's that? You don't want wall street bankers controlling the currency through the fed! How dare you suggest that monetary doesn't benefit the people!

And to suggest that Iran is less of a threat things Russia and china! You can't be serious, Russians and Chinese wear suits and read books, them ranians is MUSLIMS!!!!!!

Haha, the most hilarious thing about Ron Paul is that his positions are basic common sense, being portrayed as radically new or out there ideas.

TommyGunn · « **Reply #23 on:** January 17, 2012, 11:29:37 PM »

Somehow I knew you'd like Ron Paul.

De Selby · « **Reply #24 on:** January 18, 2012, 02:08:11 AM »

Quote from: TommyGunn on January 17, 2012, 11:29:37 PM

Somehow I knew you'd like Ron Paul.

I take that as a compliment - the more I learn about his policies the more I like them. Ron Paul wants to demolish state power and increase individual power. That is a good thing.

News:

Author Topic: Saddle up, Texas! (Read 17497 times)