Is Ron Paul A Visionary Or A Nut Job?

Which one is he?

  • Visionary

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Nut Job

    Votes: 1 100.0%

  • Total voters
    1

Yrx said:
A little of both, I think. A Huckabee-McCain ticket would be pretty darned good, in my opinion. Get Washington out of gridlock, and cut down on pork projects.
That is nuts. You would actually want a president in office that believes in talking snakes and a 6000 year old earth making policies and appointing supreme court justices? From the frying pan and into the fire. That would be madness. The Republicans had their chance for the last 7 years and they botched everything they touched. I say no more.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Whatever happened to the separation of state and religion? I watched the Republican debate on CNN a couple of weeks back, and one of the questions the candidates had to answer was whether or not they believed every single word in the Bible (they didn't mention which Bible though, maybe it was the Programmer's Bible, or the Prankster's Bible). Needless to say, I was never more eager to change the channel :p
 
DaveC said:
Yrx said:
A little of both, I think. A Huckabee-McCain ticket would be pretty darned good, in my opinion. Get Washington out of gridlock, and cut down on pork projects.
That is nuts. You would actually want a president in office that believes in talking snakes and a 6000 year old earth making policies and appointing supreme court justices? From the frying pan and into the fire. That would be madness. The Republicans had their chance for the last 7 years and they botched everything they touched. I say no more.

Absolutely, I actually twitched a little when I read his post. McCain is a Bush fucker, we don't want another Bush running shit for 4 more years (would most certainly turn into 8 as the majority of the American people aren't too bright, bless them). Huckabee is, like Dave has said, a jesus freak. No thanks.

Oh, and I was browsing wikipedia for information on Huckabee, and I found his spouse's name. Her frickin maiden name is MCCAIN.

HA!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
First of all, Huckabee never said it was 6000 years. All he said was that God was involved, but he isn't willing to say when or for how long. That leaves the statement pretty open to other ideas, such as theistic evolution or intelligent design.

And honestly, would it matter if he went right out and said 6000 years? Is that any more unreasonable than believing everything just popped into existence without any good explanation? And either way, I don't see how the subject is relevant to a presidential candidate. Maybe a science teacher, but being president involves making decisions on how to run a country, not debating on how everything started.

And separation of church and state? Is he putting forth a law requiring everyone to believe what he does? Absolutely not. He's just expressing what he (and a good chunk of America, I might add) believes. If he's not allowed to express his beliefs, then THAT is breaking the rule.

And McCain certainly isn't a Bush crony. I think of all the candidates, only Ron Paul could be further from that description than McCain, lol. You know, he almost ran as Kerry's VP last election.

Both of these people can bring something to the table. Huckabee grew up in a dirt poor family, and he has a strong message of helping people thrive. He also legislates bipartisanly, focusing on getting done with the vast majority of legislation we do agree on before we fight over the little details. I really like that about the guy, as well as the guts to talk about his faith in a society that largely attacks doing such.

And McCain is an outsider to both parties when he needs to be, cracking down on excess spending and unnecessary laws. He agreed with going to war, but he was probably the most outspoken Republican opposing the ineffective way it was being done. Now that the strategy is actually working, he's basically given it the thumbs up.

And neither of these guys is too high and mighty to crack a joke, or call on someone's crap. They're both people's lawmakers, and I really respect that about both of them. Attacking a man for being religious is just intolerant bigotry, and claiming McCain as a Bush crony is either ignorance, or worse, outright lying.

By the way, aren't we breaking the rules? lol
 
ummmm hes not just religious... hes an ordained minister, when someone is a minister God is the most important thing in there life and people are known to do just about anything if it is in the name of God. Most people who feel that spreading the message of Jesus is there duty are not capable of putting politics above there God, there is no reason he cant be the president, but i seriously doubt that he could uphold the separation of church and state when his life mission is to get people to follow his religion.
 
Anyone who makes a video about celebrating "Christ's" birth is incapable of being a president. They cannot follow that little thing that stops religion from being involved in politics; and he's demonstrated that quite well.

And yes, we need a president with a certain mentality after Bush has been in office. I don't want one that believes the earth is 6000 years old. And yes, a minister like himself clearly believes that.
 
Ron Paul is promising the moon on a stick now, but he'll fk you all over just like every other power-hungry professional liar (er... politician, sorry) has done and continue to do. You want Jesuit puppet A or Freemasonic puppet B who's going to tell you how to live your life and spend all your tax dollars on big guns for their multi-billion dollar rituals/ crusades??

People, I beg of you, wake up! What is your precious economy worth when your children won't even breathe clean air? I think it was Eisenhower who warned about the dangers of the Military/Medical/Industrial/petrochemical cartel taking over- well he wasn't wrong. The major corps have so much money and power they get away with anything because then can afford to wangle their way out. Corruption isn't the word.

We've been lied to on a massive scale for thousands of years- whereas they used to use religions for mind control the mass media does that much better for them now. They'll try to scare you into believing there is an energy crisis but they're just trying to juice the last out of a multi-trillion dollar industry that we've been fooled into believing essential (petrol and gas) us power when we could've all had free, non-polluting energy for over 100 years now if Tesla, Reich, John Keeley etcs work hadn't been suppressed by Big Oil with their distinct dislike for hydrogen powered cars and unmetered energy for all.

You should DEMAND that NONE of your leaders are part of ANY secret society but yes you'd basically have to start afresh with your gov if you rallied those sickos out, as you should. Do you realise the sort of oaths these guys take and how that effects us all- Skull n' Bonesmen, Jesuits etc?

DRM

"The darkest moment comes just before dawn"
 
Yrx said:
And honestly, would it matter if he went right out and said 6000 years? Is that any more unreasonable than believing everything just popped into existence without any good explanation? And either way, I don't see how the subject is relevant to a presidential candidate. Maybe a science teacher, but being president involves making decisions on how to run a country, not debating on how everything started.

And separation of church and state? Is he putting forth a law requiring everyone to believe what he does? Absolutely not. He's just expressing what he (and a good chunk of America, I might add) believes. If he's not allowed to express his beliefs, then THAT is breaking the rule.

-snip-
So true. You have to be brave to say stuff like that in here, everyone here is so uptight. It doesn't even say "separation of church and state" in the constitution, what they base that on is the 1st amendment Establishment Clause which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ... or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". If the idea of "separation of church and state" is taken too far it is equal to establishing a religion of secularism, which in itself violates the Establishment Clause.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yrx said:
First of all, Huckabee never said it was 6000 years. All he said was that God was involved, but he isn't willing to say when or for how long. That leaves the statement pretty open to other ideas, such as theistic evolution or intelligent design.

And honestly, would it matter if he went right out and said 6000 years? Is that any more unreasonable than believing everything just popped into existence without any good explanation? And either way, I don't see how the subject is relevant to a presidential candidate. Maybe a science teacher, but being president involves making decisions on how to run a country, not debating on how everything started.
Huckabee did say he believed the Bible verbatim. The Bible indicates that the earth is no older than 6000 years. Therefore he does believe that the earth is 6000 years old. He is a fundamentalist Christian.

What is wrong with that is that the policies he makes and the judges he appoints will most certainly reflect these religious beliefs. These people ignore scientific fact in favor of supernatural dogma. This means separation of church and state will be gone. Bush has already been moving us that direction. This will change the country into a theocracy. This means science in schools will be replaced by religion, making kids stupid, not schooled in reality, and unable to compete. This means that his foreign policies will be skewed towards Christianity and against others like oh I don't know Muslims maybe? Would he start a "holy war" Would he use nukes? Would he try to bring about the "rapture" so he can see Jesus return? These people are very scary. They have no business being president.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dude, this is seriously some of the most bigoted crap I've heard in a while. You do know that the founders of modern science were for the most part creationists, don't you? And you do know that all of our founding fathers gave religion a MUCH larger part in the political process than today, right? Like the fact that Thomas Jefferson (of separation of church and state fame) actually sponsored an organized prayer in congress?

You guys act like Christianity is something new and dangerous. Quite the opposite.
 
Well DaveC, the Muslims are the ones who believe that Jesus will come in a mushroom cloud, and are preparing to make that happen, and you think the Christians are dangerous?
 
Blah said:
Well DaveC, the Muslims are the ones who believe that Jesus will come in a mushroom cloud, and are preparing to make that happen, and you think the Christians are dangerous?
WHOA. Watch it. Not every Muslim is a suicide-bomber nutcase. There are plenty who act like normal people, living life and not trying to strap explosives around their waists in the name of Allah. Talk about a bigoted statement. If Omars were here, he'd rip your head off.

Yrx: Dave took it a little too far, obviously. The fact remains, however, that these Bible freaks are way too biased to be running a nation. Especially trying to run the most powerful (and most hated) nation in the world.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blah said:
Well DaveC, the Muslims are the ones who believe that Jesus will come in a mushroom cloud, and are preparing to make that happen, and you think the Christians are dangerous?
Let it be known that regardless of how hilarious this statement is, I don't necessarily agree with it. :lol:

And DCGM (I refuse to type that out, lol), like I said before, it's not like they're trying to force conversions or something. And it's CERTAINLY not anything as serious as a radical Islamic suicide bomber, which is the point I THINK Blah was trying to make. Our country was founded on the premises of inalienable, God given rights, so I don't think it's a bad idea to talk about the God they came from. And we're not the most hated in the world, although I won't argue that there's a lot of unnecessary hatred directed at us. Generally from those radical Islamists, lol.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah I was referring to the most radical of them. You know the old saying, "All generalizations are false" XD.

I was only trying to take it as far as Dave was. I wouldn't make such statements in public but this is the internet so I can say whatever I want without fear of retaliation. Yay!
 
dcgm is fine :p

It has nothing to do with "forcing conversions", it has to do with getting Christian beliefs involved in business and politics. We want someone who is narrow-minded enough to believe a book over scientific fact? Maybe you do, but I don't. Religion has no place in politics. NONE. Keep it to yourself.

As for being hated, yes, we are. Because we have allies doesn't mean that we're respected or well-liked. Most of the British population looks down on us. Why? Because we're arrogant, fat, lazy and ignorant. Well, most of us are ;). The French don't care for us much, either. I must admit that there have been times I've been embarrassed to be an American. There's a stigma that's attached to us and we are doing little to change it.

Perhaps if we changed our attitudes a little, we'd have more respect from other nations. Until then, we'll continue to be used as business partners and a symbol of the "free world". And don't think that just because everyone's on our side that we're liked. There's a difference between disliking and hating with a passion. The Islamic terrorists do the latter- the rest of the world does the former.
 
If you don't allow people to say their personal beliefs and act upon them, that's violating the first amendment. That part about "prohibiting the free exercise thereof." And I think you forget that a HUGE chunk of the country shares this religion, so it wouldn't really make sense to exclude everything they support.
 
Yrx said:
If you don't allow people to say their personal beliefs and act upon them, that's violating the first amendment. That part about "prohibiting the free exercise thereof." And I think you forget that a HUGE chunk of the country shares this religion, so it wouldn't really make sense to exclude everything they support.
Well when you get those with power to act on religious beliefs you get alot of trouble. Religion is irrational so you get irrational actions. Most of the war and trouble the world is in now are due to those religious zealots on all sides "acting on their beliefs". Some beliefs are to kill those that don't believe in the same weirdo spirit in the sky flying sphagetti monster whatever that they do. It is just nuts.
Blah said:
Well DaveC, the Muslims are the ones who believe that Jesus will come in a mushroom cloud, and are preparing to make that happen, and you think the Christians are dangerous?
Stay away from the Faux News Channel. They are fear mongering again ;) Last time I checked the Christians have bombed and killed many more than anyone else has (and continue), so yes I think many Christians are dangerous.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll just ignore that bit about religion being irrational and say something you might actually pay attention to. Killing is wrong, everyone in the world knows it. Anybody who believes that killing innocent people is right is not devout or even religious, they are simply fucked up.

I don't support war or killing, regardless of who the sides are. I believe that people should treat others the way they would like to be treated themselves. When people kill, even when they kill evil people, for example by executing murderers, they are not making anything right. Rather, they are out-stepping the bounds of our place in life, in other words playing God.
 
Back
Top