Still think that Obama's Like Ron Paul

[freelance]

THINK AGAIN! His views on the FISA bill are a DISGRACE! The ONLY thing he would do is make sure that the court didn't fall into the majority likes of Alito and Scalia.

Here's what he sent his supporters in an e-mail (found on DailyKos):

"Given the grave threats that we face, our national security agencies must have the capability to gather intelligence and track down terrorists before they strike, while respecting the rule of law and the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. There is also little doubt that the Bush Administration, with the cooperation of major telecommunications companies, has abused that authority and undermined the Constitution by intercepting the communications of innocent Americans without their knowledge or the required court orders.

"That is why last year I opposed the so-called Protect America Act, which expanded the surveillance powers of the government without sufficient independent oversight to protect the privacy and civil liberties of innocent Americans. I have also opposed the granting of retroactive immunity to those who were allegedly complicit in acts of illegal spying in the past.

"After months of negotiation, the House today passed a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year's Protect America Act.

"Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President's illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance – making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future. It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses. But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act.

"It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives – and the liberty – of the American people."


WE ARE SO SCREWED!

[Kludge]

Bump

[RideTheDirt]

Anybody who equates Obama and Paul needs to have their brain examined.

[freelance]

Anybody who equates Obama and Paul needs to have their brain examined.

Well, there are plenty of Obama lovers right here in the forums!

[RideTheDirt]

Well, there are plenty of Obama lovers right here in the forums!
Which makes it convenient that I posted this here;)

[pcosmar]

Anybody who equates Obama and Paul needs to have their brain examined.

Well, there are plenty of Obama lovers right here in the forums!

And we are examining them.

Seems like a sub species to me. Perhaps a mutant variety.

[DealzOnWheelz]

My liberties get in the way of you protecting me Obama please strip them and put me into national service and in line for my daily ration of food and water, anything for the greater good

[AmericaFyeah92]

heil obama!

[stilltrying]

Time for obama supporters to come in and give praise to their savior obama. Please obama supporters put me on your ignore list, you know who you are as does everyone else. I wish I could put you on mine but you seem to spread your viral BS in about every post on these forums. You must be paid operatives who work for DHS as much time as you spend on here. Im thinking maybe typical Obama social democrat and using the collective gathering of peoples money (taxes) to benefit yourselves which is the reason you have so much time to create or reply to so many posts on these forums. Moreso than actual RP supporters. Gettin paid to spread the BS must be nice. Is the IQ level down a bit in the social democrat forums or are they too lazy to discuss the real issues.

[Anti Federalist]

http://www.libertystickers.com/sites/38289/images/youre_going_to_be_very_disa.jpg

[NH4RonPaul]

Well, there are plenty of Obama lovers right here in the forums!


WHERE THE FREAK ARE THE BOARD OPS? THEY NEED TO KICK THESE PEOPLE OFF.

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2008/06/idolizing_both.html

OBAMA = MARXISM.

OBAMA IS NOT LIKE RON PAUL AND IF YOU THINK HE IS, YOU HAVE NO CLUE WHO RON PAUL IS OR WHAT HE STANDS FOR.

IT'S NOT COMMUNISM.

[pinkmandy]

Obama didn't want to vote for it. He only did because if he didn't it could cost him the election. He's just sacrificing for the greater good of getting himself elected.

Just like he wants to get rid of NAFTA despite reassuring Canada the opposite. Oh, and he didn't mean it when he told AIPAC that Iran must not have nuclear weapons no matter what and he would support Israel.


/sarcasm :rolleyes:

[Kludge]

Obama didn't want to vote for it. He only did because if he didn't it could cost him the election. He's just sacrificing for the greater good of getting himself elected.

Just like he wants to get rid of NAFTA despite reassuring Canada the opposite. Oh, and he didn't mean it when he told AIPAC that Iran must not have nuclear weapons no matter what and he would support Israel.

EMI, is that you? :eek:

;)

[newyearsrevolution08]

who the fuck would think obama was like ron paul?

obama is a socialist and nothing more/.

[zach]

Obama may not be like Ron Paul, but he sure is like Hillary Clinton!

http://www.funny-potato.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/hillary-obama.jpg

[Pauls' Revere]

All I had to do was read this load of crap. The Global Poverty Act!

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56405

[DAFTEK]

I hope all the Osama lovers on this forum would just leave the forum and go suck on osama's wewe! It makes me sick when i see so many people fall for this con artist! The only conclusion i have come to is CNN KoolAid!!!!!!

[electronicmaji]

WHERE THE FREAK ARE THE BOARD OPS? THEY NEED TO KICK THESE PEOPLE OFF.

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2008/06/idolizing_both.html

OBAMA = MARXISM.

OBAMA IS NOT LIKE RON PAUL AND IF YOU THINK HE IS, YOU HAVE NO CLUE WHO RON PAUL IS OR WHAT HE STANDS FOR.

IT'S NOT COMMUNISM.

Yep...lets kick out all the disenters....Yay for censorship :rolleyes:

[electronicmaji]

I hope all the Osama lovers on this forum would just leave the forum and go suck on osama's wewe! It makes me sick when i see so many people fall for this con artist! The only conclusion i have come to is CNN KoolAid!!!!!!

More Ad Hominems please...the ignorance of your arguements haven't filled my daily stupidity meter yet! :rolleyes:

[LibertyEagle]

EMaji,

Obama is a socialist, who wants to hand even more control over to the federal government. If you really did support Ron Paul, could you tell us what you think the two share in common? Because I sincerely do not see it. They are almost polar opposites, in my view.

[Kludge]

the ignorance of your arguements haven't filled my daily stupidity meter yet!

EMI, I think this quote best sums you up. Thank you for posting it.

[OptionsTrader]

Obama may not be like Ron Paul, but he sure is like Hillary Clinton!

http://www.funny-potato.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/hillary-obama.jpg

Obama after Estrogen therapy.

[Maverick]

Whatever. We've passed the point where Ron Paul can conceivably win the nomination by now. If RP supporters want to vote for Obama now, fine. Maybe he's better for the country right now than McCain, and maybe he's not. Just don't get too mixed up with his policies, and don't expect him to follow through on his litany of hope-infused campaign promises. Remember what Ron Paul stands for, and remember what liberty is all about, and come back to us in 2012.


P.S. And aside from the comparisons between RP's non-interventionism, and Obama's pretend non-interventionism, they are not alike. Please don't confuse the two.

[electronicmaji]

EMaji,

Obama is a socialist, who wants to hand even more control over to the federal government. If you really did support Ron Paul, could you tell us what you think the two share in common? Because I sincerely do not see it. They are almost polar opposites, in my view.

Like I said previously I'm a Social Libertarian. I don't neccesarily hate all socialism. I'm not a anarchist and im not some whacko extremist who thinks goverment can work without any taxes at all.

The main people attacking me on here for my views are anarcho capitalists who go around proclaiming that "Taxation is theft." But without that taxation there would be no police, no fire stations, no education for the poor. Frankly its a unrealistic thing to think a country and society can survive without some form of taxation.

[werdd]

Like I said previously I'm a Social Libertarian. I don't neccesarily hate all socialism. I'm not a anarchist and im not some whacko extremist who thinks goverment can work without any taxes at all.

The main people attacking me on here for my views are anarcho capitalists who go around proclaiming that "Taxation is theft." But without that taxation there would be no police, no fire stations, no education for the poor. Frankly its a unrealistic thing to think a country and society can survive without some form of taxation.

Yeah, its kind of like america circa the 19th century. completely whacko

The only legitimate tax would be one to fund the military

I dont owe anything to the poor, we are dawning on an age where people are going to have to educate theirselves. The public school system is a joke, and the knowledge that can be gained online is much greater than that of a public highschool teacher.

When you get out of college and start actually earning money and see how much uncle sam takes out of each and every paycheck, you will feel less and less like you are helping the community and more and more like you are being robbed.

[V-rod]

The fire/police/schools are funded locally. I don't see many anarcho-capitalists crying about local government. Try again.

[qaxn]

Has anyone ever seen Ron Paul and Barack Obama in the same room? Think about it.

[Anti Federalist]

Like I said previously I'm a Social Libertarian. I don't neccesarily hate all socialism. I'm not a anarchist and im not some whacko extremist who thinks goverment can work without any taxes at all.

The main people attacking me on here for my views are anarcho capitalists who go around proclaiming that "Taxation is theft." But without that taxation there would be no police, no fire stations, no education for the poor. Frankly its a unrealistic thing to think a country and society can survive without some form of taxation.

All taxation is theft. That's a factual statement that cannot be argued with.

Now, you can argue that, without taxation, "there would be no money to pay for rescuing fluffy little kittens", but, altruistic motives notwithstanding, if you are to pay to save fluffy kittens with tax dollars, you are stealing.

If, for whatever reason, I thought that saving fluffy little kittens was not such a good idea, and decided "I'm not going to pay pay for this", in the end, after a whole number of twists and turns, heavily armed men would show up and take the money from me to save the fluffy little kittens.

When heavily armed men take your money and possessions without your consent and against your will, that is theft.

[noxagol]

All taxation is theft. That's a factual statement that cannot be argued with.

Now, you can argue that, without taxation, "there would be no money to pay for rescuing fluffy little kittens", but, altruistic motives notwithstanding, if you are to pay to save fluffy kittens with tax dollars, you are stealing.

If, for whatever reason, I thought that saving fluffy little kittens was not such a good idea, and decided "I'm not going to pay pay for this", in the end, after a whole number of twists and turns, heavily armed men would show up and take the money from me to save the fluffy little kittens.

When heavily armed men take your money and possessions without your consent and against your will, that is theft.

but but but...! I thought it was ok cause most people want this?! Doesn't the majority speak for me and therefore its ok?!

[electronicmaji]

It can be argued with and is argued with. I refuse to go to extremes and say taxation is theft. It's a silly and immature stance to take.

[Anti Federalist]

It can be argued with and is argued with. I refuse to go to extremes and say taxation is theft. It's a silly and immature stance to take.

Nothing silly, extreme or immature about it.

In fact it is critical that people have this understanding, so that when they are voting for the new fire truck or the multi trillion dollar welfare scheme, they understand that not one penny of the money to pay for this is acquired without theft.

[electronicmaji]

Once again, I don't think its theft. The more you call it theft the more I disregard you and lose respect for you.

[Anti Federalist]

Once again, I don't think its theft. The more you call it theft the more I disregard you and lose respect for you.

Very well.

Explain to me why it is not theft.

Convince me.

The floor is yours...

[pcosmar]

Once again, I don't think its theft. The more you call it theft the more I disregard you and lose respect for you.

Could you explain how taking money from one person (that earned it) and giving some to others (that did not earn it) while keeping some, is not theft. :confused:

[electronicmaji]

Taking Money from one person, to ensure provision of services to that person is not theft. That simple.

[Anti Federalist]

Taking Money from one person, to ensure provision of services to that person is not theft. That simple.

What if I do not want, need or desire the service you are providing?

[electronicmaji]

It doesn't matter. You are getting it and being protected it. When someone breaks into your house or tries to kill you I really doubt if the police stops them your gonna be wining about not wanting their services.

[pcosmar]

Taking Money from one person, to ensure provision of services to that person is not theft. That simple.

You mean like Viet Nam? or Bosnia? :mad:
Perhaps you mean child services. (I have no children):(
Or FEMA, ( I have also been through at least 8 hurricanes) :eek:
How come I keep paying for stuff I don't want or need? :confused:

[Anti Federalist]

It doesn't matter. You are getting it and being protected it. When someone breaks into your house or tries to kill you I really doubt if the police stops them your gonna be wining about not wanting their services.

I live on the side of hill, very rural, in a small town.

Assuming that there was a cruiser on patrol for immediate response, the fastest response time would be 20-30 minutes.

Same thing for fire protection.

I home school both my children so I am not using any public resources for that.

I pay thousands of dollars a year in taxes for these "services" that are expensive, not viable in my situation and not needed. These funds could be put to better use buying more home fire suppression equipment, more guns and ammo and more school materials.

If I did not pay these taxes, after a while, men with guns would force me to or outright take it from me.

How is that not theft?

[Fox McCloud]

not only that, but most of those services would more efficiently be provided by the market-place--not only that, but it'd likely keep them more honest, as they have to compete against one another.

taking money from one person by breaking into their house is obviously wrong...what's the difference when a group of people band together and take people's wealth through taxation? There's really only one difference--one is an individual (usually) and one is a large group.

theft is never justified, whether it be to save another person or to enrich your own pockets.

[Anti Federalist]

not only that, but most of those services would more efficiently be provided by the market-place--not only that, but it'd likely keep them more honest, as they have to compete against one another.

taking money from one person by breaking into their house is obviously wrong...what's the difference when a group of people band together and take people's wealth through taxation? There's really only one difference--one is an individual (usually) and one is a large group.

theft is never justified, whether it be to save another person or to enrich your own pockets.

One has badges.

[CzargwaR]

Taking Money from one person, to ensure provision of services to that person is not theft. That simple.


You just lost the argument, because taking ANYTHING from someone without consent is theft- no matter how the money is used.

And don't try to call a majority vote a consent,. If 1 person doesn't want a library in their town, yet 80 others do, sure those 80 can agree to pay for it, but the one did didn't shouldn't and shouldn't be able to use it or pay for it on a per use basis only.

[Anti Federalist]

You just lost the argument, because taking ANYTHING from someone without consent is theft- no matter how the money is used.

And don't try to call a majority vote a consent,. If 1 person doesn't want a library in their town, yet 80 others do, sure those 80 can agree to pay for it, but the one did didn't shouldn't and shouldn't be able to use it or pay for it on a per use basis only.

I'm still waiting for EM to reply.

Some, like EM, seem to think that the because the money is used for altruistic purposes (the public good, saving fluffy kittens) it's "unfair" to call it theft, and that is enough to prove that it isn't.

But that doesn't hold water.

Theft is theft is theft. Rob from the rich to give to the poor nonsense.

(Interesting to note, the real Robin Hood character robbed not from the rich but from TAX COLLECTORS):D

[DAFTEK]

More Ad Hominems please...the ignorance of your arguements haven't filled my daily stupidity meter yet! :rolleyes:

That's because your head is Obamanized with CHANGE, CHANGE, YES WE CAN!!!! :rolleyes:
http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2008/06/21/amd_obama-seal.jpg

Now go to your corner....

[Acala]

About the only rational and moral argument for taxation is in relation to services that people cannot opt out of - like national defense. If you live within the borders, you benefit from the service. So there is at least SOME basis for saying that taxation is justified for people that would otherwise be free-riders. But this argument CERTAINLY does not justify taxes for schools, roads, education etc.