RPB – Ron Paul Blimp

RonPaulBlimp.jpg (27 KB)

  • Leave a comment ?

    130 Responses to RPB – Ron Paul Blimp

    1. Please note the tags! FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS OR YOU GET A FROWN 🙁

      Reply

    2. I hope I did it correctly. This will be my first ever Theme Day post.

      Ron Paul FTL.

      Reply

    3. @tiki god: wait, this was tagged RPB. should there only be a single tag?? (sorry, I didn’t submit anything, I can’t put creativity on the spot like that!)

      Reply

    4. @token2k6: I think Tiki added the tag.

      @Puulaahi:
      Aw. Why? Ron is whom I would have voted for. Ok technically I would have wanted Kucinich to win, but he didn’t have a chance anyway. So besides him, Ron was way awesome. One quality man.

      Reply

    5. dieAntagonista speaks the truth.

      Reply

    6. @dieAntagonista: Wow this is the first time I agree with your posts…I also like Ron Paul

      Reply

    7. I know. It’s always painful, the first time.

      Reply

    8. @tiki god: That is NOT A FROWN.

      Argh

      Sometimes you make me SO ANGRY.

      Reply

    9. this was not correctly tagged. as you remember, I tag every single one of my posts correctly, and I had made specific demands as to the way the theme day posts were to be tagged.

      And I made that post a sticky.

      Reply

    10. lol@tagfail

      I also like Ron Paul except for one nagging thing:
      I do not believe things like homosexual rights and women’s health should be left up to state voting. I understand what he’s trying to get at, like many libertarians who agree with him. But this is the UNITED States of America, not fifty seperate countries. Certain rights violations like, oh I don’t know, slavery, should not be “left up to the states”.

      Everyone non-Mormon Utah would be FUCKED.

      Reply

    11. *Every *in Utah

      /typos. 😛

      Reply

    12. I love how idiotic the Rupaul supporters were. YAH YAH GO RON PAUL REVOLUTION!!

      Then, when he drops out, they vote the polar opposite of his beliefs, Barack Obama.

      Yeah, going from the libertarian who votes against anything not specifically authorized to the Federal government to voting for the Messiah who has expanded the Federal government larger than any President has in the history of the republic.

      dieAntagonista is an even brighter example of this – only Kucinich was more of a rabid socialist than Obama was in the primaries. It’s go to be something other than ideology, perhaps the voters just like to make a statement and don’t really care what the candidates actually support.

      Reply

    13. Awwww crap!

      I guess that’s what I get for dicking around with MCS instead of writing my candidacy paper.

      Reply

    14. Cathy,

      Did they teach US History where you went to school? It most certainly is the United STATES of America, consisting of 50 separate states free to make their own laws based on how their residents vote.

      Remember, the reasoning was to promote competition between the states, so you can institute ridiculous liberal policies in states like New York and California, and pro-growth policies in states like Tennessee and Texas. Then, the people can vote with their feet for the policies they feel would advance their economic situation. Federal control of everything brings down EVERYONE when moronic policies like Obama’s are instituted, and there’s no escaping his taxation.

      And your idiotic example of “slavery” is spelled out in the Constitution itself, and thus not up to states to decide (see 14th Amendment).

      Reply

    15. @Bodero: It’s not even an issue for the states. Anyone who thinks states should be allowed to deny rights to a minority based on a popular vote is stupid. The judicial system exists to protect minorities from the “tyranny of the majority” and judges across the country have consistently sided on the rights of homosexuals and freedom of choice.

      The very fact that people can revoke a right from a minority by a simple majority vote (i.e. California Prop. 8) is utterly retarded.

      Oh yeah, and Ron Paul is a hypocrite. A TRUE libertarian is in favor of allowing homosexuals to marry, as it’s not an issue for ANY government to regulate.

      Reply

    16. @Bodero: Agreed on State’s rights. If you don’t like a policy, it’s much easier to enact change at a state level rather than fighting the feds. If you are unable to change the policy, you pack up & move to a different state, more in line with your views. After you move, you still get to live in America, instead of having to go to Canada or whatever.

      Reply

    17. Slavery is abolished per the 13th Amendment, not 14th btw.

      @deuce: Who defines “minority”? The 14th Amendment and Civil Rights laws (which are statutory changes to the Constitution, rather than Amendments and would have left the founding fathers spinning) spell it out. Sorry, but sexual preference is not considered a minority.

      And if, in your opinion (or state, for that matter), it is, how is it discrimination by defining marriage as between a man and a woman? It is the very definition of marriage. Civil unions can be allowed side by side but calling for “gay marriage” is like calling for a “square wheel.”

      And a true libertarian (of which I am not – I believe in moral order as defined by law) would likely believe that there should be no statute at a FEDERAL level banning or permitting gay “marriage.” States should be free to allow or disallow such a certificate.

      Reply

    18. @Bodero:

      I’m not American, I live in Europe. We have quite different defintions of what a republican and what a democrat is, over here.

      There are certain aspects of both political viewpoints that I appreciate, so I feel like even though I’m a liberal or whatever label you have for me, a republican might be the better choice. One single vote doesn’t matter, and it’s clear that America wasn’t ready for someone like Kucinich. He was the only candidate who was for gay marriage among other things and I would have loved to see him become president of such a great nation. Like I said, it wasn’t very realistic, and besides him, Ron was the only man who would have qualified, to me, as a decent president.

      If Obama is a socialist, then so is McCain and even Ron. If your definition of socialist is broad enough to include one, it has to be broad enough to include the other. Not only that, but you yourself currently reside in a socialist nation. You’ve got public fire, public police, public postal system etc. What is socialism? Socialism is when all of the productions and industry of a country are owned by the people.

      I suggest you pick up a book or two on basic political defintions, before you accuse me fo being a socialist.

      Reply

    19. @Bodero:
      Agreed.

      Cathy, have you ever heard of the Article of the Confederacy? That’s what they wanted the States to be, but after they failed they realized they’d need some kind of central government to police interstate commerce and have some kind of centralized military power.

      Interstate commerce, a federal military, and diplomatic relations imo should be the only things that the federal government can control. Also, they should only guarantee rights, not take them away. Bill of Rights = yes. Prohibition = no. I guess I can give them treasury and tax…but just for the reasons stated above.

      Oh and while I’m ranting on the gigantic power of the government, I would like to say that the month or so off that representative get should be for coming back to their own state/district and getting in touch with what problems and feelings their constituents have, not for vacations. AND they should vote for their STATE not their PARTY. I realize they are the elected party, but what is good for the party is not always good for the state, and a representative’s primary allegiance should be to his/her own state.

      wow I feel much better now. /rant

      Reply

    20. @deuce: Haha. It totally tricked you with a smiley. Yeah I agree with you. But after Bush, Ron would have been an amazing step in the right direction, still.

      Reply

    21. btw ron paul scares me…I wouldn’t have him delivering my babies.

      Reply

    22. @dieAntagonista: Interesting, I didn’t think I called you a socialist at all. I called Kucinich a socialist, which is a label he doesn’t try to run far from. And your interest in American politics is admirable, your confusion is also noted. Socialism is a sliding scale from full laissez-faire (the opposite) to full-on Hugo Chavez. There are degrees in the middle. Someone with a hint of socialism (such as George W. Bush with TARP) but still supports the free market overall would be foolish to call a socialist, but someone whose core principles are at odds with free market capitalism, such as Obama, would be much more apt to be called a socialist.

      If this is confusing, let me make it simpler – a better term for the modern day American “liberal” would be a statist, the belief that government is the be-all and end-all to our problems.

      Reply

    23. @Staplegun: Bingo. I sigh when I hear people bitching about Congress not working enough. Hell, if it were up to me, I’d keep their salary and only require them to work two weeks a year to balance a budget. Every day Congress meets, we lose more of our liberties.

      Reply

    24. @Bodero: I’m afraid you’re wrong. To call Obama a socialist is a ridiculous exaggeration and you know it. It’s just the most simple accusation you can think of because every other person who hasn’t read up on any of this, has said it.

      But I see already that you’re not willing to agree on anything, except putting everything and anything in a box. You got ’em labels ready for everyone, don’t you.

      So there might be one thing that could make this more interesting, who did you vote for or who were you in favour of becoming president the most?

      Reply

    25. wow.. so much anger and rants. My example of slavery was not “idiotic” it was accurate. Slaves were the minority at the time. Part of the reason we had a Civil War was because certain States thought it was their “right” to deny a minority group their rights as human beings.

      Prop 8 is denying courthouse marriages too, btw. It has nothing to do with pegs and everything to do with uppity Religious folk freaking out over what other people do.

      Fact is, the same laws which allowed for interracial marriages should be applied to homosexuals. Just because a bunch of conservatives in your state think it’s disgusting (Alabama) doesn’t mean they have any “right” to vote against it and kick you out of the state or break up your marriage. Not to mention how completely pointless it is.

      The same can be said for abortion though that can actually be INTELLIGENTLY argued in terms of murder and definitions of life so it’s not something worth discussing in a tl;dr forum post.

      Point is, Everyone is a Minority in another state. You may think it’s “no big deal” for some state YOU don’t live in to pass laws which don’t affect you, but I actually care about people outside of myself. And I know too many happy homosexual couples who deserve to be married in a courthouse (that their tax dollars help fund) and get all of the medical, legal and tax-bracket changes which come with that commitment choice.

      It’s not just some wedding. And it’s not “religious discrimination”. It’s a courthouse. The same courts where everyone is supposed to get a fair trial.

      Lawyers take oaths to be non-biased.
      Doctors do too.

      If you wanted to discriminate your services, maybe you should have gone into another line of business.

      Reply

    26. @dieAntagonista: Ridiculous? How the hell can you come to that conclusion based on the moves he’s made compared to the previous 42 presidents?

      And my vote was for the lesser of two liberals, John McCain. But he was the very last person I’d have liked to see win the Republican primary, because the GOP has this forgetful memory where they, for some reason, can’t remember that running “lesser liberals” than the Democrats doesn’t actually win any elections.

      Throughout the campaign, I was a Thompson supporter until he dropped out, then a Romney supporter.

      But no one has addressed my core point – why did Ron Paul supporters back him when they (mostly) then went off to support his polar opposite, Barack Obama?

      Reply

    27. @dieAntagonista: I just meant FTL as in he lost. I thought he was alright. I like how he was more honest and upfront then many of the candidates. I liked Kucinich too. He seems honest and too the point like RP. I voted for Obama because he was totally set to win and out of the two lead candidates was the better choice. I would rather have an independent win but that’d never happen unfortunately.

      Reply

    28. @CathyLong:

      I do have to agree with you. I don’t think marriage should be decided on in a court of law or in a piece of legislation. I think Civil Unions should be open to as many people of whatever gender or race. I’m cool with interracial couples, homosexual couples, and polygamy. I don’t think the government should be able to decide any of that. However, I do believe that a church has the right to deny you a marriage ceremony if you are one of those couples (groups?) and their tenants forbid that.

      Reply

    29. @CathyLong: The slavery argument was ridiculous because states haven’t had power to force slavery or involuntary servitude for 144 years.

      As for your discussion about gay marriage, I’ll just say that I’m not here to care. Give ’em civil unions so they have the same benefits (health care, wills, etc) without the traditional religious name of marriage (since it isn’t marriage).

      But my core argument is that the Constitution does not authorize Congress the power to statutorily pass such a bill, as your interpretation of “minority” is not concurrent with precedence established by the Supreme Court. Thus, the power is relegated to the states, just like the rest of marriage certification issuance.

      Reply

    30. ***I think that if you want to live in the US, you need to learn to get along with other people. I think that’s part of what this country was founded on and too many people seem to forget it. They come here and just want to live in a compact version of where they moved from.

      It’s one thing to embrace your culture or love your past, but it’s another thing entirely to segregate yourself from the outside world.

      As it is today, America is not a melting pot. The people do not blend, meld or adapt. All we do is hole up in our own little “safety zones” and try to pretend we like our neighbors while we secretly curse them.

      Are we ever going to let that go? I’m multiracial. I don’t identify with any place other than America. But I grew up in a military family so I don’t even have a state or a city to call home.

      I really wish I could say I was proud to be American. But I don’t even know what that MEANS.

      Reply

    31. @Bodero: The fact that Ron Paul stepped out of the race might have something to do with your last statement there.

      Reply

    32. @Puulaahi: Not really, because as I said, they were polar opposites. Sure, you need someone to vote for if your candidate steps out, but would you then go and pick the exact opposite of who you were supporting prior?

      You probably hit it on your previous comment, “I would rather have an independent win but that’d never happen unfortunately.” Of course, Ron Paul was a Republican and Kucinich was a Democrat, but they’re “anti-establishment” and that’s who you wanted to see in the Oval Office. You didn’t care about policies, it was all image, and after Paul dropped out, Obama then had the image.

      Reply

    33. @Bodero: Because I don’t compare a man of today with what people did over hundred years ago. America has changed ever since, so have the general defintions and viewpoints.

      You honestly voted for the mess that McCain is and his little pet clown Palin? I can tell you why people were willing to go from Ron to Obama. Because only a fool would be oblvious enough to not see what terrifying consequences McCain and Palin would have meant. See it’s so black and white with you. I don’t know what to say anymore.

      Reply

    34. @Bodero: “You didn’t care about policies, it was all image”

      Well aren’t you a little judgmental twit. All sour cus your candidate lost. Isn’t America grand…Someone doesn’t agree with you so first thing you do is throw out insults. First grow up and then you can have big boy discussions like sane respectable people. Perhaps I am asking too much of you.

      @dieAntagonista: I liked some of the things Bill Richardson said too.

      Reply

    35. @Puulaahi: So you’ve decided to act like a pompous ass because I correctly judged you. Sorry!

      How else can you explain my statement: You wanted a free market libertarian capitalist to win (who had an ‘underground appeal’), and when he dropped out, you threw your support behind a big government statist (who had an ‘underground appeal’). If the shoe fits…

      Reply

    36. @dieAntagonista: It is in your best economic interest to see a weakened America, and Obama is doing exactly that. Thus, for your viewpoint, he was the perfect candidate. It’s pointless to relive the election again, because McCain is back to his reprehensible old self with his “bipartisan” crap (read: Republicans cave and liberals pass bills). He was the lesser of two evils, and what has happened in the first 70 or so days proves that. But that’s all I’m going to say about an election with two terrible choices.

      Reply

    37. don’t say anything.

      in other news: I HAVE SOME FUCKING PANCAKES

      Reply

    38. @dieAntagonista:

      I voted for McCain, well, for one because I’m more in line with his policies than Obama’s, but also because I’m in favor of a balanced government, and with Obama in power, there is definitely *not* a balance in power. I see that as terrifying in itself. :/

      Reply

    39. @Bodero: You have no right to judge anyone but yourself and looks like you think way too highly of yourself by the way you described me. Especially because A) I have never spoken to you B)Never seen you on MCS until today C)Obviously have deep seeded resentment towards the election.

      Go back to believing your bile and stop being a shoe salesmen. You suck at that job sir.

      Reply

    40. @Puulaahi: I have every right in the world.

      Wow, some people really hate to see themselves from the outside looking in. If it’s not a pretty sight, they sure do get angry.

      Reply

    41. @Bodero:
      Uhm, die wants to live in America. How exactly is it in her interests to get a weak American economy?

      In other news: LOL, IN DURING SHITSTORM LOLOLOLOL

      Reply

    42. @Sticky: I didn’t say economy. I mean a weakened image abroad. And even for many Americans, that is their desire. There really is no other rationale for Obama’s neutering of the military and the war on terror.

      Reply

    43. well, i’m not going to be bothered to read this thread, but HEY EVERYONE, FUCK YOU

      Reply

    44. @Puulaahi: watchout Puu bro your words will come back to bite you, especially the last sentence.
      ~~~~

      @Staplegun:

      0:47~0:52

      Reply

    45. @Bodero: Haha oh god, that has got to be the most hilarious argument anyone has brought up against me.

      That just goes to show how little you know of how the world works. I’ve got news for you. Ever since the economy is such a mess in America, the same has happened in Europe. And oh yeah, right, you meant a weakened image abroad. What is that even supposed to mean? Weak in what sense.
      I never “supported” any candidate because I was in favour of my own country. It doesn’t work like that, you’re insane to believe otherwise.

      Yeah, Obama was sold to the people but so was McCain and Hillary.

      And hey, guess what, I don’t watch TV. All the facts I knew about the candidates was through what I learned from independent newspapers and the like. I have watched some debates on the Internet, but never did I know about who was “in” and “hip” to the American people. I made up my own mind, unlike you.

      Reply

    46. Also, it was a pleasure, Bodero, but I’m done here. I’ll go before Alec or MintyMadness show up and insult me because I made more than 5 comments on one image.

      Reply

    47. @Bodero: You live in a scary ass fantasy world. Everything really is black/ white to you as dieA stated above. Gotta love your pseudo psychology too and you did say economy.

      Reply

    48. @dieAntagonista: Ok. Then explain how you could support both Paul and Kucinich.

      Reply

    49. @dieAntagonista: I hope I wrote it is correct : Îmi place când eşti supărat lol
      ~~

      Reply

    50. @Bodero: do you like banana’s ? do you like apples? ok there you go lol

      Reply

    51. @Puulaahi: So am I right to assume you have no political ideology? You are an “independent” whose political beliefs sway with the wind? No core framework of how to handle a situation and how you feel a government should operate?

      Reply

    52. @Snarky Parker: YA man you missed teh movie but i saved some pop corn for ya ^^

      Reply

    53. Haha alright, you people leave me with no choice. Cute overload.

      @ColombianMonkey:
      That was correct yes, I enjoy it too, most of the time. But besides motherfucker, I don’t like when people name call me. And both users I mentioned are good at doing just that.

      @Bodero:

      Kucinich and Ron Paul are the only two congressional representatives who voted against the Rothman-Kirk Resolution.
      Kucinich is the only candidate who would have legalised same sex marriage. That’s one main reason why I wanted him to win.

      Now, Ron opposes federal regulation of the death penalty, of education, and of marriage.
      Kucinich would have abolished the death penalty, ended the war on drugs.
      Again, both of them would have legalised medicinal marijuana and decriminalised non-medical possession.
      Both of them are against the war in Iraq.

      These are the main issues that interested me.

      Both of them would have meant negative consequences as well.

      Ron is pro choice, Kucinich isn’t.
      Kucinich would have strenghtened gun control, Ron wouldn’t have.
      etc.

      You see, you can’t just seperate them like that, democrat/ republican. Like I said, America wasn’t yet ready for someone like Kucinich, but Ron Paul would have been one fucking amazing president. Especially now, after those 8 years.

      And the reason why you have a problem with Puulaahi’s lack of polticial ideology, which is actually just him being open-minded, is because you can’t put him in one of your boxes.

      Reply

    54. @ColombianMonkey:
      GETCHA PAWPCAWN READY [/Loudmouth asshole who can’t catch a ball also known as Terrell Owens]

      Reply

    55. Awww, I missed it too. Paul was a joke. Anti reproductive rights, anti evolution, anti education, anti science, anti research… No thx.

      Reply

    56. Oops, I made a mistake. Ron is pro life, Kucinich isn’t.

      I’m obviously in favour of Kucinich being pro choice, and of Ron not wanting to strengthen gun control.

      Reply

    57. @fracked again: He was also anti-federal regulation of any of those things. I think you may have missed the point.

      He wasn’t afraid to let people know how he felt about those things, and then went right on to say that he didn’t think that any of that was the Federal Govt.’s business.

      Reply

    58. @dieAntagonista: I can honestly say that if you can accept that they’re assholes out there you will have a blast of your life.

      Reply

    59. @Sticky: I’m from Buffalo, NY. Please don’t mention T.O.. Ever.

      Reply

    60. @ColombianMonkey: Yeah but I thought MintyMadness and I were friends. So that was ugly. But other than that, I appreciate assholes.

      Reply

    61. @Bodero: I have a political ideology. Everyone has a political ideology. dieA said it all. I am open minded, I have this unique ability of seeing things from other point of views. You should try it sometime. Sorry I don’t fit into your labels. I am not registered to a party. That is how independent I am. I lean left and we obviously have different beliefs. No candidate can ever truly convey all of your own personal beliefs. They will all disappoint you because the system is corrupt one way or another. At least we have checks & balances.

      Reply

    62. @dieAntagonista: I can be an asshole at times FYI.

      Reply

    63. @dieAntagonista: If those are the main issues that interested you, then that answers my question. Between the two, they have similar beliefs based on radically different thought processes (Paul believes in limiting the power of the government over individuals, Kucinich probably tokes up before going to the House everyday).

      As for the “boxes” (which I call ideologies), when you have opinions on the whole range of issues, there usually is some fiber connecting your rationale from issue to issue. Otherwise, you’ll be caught up in hypocrisy. Ideology isn’t a bad thing, but it’s portrayed that way by intellectuals who feel that if you vote straight party line in an election, you’re an idiot.

      Reply

    64. @Puulaahi: “At least we have checks & balances.”

      But that was the whole point of the initial shitstorm! One of the checks and balances are the federal government’s limited role vs. the states: your balance was the ability to move within the US and experience a different philosophy when the checks of one state is out of whack.

      That’s not even getting into the radically growing executive branch, both under President Bush and President Obama.

      Reply

    65. @Bodero: It’s congresses job to do the checking and balancing which didn’t happen under Repub/Repub the past 6 years. The executive branch has been growing long before Bush. See Reagan. Still too early to say for Obama. Your probably one of them paranoid Conservatives. As for State Vs Federal, usually federal law rules over state law. State is usually SOL.

      And FYI hypocrisy reigns supreme everywhere in everything. Especially in politics.

      As for the shitstorm …ROFL

      Reply

    66. @Bodero:

      Nah, accepting a person’s viewpoints is one thing, forcing them to give themselves a label is another.

      I have no problem with anyone who has a concrete polticial viewpoint. But if one doesn’t feel the need to give himself a label, I’m not going to accuse them of having no political ideology.

      “Between the two, they have similar beliefs based on radically different thought processes”

      I know that. So? You have to play by the rules of a system that you cannot change. I happen to not agree with this system but if I have the choice to force it in a better direction then that’s what I’m going to do.

      Reply

    67. @dieAntagonista: friends doesn’t always say nice things, but nevertheless if we don’t have assholes who are left to make us look good? lol

      Reply

    68. @Puulaahi: “As for the shitstorm …ROFL”
      Always makes me feel a little proud. We both are the culprits of this one.

      Also, I like assholes who are in-box-unputables.

      @ColombianMonkey: I know. I’m just a naive fool.

      Reply

    69. @dieAntagonista:
      I (try) to be an amusing asshole. As for pulling it off, I don’t know about my success rate.

      Reply

    70. @dieAntagonista: “who are in-box-unputables.”

      I love that! Yeah we both stirred the pot.

      One damn hot naive fool. But so am I.

      Reply

    71. @dieAntagonista: how can you be naive(inexperience) if almost all the time you are here you deal with unsophisticated people? wut you need is too loosen up and enjoy some Human Sledding with me in holland lol. I plan to go snowboarding this month!

      Reply

    72. I sense an important emotion (*walks back into the shadow & disappears*)

      Reply

    73. Ok this discussion is interesting and all but can I just say that Americans fucking rule. (and Colombians)

      In my area, I could never discuss these things. Except with relatives and they don’t count.
      If I asked anyone here whom they voted for, I’d get an angry look and a “I don’t have to fucking tell you that”.

      And Monkey, well I am in fact inexperienced. All I know is theory. I’m an expert when it comes to theory, bloody hell and what an expert.
      Inb4 anyone calling me a loser.

      Human sledding looks dope. Snowboarding? For the first time or what. I can give you some lessons.

      Reply

    74. @ColumbianMinkey:

      This is a looong movie, man. 😐

      Reply

    75. @dieAntagonista: I need some lessons. I can only go down on one edge and I have to stop to go down on the other edge. lol

      You are too damn intelligent to be a loser. If anyone is a loser, I am.

      Reply

    76. This was the first post when I checked this morning before classes, and I thought, “This should be entertaining”. And I was right. dieA didn’t insult anyone’s mom, which for some reason would have entertained me greatly, but otherwise a good time was had by all. Well, me at least.

      @Bodero: “Oh noes! The homersexuals are stealing are werrrds!”

      Reply

    77. @AgZed: You make me smile.

      @Puulaahi: Unacceptable. Luckily, I’m a pro. I mean, an actual pro. Only when it comes to sports though.

      Hey that rhymed.

      But yeah I’ll give you lessons anytime. I have actually won competitions and whatnot. All self taught. One single time I managed to do a 360.

      Reply

    78. @suicydking: Nope, didn’t miss a thing. No fed control, but no fed money for research, education, etc… either, always against pork, but send loads to his district, gives a token vote against, acts principled, but is just another bronze age repub. He just plays people for fools and builds his retirement fund. Make sure to buy gold, making his investment portfolio worth even more.

      Those things he is against (outside of evo and repro rights) are among what Adam Smith would have called the “commons” and thus, the responsibility of the gov to pay for and maintain. lrn2Wealth of Nations.

      As for evolution, being against it just shows he is an idiot, and being against repro and minority rights proves he is only playing the libertarian card to manipulate the people who don’t even know what the party is supposed to stand for. The Libertarian party went down the tubes back in the 90s anyways. Seriously, Bob Barr? A Christian Dominionist?

      Reply

    79. @dieAntagonista: Girls got skillZ! Yeah, I am a better skier. Probably cus I learned that initially. I’d love to be your minion student. That’s so sick that you won competitions and a 360 is simply insane.

      I gotta get you on a surfboard.:)

      Reply

    80. And besides, Adam Smith was for regulation and a progressive tax system. The guy that invented capitalism was to the left of today’s US Democratic Party. Somehow, the repubs and libertarians have managed to convince the average US citizen that laissez faire is the only form of capitalism, all else is socialism. Of course, we’ve seen how well a lack of regulation works.

      Reply

    81. holy geez, 87…no 88 responses. feuding over politics can go on forever!!

      Reply

    82. You make it sound as if theories are less important. Let me remind you that great theories often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds lol.
      ~
      I never did snowboarding but I feel this tiny orb of violent raging inconceivable power building inside of me when I think about snowboarding. Am I destined to be the best?

      Reply

    83. @Puulaahi: Haha, I have won skiing competitions as well.:p Skiing is what I learned first. It was terrible though. My mother forced me to take classes and I had to take this stupid bus. Every day I almost threw up, but just on the last day I actually did. You know where? On my teacher’s little sister. I’m still traumatised, which is probably why I refuse to ever go skiing again.

      @fracked again:

      “Paul founded a think tank, the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education (FREE).

      Paul has introduced several bills to apply tax credits toward education, including credits for parental spending on public, private, or homeschool students (Family Education Freedom Act); for salaries for all K–12 teachers, librarians, counselors, and other school personnel; and for donations to scholarships or to benefit academics (Education Improvement Tax Cut Act). In accord with his political positions, he has also introduced the Sanctity of Life Act, the We the People Act, and the American Freedom Agenda Act.”

      He might not be perfect, but he’s pretty fucking close. Every candidate had some negative sides, Ron would still have meant a huge improvement.

      Reply

    84. @token2k6:
      Nah. Turned into another “let’s all hit on die” thread, not that I’m complaining. XD

      Reply

    85. @dieAntagonista: Aww traumatized from skiing.lol

      @Sticky: I like her, so I hit on her.Figure it out. Better then a BS circular whine fest political debate.:P

      Reply

    86. @dieAntagonista:
      The tax credit for spending money on education is a back door means for sneaking money to religious schools.

      Sanctity of life act, We the people act: the constitution is great except when it stands in the way of denying people rights. This guy isn’t a libertarian, but a dominionist.

      The American Freedom Agenda Act is one of the few things he has done right.

      Take a look at the other people who supported Ron Paul, militia nuts, white supremacists, 9/11 nuts, tax protesters, etc. He’s a nut that attracts other nuts.

      Reply

    87. @Puulaahi:
      Naw, rly? I hit on her too. 😛

      Reply

    88. THE FOLLOWING PREVIEW HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR ALL AUDIENCES BY MCS:

      (gunshot)
      In a world where pictures are posted up to be commented on, and flaming is the norm, one Columbian guy dared to be different…to be Comic Relief!

      Starring…

      ColumbianMonkey: “Reporting live from the shitstorm, guy!”

      Snarky Parker: “…opinions are like assholes, eeeverybody has one!”

      tiki god: “Goddamit, follow the rules or I’ll have you turn your MCS badge in!”

      Puulaahi: “I was born to flame.”

      dieAntagonista: “Imagine an nuclear missle if you will…that’s how powerful my debating skills are.”

      CathyLong: “I swear I’m the only normal one here.”

      and introducing Bodero: “(insert generic debating statement here)”

      MCS is heating up, and this time, no one can hold back the pressure!

      (explosion)

      Comic Relief…in theaters today!

      Reply

    89. “I’m Ron Paul, and I approve of this preview.”

      Libertarians FTW

      Reply

    90. …I feel left out of the movie. 🙁

      Reply

    91. @Snarky Parker: ROFLOCOPTER HAHAAHAHA

      Woooooooooooohoooooooooooooo!

      “I was born to flame.”

      I’d watch that and produce it.

      Reply

    92. @Puulaahi: Naw, traumatised from throwing up on people. Man, it’s pretty embarrassing, I don’t recommend it.

      @fracked again:
      I know I know, but the tax credit would have been positive for everyone else as well. You know, as ridiuclous as not accepting evolution as a scientific fact is, I think Ron Paul is an honest man. And I think someone like him could have improved the lives of many Americans, even if his motives are somewhat questionable.

      “Take a look at the other people who supported Ron Paul, militia nuts, white supremacists, 9/11 nuts, tax protesters, etc.”

      Yes, I’ll give you that. That’s the only major problem I had with him. But I think Ron would have been a good start. I’m glad Obama won, but he isn’t all that he promised he would be either.

      @Snarky Parker:
      My character is the best. By far. I’m the villain though, right?

      Reply

    Leave a Comment




    Advertisements Alcohol Animated Images Art Awesome Things Batman Cars Comic Books Computers Cosplay Cute As Hell Animals Dark Humor Donald Trump Fantasy - Science Fiction Fashion Food Forum Fodder Gaming Humor Interesting LOLcats Military Movie Posters Movies Music Nature NeSFW Politics Religion Sad :( Science! Sexy Space Sports Star Trek Star Wars Technology Television Vertical Wallpaper Visual Tricks Wallpaper Weapons Women WTF X-Mas