Originally Posted by ziggyX65

Actually sometimes I think Paul's right and sometimes I think he's off his rocker. The problem is, as I see it, too much government involvement in all the wrong places (those that seem to help their corporate masters and robber barons) and not enough government involvement in areas that protect labor, consumers and small business competitors to these behemoths. I would agree with Paul where getting government out of the "crony capitalism" business is concerned, but not about ideas concerning regulations and protections for the masses against corporate excesses.

Yeah, like it being against the law to bury my mom's ashes in our flower garden in our backyard?

Originally Posted by ziggyX65

Actually sometimes I think Paul's right and sometimes I think he's off his rocker. The problem is, as I see it, too much government involvement in all the wrong places (those that seem to help their corporate masters and robber barons) and not enough government involvement in areas that protect labor, consumers and small business competitors to these behemoths. I would agree with Paul where getting government out of the "crony capitalism" business is concerned, but not about ideas concerning regulations and protections for the masses against corporate excesses.

Sorry, the sound and picture quality aren't great, but worth sharing anyway. Bruno messing with Ron Paul:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7RnlPQCKBQ&sns=em

Originally Posted by Deb C

Yeah, like it being against the law to bury my mom's ashes in our flower garden in our backyard?

How would anybody know you had done that? You didn't actually go and ask permission, did you?

Originally Posted by Justin '77

How would anybody know you had done that? You didn't actually go and ask permission, did you?

Oh, SNAP!!!

Originally Posted by Justin '77

How would anybody know you had done that? You didn't actually go and ask permission, did you?

I didn't ask permission. I was telling a friend of ours who is a lawyer about our plans and she was the one who informed me that it was against the law.

We still plan to spread her ashes this coming Spring. Hope the backyard police aren't looking, I might get pepper sprayed.

Originally Posted by Deb C

I didn't ask permission. I was telling a friend of ours who is a lawyer about our plans and she was the one who informed me that it was against the law.

We still plan to spread her ashes this coming Spring. Hope the backyard police aren't looking, I might get pepper sprayed.

Excellent. Such laws as those deserve to be violated as frequently and as widely as possible.

Given that Ron Paul is likely going to win the Iowa Republican Caucus with substantial Independent and Democrat support. I want to ask If some Millennials have rallied around him and helped his campaign immensely, much the same thing happened with Barack Obama in 2008.

To be honest I find Mr Paul to be a bit of a crank, especially given his views that the US should go back to the gold standard which is in my estimation to be tin foil hat nuttery. Then again by US standards I would be considered a flaming pinko liberal.

Originally Posted by Tristan

Given that Ron Paul is likely going to win the Iowa Republican Caucus with substantial Independent and Democrat support. I want to ask If some Millennials have rallied around him and helped his campaign immensely, much the same thing happened with Barack Obama in 2008.

Yes, absolutely. In fact, if you were lurking around Reddit in 2007 and 2008, you would have noticed that the mass of support for Obama only came after Ron Paul was sufficiently knocked out of the primary running. The grass-roots style "money bombs" were originally for Paul, and shifted to Obama after Super Tuesday.

To be honest I find Mr Paul to be a bit of a crank, especially given his views that the US should go back to the gold standard which is in my estimation to be tin foil hat nuttery. Then again by US standards I would be considered a flaming pink liberal.

Well, I think that is a bit of misrepresentation of his monetary policies, but I'm used to seeing that by now I suppose...

Ron Paul introduced the Free Competition in Currency Act that would go a long way toward making specie currency a legal competitor to Federal Reserve notes. As it stands now, people trying to use gold and silver as money can be arrested and their coins are subject to seizure.

18 U.S.C. § 486:
Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals, intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Excellent. Such laws as those deserve to be violated as frequently and as widely as possible.

Yeah. We lost a cat in 2002 and had her ashes spread into the ground where we planted a tree sapling. The idea was that she would "live on" in some other form while the tree prospered and grew. Last I heard, the tree was still growing and going strong.

Question -- who do you predict will drop out of the race next Wednesday, after the Iowa Caucuses?

My predictions: Michelle Bachmann, John Huntsman, Rick Perry, and Newt Gingrich will finish in the bottom in Iowa and drop out either on the 3rd or right after New Hampshire (Huntsman). Santorum may be the Huckabee of 2012 (he's surging at just the right time), but like Gingrich, lacks the funds and organization to withstand the barrage of negative ads from Romney that the good folk from South Carolina will receive. Paul will not drop out until deep in the primaries, because of his organization and cadre of devotees, but he won't be able to take Romney. Romney will be the GOP nominee.

As to whether its Romney or Obama getting inaugurated in January 2013, it depends on the economy and assumes that 12/21/12 isn't catastrophic.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

Question -- who do you predict will drop out of the race next Wednesday, after the Iowa Caucuses?

My predictions: Michelle Bachmann, John Huntsman, Rick Perry, and Newt Gingrich will finish in the bottom in Iowa and drop out either on the 3rd or right after New Hampshire (Huntsman). Santorum may be the Huckabee of 2012 (he's surging at just the right time), but like Gingrich, lacks the funds and organization to withstand the barrage of negative ads from Romney that the good folk from South Carolina will receive. Paul will not drop out until deep in the primaries, because of his organization and cadre of devotees, but he won't be able to take Romney. Romney will be the GOP nominee.

As to whether its Romney or Obama getting inaugurated in January 2013, it depends on the economy and assumes that 12/21/12 isn't catastrophic.

Consult the crystal ball (astrology)!

Santorum is surging now, since Jupiter is powerful in his sign. That should keep him in the race through March, if he can do well in the south. He has no chance to win ultimately, but I wonder if Romney (assuming he wins) or another nominee may be foolish enough to choose him as veep.

John Huntsman should stay in past New Hampshire, since he's put his eggs in that basket. He won't win, so he may drop out after NH, or stay in a little longer if he feels he got some momentum out of NH. But he's going nowhere.

Perry and Bachmann are doing a bit better now in Iowa, but they will finish out of the top 2, so they may drop out. They are the most likely to drop out after Iowa; especially Bachmann, since Iowa is her strength, while Perry still has some hope in upcoming southern primaries. So that will depend on whether Perry really wants to continue or not. Newt will not drop out after Iowa, since he has #1 status in upcoming southern primaries. I agree with your assessment of Paul and Romney. Romney, Paul and Gingrich are the strongest candidates according to the electability indicated in their horoscopes, followed by Perry. So Bachmann is most likely to be the first to drop out, followed by Huntsman.

Obama will defeat Romney in the Fall, both because his chart is superior, and because I have already predicted modest economic recovery through 2012.

12/21/2012 is a bigger deal than people think, but it is not the apocalypse. It is the end of a cycle, a phase in history, especially for the Meso-American peoples. It may indicate a major change there. Could the revolutionary spirit of this era, which I had already predicted to come, come there too? Is it needed there? Food for further thought!

Meanwhile, 2012 means a change in energy on planet Earth. That is already happening. It marks potentially the start of the "new age," but it will largely be what we make it! We have a lot of waking up to do.

Anyway can you fill me in on Romney's record while he was governor in Massachusetts?

As I see it Romney is the strongest and be most competitive against Obama out of all the Republican nominees. However as I see Romney being a Mormon does not endear him to the Christian Conservatives in the party. Also (correct me if I am wrong) his record while governor of Massachussets does not endear him to laissez faire crowd in the Republican party.

Originally Posted by Tristan

Anyway can you fill me in on Romney's record while he was governor in Massachusetts?

As I see it Romney is the strongest and be most competitive against Obama out of all the Republican nominees. However as I see Romney being a Mormon does not endear him to the Christian Conservatives in the party. Also (correct me if I am wrong) his record while governor of Massachussets does not endear him to laissez faire crowd in the Republican party.

He's the sort who "saves" jobs by putting lots of people on permanent layoff. That is what Bain Capital did.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

He's the sort who "saves" jobs by putting lots of people on permanent layoff. That is what Bain Capital did.

The Bain of our existence?

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

Question -- who do you predict will drop out of the race next Wednesday, after the Iowa Caucuses?

My predictions: Michelle Bachmann, John Huntsman, Rick Perry, and Newt Gingrich will finish in the bottom in Iowa and drop out either on the 3rd or right after New Hampshire (Huntsman). Santorum may be the Huckabee of 2012 (he's surging at just the right time), but like Gingrich, lacks the funds and organization to withstand the barrage of negative ads from Romney that the good folk from South Carolina will receive. Paul will not drop out until deep in the primaries, because of his organization and cadre of devotees, but he won't be able to take Romney. Romney will be the GOP nominee.

As to whether its Romney or Obama getting inaugurated in January 2013, it depends on the economy and assumes that 12/21/12 isn't catastrophic.

Jenny, Gingrich leads by a mile right now in SC and in Florida. I can't imagine he'll quit before then.

Yahoo reports today that Rick Perry supports English as the official language of the US. Very courageous on his part, I think, since it means he'd have to learn it!

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Jenny, Gingrich leads by a mile right now in SC and in Florida. I can't imagine he'll quit before then.

Yahoo reports today that Rick Perry supports English as the official language of the US. Very courageous on his part, I think, since it means he'd have to learn it!

Actually it is true Gingrich did lead all the others in SC and Florida. However the last polls taken there were on December 19th, before Gingriches implosion.

I feel safe in saying the polling..if taken now..is quite different.

Keep digging that hole, Ron...


Ron Paul Ups The Ante And Claims Sexual Harassment Shouldn’t Be Illegal

Odin just keeps on campaigning for Romney, this time with some nonsense headline that doesn't even agree with the content of the linked article:

So, if there is any violence involved, you still don’t need a federal law against harassment. You just need to call the policeman and say there’s been an assault or there’s been attempted rape or something.

So, you have to separate those two out. But because people are insulted by, you know, rude behavior, I don’t think we should make a federal case out of it. I don’t think we need federal laws to deal with that and people should deal with that at home.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

Odin just keeps on campaigning for Romney, this time with some nonsense headline that doesn't even agree with the content of the linked article:

So Paul says, "So, you have to separate those two out. But because people are insulted by, you know, rude behavior, I don’t think we should make a federal case out of it. I don’t think we need federal laws to deal with that and people should deal with that at home."

The issue isn't the "rude behavior", it's the power structure around the behavior that matters. If I act rudely to some stranger out on the street, who cares? Nobody. I'm just an A$$hole.

But if someone is dependent on a job or whatever, and someone who has power over me and that job behaves rudely, it's a whole different issue.

This is what we are talking about these days ... people who have an inordinate amount of power over others, people who do NOT merit that power, and who inflict arbitrary consequences on folks who have little or no power and may in fact depend on systems that the powerful too often hold the rudder.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

Odin just keeps on campaigning for Romney, this time with some nonsense headline that doesn't even agree with the content of the linked article:

Here is an article about why people like Odin hate Ron Paul so much.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

Odin just keeps on campaigning for Romney, this time with some nonsense headline that doesn't even agree with the content of the linked article:

So you think there should not be a federal law against sexual harassment? Most sexual harassment does not qualify as assault, either, assault requires physical attack, most sexual harassment is verbal.

Originally Posted by Odin

So you think there should not be a federal law against sexual harassment? Most sexual harassment does not qualify as assault, either, assault requires physical attack, most sexual harassment is verbal.

Actually assault isnt necessarily physical. Normally when assault is physical, it becomes battery

Originally Posted by Galen

Here is an article about why people like Odin hate Ron Paul so much.

Excellent piece. A bit over-the-top on Paul, but an amazingly effective analysis on the dissapointing failure of Obama.

What I like about the libertarian movement, and I don't agree with plenty of it, is that it is more intellectually honest than frick and frack (Dem and GOP) in relation to non-economic social issues and foreign policy. They have filled the vacuum left by the Dem party which has become virtually indistinguishable from the GOP on these issues.

Also an excellent point about the failure of our current cycle:

Originally Posted by SALON

Because most of those policies are fully bipartisan in nature, the election season — in which only issues that bestow partisan advantage receive attention — places them even further outside the realm of mainstream debate and scrutiny. For that reason, America’s elections ironically serve to obsfuscate political reality even more than it usually is.

This would all be bad enough if “election season” were confined to a few months the way it is in most civilized countries. But in America, the fixation on presidential elections takes hold at least eighteen months before the actual election occurs, which means that more than 1/3 of a President’s term is conducted in the midst of (and is obscured by) the petty circus distractions of The Campaign. Thus, an unauthorized, potentially devastating covert war — both hot and cold — against Iran can be waged with virtually no debate, just as government control over the Internet can be inexorably advanced, because TV political shows are busy chattering away about Michele Bachmann’s latest gaffe and minute changes in Rick Perry’s polling numbers.

Originally Posted by Odin

Keep digging that hole, Ron...


Ron Paul Ups The Ante And Claims Sexual Harassment Shouldn’t Be Illegal

Ah yes. And I wonder, between Paul and the non-racist, non-misogynist currently in power... which one has killed more brown women?

I suppose, if that's the kind of thing that matters to a person...

Originally Posted by TeddyR

Excellent piece. A bit over-the-top on Paul, but an amazingly effective analysis on the dissapointing failure of Obama.

What I like about the libertarian movement, and I don't agree with plenty of it, is that it is more intellectually honest than frick and frack (Dem and GOP) in relation to non-economic social issues and foreign policy. They have filled the vacuum left by the Dem party which has become virtually indistinguishable from the GOP on these issues.

Also an excellent point about the failure of our current cycle:

Well, at least Democratic fricking doesn't endanger our drinking water or pass itself off as "Enough natural gas for the next 100 years!" to unwary investors.