JohnnyMarko 1 #1 January 25, 2012 So my boyfriend is extremely interested in politics and I didn't even bother to register or vote in the 08' election...I told him all I want is a flat tax and gay marriage...so who should I vote for? He said Obama or Ron Paul... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #2 January 25, 2012 Hate to tell you this, but you're unless you're a US Citizen you can't vote in the US Presidential election I'm sure Obama would be more than happy to accept a donation from you. You'll have to sign it "Mickey Mouse", but don't worry, you won't be setting any precedents. We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #3 January 25, 2012 QuoteSo my boyfriend is extremely interested in politics and I didn't even bother to register or vote in the 08' election...I told him all I want is a flat tax and gay marriage...so who should I vote for? He said Obama or Ron Paul... I doubt Obama would EVER go for a flat tax. Paul just might. The other GOP candidates likely would talk about it, but just like Obama would retain the tax structure that they can exploit. Obama would go for gay marriage because it's a political agenda. Paul truly believes that government should stay out of social issues, so he would actually be sincere about it. The other GOP candidates would oppose it (agenda thing again) 2 for 2 on Paul - he's great for fiscal and domestic and social issues if you are a "spend less and stay out of my personal business" type, you'd have to look at his foreign policy though, to see if you align there - it's pretty divisive. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #4 January 25, 2012 taxes and/or gay marriage will be decided by the Congress, not the President, so it matters fuck all who you vote for in that regard..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #5 January 25, 2012 >Paul truly believes that government should stay out of social issues, so he would >actually be sincere about it. Under Paul nothing would likely change, and might even get worse. Indeed, he has said that states can outlaw homosexuality if they like, so in many places things would get worse for gay rights. He has also said he wouldn't repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, and in fact supported it when it first came out. The DOMA requires the Federal Government recognize conventional marriage but prohibits them from recognizing gay marriage. Oddly he also sponsored the Marriage Protection Act, which would have banned federal judges from ever considering constitutionality challenges to DOMA. That's a very odd position for someone who advocates not using legislation to enforce behavior and instead letting the courts decide when there's been an injustice done. (And who claims to support the US Constitution as the ultimate law of the land.) So overall he'd probably be a blow to gay rights, and would keep the Federal government's current anti-gay-marriage position. Agree with you on the flat tax though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #6 January 25, 2012 Quote you'd have to look at his foreign policy though, to see if you align there - it's pretty divisive. And that's where he becomes unelectable. I am all for taking our troops out of Europe, and letting them pay their own way for defense. But, the fact of the matter is, the world needs a clear winner at times, and that's where our military comes into play. We cannot eliminate that. Things would turn ugly within a generation if we did.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #7 January 26, 2012 QuoteQuote you'd have to look at his foreign policy though, to see if you align there - it's pretty divisive. And that's where he becomes unelectable. I am all for taking our troops out of Europe, and letting them pay their own way for defense. But, the fact of the matter is, the world needs a clear winner at times, and that's where our military comes into play. We cannot eliminate that. Things would turn ugly within a generation if we did. but the costs are making us a clear loser in less than a generation. We aren't collecting enough taxes to be a clear winner, not sure we have the number of soldiers to support it even is we do have the money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #8 January 26, 2012 Quote but the costs are making us a clear loser in less than a generation. We aren't collecting enough taxes to be a clear winner, not sure we have the number of soldiers to support it even is we do have the money. Agreed, we spend an enormous amount of money on our military. Taking our troops out of Europe would be a good starting point, IMO. Revising our procurement procedures is another area where there's significant potential for cost savings.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #9 January 26, 2012 QuoteQuote you'd have to look at his foreign policy though, to see if you align there - it's pretty divisive. And that's where he becomes unelectable. I am all for taking our troops out of Europe, and letting them pay their own way for defense. But, the fact of the matter is, the world needs a clear winner at times, and that's where our military comes into play. We cannot eliminate that. Things would turn ugly within a generation if we did. we don't need a generation - I'd chance it for four years just to get more visibility to the fiscal and domestic alternatives that we'll NEVER see with any of the others ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #10 January 26, 2012 Quote we don't need a generation - I'd chance it for four years just to get more visibility to the fiscal and domestic alternatives that we'll NEVER see with any of the others So you're advocating that we massively reduce military spending, and see what happens?We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
usedtajump 1 #11 January 26, 2012 Quote So my boyfriend is extremely interested in politics and I didn't even bother to register or vote in the 08' election...I told him all I want is a flat tax and gay marriage...so who should I vote for? He said Obama or Ron Paul... Vote for me, unlike all the others I'll truly get you anything you want. What PAC do you represent? The older I get the less I care who I piss off. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #12 January 26, 2012 QuoteQuote we don't need a generation - I'd chance it for four years just to get more visibility to the fiscal and domestic alternatives that we'll NEVER see with any of the others So you're advocating that we massively reduce military spending, and see what happens? just as much as you are advocating that we apply 100% of every bit of income from every single citizen for the military....... Since Paul can't just do it with the wave of his hand (though Obama is likely trying to get that authority for the exec branch, he hasn't succeeded yet) I'd hope that we would see serious reduction over a 4 year term in all government spending, but tempered by a legislative inertia to do it in a controlled and petulant fashion. Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, Military You have to hit ALL 3. (and all the "other programs") - why do the righties think military is the sacred grail and the lefties think the other 2 are the sacred grail? I doubt a President Paul would get ANYTHING he wants 100%, but he sure would embarrass the idiots on the right AND the left and ensure that the public knows all the missed opportunities. I'm not comfy with the degree that he'd press his foreign policy positions. But yes I am super comfy with him trying and makng smaller steps. But maybe that's not me being willing to be aggressive as needed you guys keep confusing the office of president (in a self regulating 3 branch type of government) with some kind of emperor with ultimate authority edit: I'm not a Paulite, but I'm running out of options here ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #13 January 26, 2012 QuoteQuote we don't need a generation - I'd chance it for four years just to get more visibility to the fiscal and domestic alternatives that we'll NEVER see with any of the others So you're advocating that we massively reduce military spending, and see what happens? Here's another good answer to your strawman "we spend an enormous amount of money on our military. Taking our troops out of Europe would be a good starting point, IMO. Revising our procurement procedures is another area where there's significant potential for cost savings. " sound familiar? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #14 January 26, 2012 Quote just as much as you are advocating that we apply 100% of every bit of income from every single citizen for the military....... Huh? You lost me here. Are you saying that I'm saying we should spend all of government revenues only on the military? (...gee, I need to sit down after writing that)We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #15 January 26, 2012 I had to rest a bit when you overstated my position as well I'd call it even shucks man, let's not turn this into a Mike vs Quade session or a Mike vs Kallend session or a Kallend vs well, anyone session or a Rush vs Billvon session or a you know ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #16 January 26, 2012 Quote Beer!tongue Agreed. Truth be known, I'm inclined to actually agree with what you advocated more than I may have let on.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #17 January 26, 2012 Quote Vote for me No ... vote for me because I have attached a catchy song to tell you: You better reconsider, you will never do better, there is no one like me Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #18 January 26, 2012 How about Joe Walsh?"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #19 January 26, 2012 Sock Monkey for President 2012! Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #20 January 26, 2012 How about just keepin' this shit to yurself, eh? That's why they call it a secret ballot... That's why they call me bad company: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVo8g7T39A4&ob=av2n Be a simple man: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7i2kIW2wvAE&feature=fvsr It works brother...Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #21 January 26, 2012 QuoteHow about just keepin' this shit to yurself, eh? Why? None of us keep our shit to ourselves in here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverborg 0 #22 January 26, 2012 Gary Johnson would've been a good candidate IMO, but he got drowned out pretty quickly. He didn't have the grassroots following that Paul has to stay in the race at this point. I'm not a Ron Paul die-hard, but I think by far he's the best candidate for the job at this point. I really don't see any likeable traits in anybody else in the race. His foreign policy views are extreme, but he's not going to be a dictator and will only have 4-8 years in office to try and curb some of our military spending. I don't see any other candidate even touching the idea of miltary cuts and that's beyond ignorance at this point. If they seriously think they can balance the budget without a drastic decrease in our military, then they're not competent enough to hold office and make any improvements on our current budget crisis. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #23 January 26, 2012 QuoteRon Paul .... His foreign policy views are extreme, but he's not going to be a dictator and will only have 4-8 years in office to try and curb some of our military spending. I don't see any other candidate even touching the idea of miltary cuts and that's beyond ignorance at this point. see, you said it in about half the words I did. I really need to practice more ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #24 January 26, 2012 QuoteIf they seriously think they can balance the budget without a drastic decrease in our military, then they're not competent enough to hold office and make any improvements on our current budget crisis. This. This applies to any president, of any stripe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 806 #25 January 26, 2012 Ron Paul has as much chance of getting elected as I do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
