What do ya'll think about Ron Paul?

[LA_MERC_Captain_Obvious]

Seems like he has more of a traditionalist republican point of view. a pretty stark contrast to the direction the republican party has been headed in the last 15-20 years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7d_e9lrcZ8&mode=user&search=

[LA_MERC_Wetzny]

Even this dude would be better than BillaryObam-yo-momma.... I think...

[LA_MERC_T4rg3T]

He seems to be an intelligent guy and any guy that neither party likes, might be a good candidate for president

[LA_MERC_Captain_Obvious]

Maybe that's a good gage on the quality of the person.... If neither Dems or GOP's like him then that's a great sign.

I like his stance on alot of issues, but I don't see him going anywhere. he wants too much change and most people in politics hate change and prefer the status quo. Also, he reminds me of someone else with the same initials in the same spot - Ross Perot.

[LA_MERC_th33_r00k]

I like the guy. He is dead on when he says that the stance most peeps are taking on Iraq is a cop out. I also like the fact that he calls bu11sh!t on the use of "moral obligations" by the smacktard at the end.

He will get the gang mentality boot out of his party as a contender, but I woulg heavily consider voting for him. One of the best candidates to date.

[LA_MERC_LaTech]

The problem is, when you piss off both ends of the spectrum (and how can he say what he says without pissing off the extremes?), you will have less natural support than someone that preaches the party line, regardless of what they really think. I do think he's someone to watch though...could be interesting.

[LA_MERC_Wetzny]

The Libertarians would be better represented by someone OTHER than Ron Paul. I watched his debate performance and (IMHO) the man is either criminally stupid or on heavy medication. He basically just invalidated World War II. Nice going, Congressman! And Ron Paul gets a prize for the most incoherent answer on immigration.

[LA_MERC_Dirge]

lol @ wetz luv you man

libertarian = afraid to choose/fence rider

[LA_MERC_Sabre]

I like him and I agree that our policies (like them or not) have definitely caused the hatred from the many terrorist groups. I don't think that we should stand back and let innocent people get murdered and raped but at the same time, there are consequences to these actions or 'protections'. We did cause 9-11, but we caused it by doing the right thing in protecting people who could not defend themselves....cheers!

[LA_MERC_Wetzny]

Sabre, I''ll only I respectfully disagree with you... It's nearly six years since that date, I'm not going down that road again.

Here's my 9-11 experience, written in the Washington Times and reprinted here....

BLESSED WITH REAGAN

We had written this week how popular the name "Reagan" is becoming in this country - especially for girls.

Since then, we've heard from the parents of a dozen babies named Reagan, including Jeff Lungren, communications director for the House Judiciary Committee.

"Thought you might enjoy this picture of Reagan Maria Lungren, born Oct. 23, 2002," says the proud Capitol Hill aide.

David Wetzel, of Wichita, Kan., writes to say that his now 22-month-old son, Reagan, actually saved his daddy's life - not once, but twice.

"In January 2001, I was employed with a major financial-services firm when a career opportunity became available which would have relocated me and my wife to the World Trade Center in New York," says Wetzel.

In fact, the couple excitedly agreed to accept the position and relocate to Manhattan. But within 48 hours of their life-altering decision, Marietta Wetzel learned she was pregnant. After much thought, they decided to stay in Kansas.

Their child was due to be born in August 2001, and they decided on a name - Reagan, after the 40th president of the United States. Around that time, David Wetzel was advised of meetings he'd have to attend in both Trade Center towers in New York Sept. 10-14.

But Reagan was late, and when doctors set a Sept. 7 date to induce labor, David Wetzel canceled his trip. Finally, Reagan arrived, weighing in at 10 pounds, 13 ounces.

Late in the morning of Sept. 11, "after an astonishing lack of sleep," a bleary-eyed David Wetzel was awakened by his mother-in-law and told the tragic news.

"I was speechless," he said. "By this time, both towers were down, and I was immediately in tears. I had the usual litany of questions. Then it hit me. Twice in the last nine months, my son Reagan, who was only four days old, had kept me out of the Trade Center. Twice. What a blessing."

[waltersw15]

Wetz,

That is truly amazing! Not much more I can say about that.

I also have to sort of disagree with the idea that we caused 9-11. The blame rests solely on Islamic Radicals. So if we want to follow that train of thought, then the blame would still rest on them, because we would not have been doing things over there if they were not doing things to their people that created a need for protection from us. Also, would that logic hold to say that we caused Pearl Harbor? Or maybe our global warming killed the dinosaurs?

[LA_MERC_LaTech]

Just my opinion: I would have to agree with Sabre on this...we had as much to do with 9/11 as anyone else. No, it wasn't Americans that flew the planes into the towers, ground or other buildings...but through our actions and foreign policy, we helped create these monsters (Look at the Invasion of Afghanistan by Russia and our funding of the militant groups there with arms and the emergence of Osama as a prime example, and just one example). It's the "bite the hand that feeds you" mentality.

[LA_MERC_Captain_Obvious]

I agree with Sabre and Ron Paul on that issue too. I don't think we directly caused or responsible for the 9/11 tragedy, but indirectly we are. By messing with the affairs of the nut jobs over there for so long we pissed them off so much they started to take more and more action against us. 9/11 was just a result of the US pissing off certain crazy freaks for too long. However, I don't know if it was avoidable or not. Yes Kuwait was getting rapped bad, yes there are some very bad and imorral people over there. If we have the ability and means to stop it.... I think we should. kind of like being in hte 12th grade and seeing a 9th grade bully beating up a 7th grader after school. You step in and stop the injustice.
However, I don't think we should police them. If the UN wants to police them, fine, let it be a UN led force, but the US as a country should stay out of the affairs of other countries. (and yes I know that the US military makes up a large portion of the UN forces, but that crap needs to stop too)
on the subject of the UN, when looking further into this guy, I found he introduced legistation to remove the US from the UN. it got shot down pretty quickly, but I would like to see politicians debate that possiblity a little further.

[LA_MERC_T4rg3T]

Wetz,

That is truly amazing! Not much more I can say about that.

I also have to sort of disagree with the idea that we caused 9-11. The blame rests solely on Islamic Radicals. So if we want to follow that train of thought, then the blame would still rest on them, because we would not have been doing things over there if they were not doing things to their people that created a need for protection from us. Also, would that logic hold to say that we caused Pearl Harbor? Or maybe our global warming killed the dinosaurs?


What designates the US as the protector of the world? You wouldn't want your neighbors coming into your home to "protect" you or your kids because they felt like someone was being mistreated. Why does the US feel that we have to go into everyone else's home to "protect" them? Let the UN handle it.

Ron Paul did have it right on one thing. If we are going to go to war against an opponent, go to war, bypass UN sanctions, kick ass, and then get the hell out. We don't need to mess around. It almost reminds me of what the Vietnam war was like. Send a limitted amount of troups to fight a never ending war in a jungle. Our soldiers are trained to go in and kill. Not to police a city. I mean, how do you expect them to fight with women and children are holding the bombs and guns (besides not leading them as much)?

[waltersw15]

What designates the US as the protector of the world? You wouldn't want your neighbors coming into your home to "protect" you or your kids because they felt like someone was being mistreated. Why does the US feel that we have to go into everyone else's home to "protect" them? Let the UN handle it.


To some point, I can agree with this. I, at times, think we should not interfere with trying to protect people in other countries. However, if you see a bully beating the crap out of a defenseless kid, do you just watch it happen everyday, and think one day that kid will be able to defend themself, or do you eventually get tired of seeing that kid get beat up everyday and try to help him out?

In regards to using the analogy of whether I would like it if somebody came into my house to protect my wife and child because they thought I was mistreating them, if I am mistreating them somebody should step in. Would I like it? No, because I am the abuser. However, my wife and child would probably be thankful that somebody came to their rescue.

Do I think the US should be the world protectors? No, but unfortunately, the US is who everyone calls on for help. And why is that?, because we are the usually the only ones who will help.

And then again, with this line of thinking about not protecting people, then the world should have just let the holocaust go on unimpeded, because that was Germany's business; not ours.


Ron Paul did have it right on one thing. If we are going to go to war against an opponent, go to war, bypass UN sanctions, kick ass, and then get the hell out. We don't need to mess around. It almost reminds me of what the Vietnam war was like. Send a limitted amount of troups to fight a never ending war in a jungle. Our soldiers are trained to go in and kill. Not to police a city. I mean, how do you expect them to fight with women and children are holding the bombs and guns (besides not leading them as much)?

I can agree with this stance. The military is not the police. Sometimes, I think when it comes to Iraq, should it really matter who gets in power over there? We went over there and removed the powerful Saddam Hussein. That should serve as enough warning to the next leader that you do not mess with the US. If they haven't learned their lesson, then rinse and repeat. Ask Morimar Ghadafi if he learned the lesson that Ronald Reagan taught him. How many times have we had to go back and bomb Japan since WWII? None, I guess they learned their lesson. How about Germany? They didn't get it the first time, but it seems like they now understand the message after repeating the course.

To me, if the people of Iraq truly want us to leave their country, then we should leave. But, they better work really hard to get people in power who will not do things to "piss us off." So if the extremists are in power and they start bombing US targets. Guess what? It is time for school again.

I think if the UN could actually work to benefit the world instead of it being a forum for countries to vote their anti-US vote all of the time, it would work better. However, since the UN is the forum where many countries feel that they can tell the US "No" all of the time regardless of how beneficial it may be, nothing ever seems to get accomplished there.

It's funny how many people hate the US, but they always ask for US dollars anytime their countries are hit by catastrophes and such.

[LA_MERC_Wetzny]

Well said, I concur... Like Bill Paxson said in Aliens "yeah, I agree.... I say we take off and the Nuke the FOCKERS from orbit.."

[LA_MERC_Bacowrath]

Well, I won't go into a lengthy explaination of why I believe what I believe, because no one will care, but here are a few points:

1. We in NO way "caused" 9/11. I am not going to argue blunders in foreign policy, because they are certainly there, however, to say that we "caused" those turds to fly their planes into the towers is irresponsible logic. It would be like saying that a woman "caused" herself to be raped because she had a "sexy" walk....just dumb.

2. I won't rehash my opinion about being the "world police", but I do believe, from my own experiences, that some people DO want to be defended, and as a free nation, I believe that we have an obligation to promote and defend freedom where ever it is needed, or wanted. The idea that you would not want your neighbor to come over and mess with the way you are handling your children is a valid one. However, if you ARE mistreating your children, YOU may not want someone coming over to settle things, but I am SURE that the kids would'nt mind a hand. Same thing in another country, OF COURSE some commie pinko dictator wouldnt want us coming over to mess in his afairs, but the people who are being raped, tortured, and killed sure would'nt mind a little help. I can tell you that first hand from the 5 year old little girls who's ******'s I had to repair because some islamic limp **** wasnt man enough to get a real woman....I digress before I get into trouble :)

3. I agree with the fact that if Iraqi's want us to leave, we should go, but how do you take a valid poll??? If you ask in the streets, the people are scared to respond, if you have ballot boxes put up how do you know that the people who WANT us there won't be held in their homes until the polling is over. It is a hard call to make. All of the guys that I know over there say that the MAJORITY of folk WANT us there UNTIL things are put in order. Now, I think that the "putting things in order" is the tough part. We need a better plan.

4. The UN is a POS antiquated organization that was NEVER intended to make "global laws", nor enforce them. The UN was set up for communication, and diplomatic relations, it was NEVER intended to make laws that superceed our Constitution (Which thanks to ol Billy Bob Clinton, they now do) Thats all I have to say about that.

[LA_MERC_T4rg3T]

I don't think anyone "meant" that we directly caused 9/11. I think they implied that things we did or didn't do lead to the 9/11 attacks.

Who wants us in Iraq? The government or the people? If I remember right, the people are the ones shooting at our troops. The people are the ones that want us out of Iraq. I don't remember them crying and begging for help.

Iraq pilots didn't fly planes into the twin towers, a terrorist cell did. We went to Iraq after Osama. Sadam was just in the way plus the fact that we held a pretty big grudge against him in the past. What better reason to go after him than by putting him in with Osama? Where are all these "Intelligence reports"? WMD's? As a concerned citizen, I'd like to read these reports.

People need to wake up. The government is not your friend. The government does not do things in the best interest of the people. Government officials are there for the power and retirement benifits. How can people who come from political families, who live in million dollar homes and went to the best schools, ever think that they are going to go into politicial office to fight for the rights of the middle class people? They have no clue what the middle class is nor do they care.

If the US is going to the World "Justice Fighters" then we need to be compensated for the lives and money lost during these events. What ever happened to the spoils of war... hmmm.. then again, the government may already have things worked out for themselves. To bad the families of the dead soldiers won't see any of it. I think they signed up in the military to protect our country, not police others.


http://images.wikia.com/uncyclopedia/images/thumb/2/21/Founding-fathers-of-america.jpg/250px-Founding-fathers-of-america.jpg

[LA_MERC_Bacowrath]

I don't think anyone "meant" that we directly caused 9/11. I think they implied that things we did or didn't do lead to the 9/11 attacks.

Who wants us in Iraq? The government or the people? If I remember right, the people are the ones shooting at our troops. The people are the ones that want us out of Iraq. I don't remember them crying and begging for help.

Iraq pilots didn't fly planes into the twin towers, a terrorist cell did. We went to Iraq after Osama. Sadam was just in the way plus the fact that we held a pretty big grudge against him in the past. What better reason to go after him than by putting him in with Osama? Where are all these "Intelligence reports"? WMD's? As a concerned citizen, I'd like to read these reports.

People need to wake up. The government is not your friend. The government does not do things in the best interest of the people. Government officials are there for the power and retirement benifits. How can people who come from political families, who live in million dollar homes and went to the best schools, ever think that they are going to go into politicial office to fight for the rights of the middle class people? They have no clue what the middle class is nor do they care.

If the US is going to the World "Justice Fighters" then we need to be compensated for the lives and money lost during these events. What ever happened to the spoils of war... hmmm.. then again, the government may already have things worked out for themselves. To bad the families of the dead soldiers won't see any of it. I think they signed up in the military to protect our country, not police others.


I hear ya man. I don't like seeing people that I personally know and trained getting blown apart over there, but sometimes policing other countries protects our own. We policed Germany, and Japan for years after the war, and they are still on a short leash when it comes to how they can build their millitaries. I'm not saying that what we did was justified, or that the government is our "friend", I'm just saying that we can't just up and leave now. That would be worse than letting Sadam stay around to kill his own people.

As far as "them shooting at us", the areas where most of the fighting is taking place is relatively small, and the "people" that are fighting us are not all Iraqi. According to a friend of mine high in the ranks, 90% of the insurgents are Jordanian, Iranian, and Pakistani. It has nothing to do with people wanting us there or not, it has EVERYTHING to do with a religion that promises rewards in "heaven" for those who kill anyone who is not a muslim. Those folk just see an opportunity to cash in on some blessings from Allah.

I agree that they should allow the "spoils of war" clause back in effect for the soldiers over there, and to use that countries natural resources to fund our "police work". I know what fallen soldiers families get when they die. I delivered 3 checks with several metals to the families of those who served with me and fell in battle. It is peanuts, and yes, it should be updated. I think that the families should AT LEAST receive a full pension untill the benefeciary (ie: wife) dies. BTW we signed up to serve our country, not just protect it. Sometimes that means doing things that you don't agree with.

I don't "like" this war any more than the next person. Hell, I didn't LIKE the combat that I was in, but like I said before, you can't understand what is going on over there, as far as the poeple go, until you have been there.

[LA_MERC_T4rg3T]

']I hear ya man. I don't like seeing people that I personally know and trained getting blown apart over there, but sometimes policing other countries protects our own. We policed Germany, and Japan for years after the war, and they are still on a short leash when it comes to how they can build their millitaries. I'm not saying that what we did was justified, or that the government is our "friend", I'm just saying that we can't just up and leave now. That would be worse than letting Sadam stay around to kill his own people.


I wanted to bomb Iraq from the first day of the war. It would have saved more american lives and money even if we rebuilt afterwards. What we did in the war on Japan and Germany is the definition of war. Those were the days when other countries and people were afraid of the USA. Its a different story now-a-days. Like I said in an earlier post, if you are going to go to war on a country, go to war. Countries will either leave you alone due to respect or because they are afraid of you. I can deal with either one.



I don't "like" this war any more than the next person. Hell, I didn't LIKE the combat that I was in, but like I said before, you can't understand what is going on over there, as far as the poeple go, until you have been there.

I have a lot of friends that have went and came back multiple times. I have one still training others who are headed there. I also wouldn't mind serving and country that SERVED ME! But we all know that isn't the case.

[LA_MERC_Bacowrath]

I have a lot of friends that have went and came back multiple times. I have one still training others who are headed there. I also wouldn't mind serving and country that SERVED ME! But we all know that isn't the case.

I salute your friends, I wish them a safe return. If you are waiting for ANY country to serve you, you will be very disapointed. Not that I like the guy at all, but I do like what he said: "Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country." ~JFK Part of the reason that this country is as messed up as it is, is that too many people talk, and do nothing. If you want change, you have to MAKE change. Oh, I have had MANY people tell me "What can I do??? I am a nobody!!! I don't have any power!!!" and I always say to them: "What have you done to try? Have you organized anyone for a cause? Have you bonded together with others who want change???" the answer is always a smart allek remark, or silence followed by a smirk. We ALL want change, but you HAVE to try and make a difference yourself.

[LA_MERC_T4rg3T]

I said "serve me" but I meant "serve the needs of the people". You know, the people that put them in office.

Oh yeah, I work and pay taxes. Work puts a big damper on attending meeting and marches. I also vote when the time comes to vote and try to get others to vote also even though the electoral college has the final say in the presidency. I've written my representative a few times to no avail and also spoke with a couple of state reps in person. They always say that there is not much they can do.

What JFK said over 44 years ago was a good quote but after 44 years of people doing their part for the country, the government hasn't done much for the people.

[LA_MERC_Bacowrath]

Well dude, obviously we won't come to terms with this :) I think that we are pretty much both thinking the same things, with a few different ideas on how to get there. I wasn't insinuating that you personally were'nt doing anything, I just meant that the nation as a whole has become lithargic concerning the welfare of our nation. I would'nt give up on what you ARE doing, this nation wasnt formed over night, and it won't change overnight either.

As much as you think the government is not doing for you, just remember that you have the freedom to complain :) I'm tellin you man, there STILL aint no better place to live out there.

[LA_MERC_LaTech]

I still think it's time for a revolution.

[LA_MERC_Sabre]

']
1. We in NO way "caused" 9/11. I am not going to argue blunders in foreign policy, because they are certainly there, however, to say that we "caused" those turds to fly their planes into the towers is irresponsible logic. It would be like saying that a woman "caused" herself to be raped because she had a "sexy" walk....just dumb.

I think the point I was making, using your example was this....

even though the girlt that got raped did not 'cause' the attack, she still made a choice to go walking around wherever she was. She made a choice to go on that date, she made a choice to walk in the park alone. I agree she did not intentionally cause this, but it did happen because of choices SHE made.

Same for the 9-11, we made choices and we have to pay the consequences...I think we made the right choices though...




Wetz...that's an amazing story! all I can say is wow!