My Sincere Hope For Obama

[acptulsa]

Quantized, we wish to draw a line in the sand. The law enforcement agencies had all the information they needed to stop the 9/11 attacks and they dropped the ball. This is well documented. After dropping the ball, Bush used them as an excuse to curtail civil liberties by provoking a knee-jerk reaction in a pissed off populace. This is the largest curtailment of civil liberties in the nation's history. Habeus corpus is de facto repealed, even though it is part of the Constitution.

The dangers of this are manifold. They are listening to our phone calls. They are trying to regulate this very free speech we are engaged in now. Obama decries the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act with flowery language even as he votes for it. How is this different from Dubya with his signing statements? He decries this invasion of our liberties, yet helps to sign it into law. You decry certain of his stances yet will vote to put him in office. Where is the change? Where is our hope in this? We wish to draw a line in the sand and fight whosoever will cross it. The Constitution is that line. We are fighting. Join us or go away, please. Time to decide whether you're on the side of freedom or the status quo. Which side are you on?

Aratus, a horse race is exciting and all, but we're not track touts trying to set odds on stallions and mares. This sort of bull is the usual mainstream media method of distracting voters from the questions they should be asking--like who is fit to run this nation? Like who will do what Dubya hasn't done and honor the oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution for our children and grandchildren? We have bigger fish to fry than Obamaleadsclintonbyanosecomingaroundtheclubhouseturnwithmccainbackbytwolengthsandetc. If you can't add substance to our debate, you're waggling your fingers over that keyboard to absolutely no effect. If we want horserace rhetoric, there's certainly no shortage of it out there for us to choose from--and no, you're not better at it than the professionals. If you want to find the winner and place your bets, go find a bookie. There are none here.

 

[amy31416]

Hey. talking to you is also tiresome esp trying to defend myself against your outright baseless accusations. i create a thread to question the plausibility of voting against McCain by voting for the democratic nominee. You accuse me of having an agenda. i create a thread to question if US have convincing intelligence of AlQeada in Pakisatan, would RP vote to strike, you again make that ridiculous comment that "your man obama will attack pakistan for you". You are the one who is fanning the forest fire. this is a forum. Tell me how these questions which i posed are illegitimate? Tell you what. i started as a Clinton supporter because i like her pro-science policy. then i learned about RP through the debates. i am sold with his messgae of liberty. then i learned more about other candidates. i am always open to the truth. As a scientist, i learned that if the facts does not tally with the theory, change the theory and not the facts. i apply the same pragmatism to undertsanding politics. i find no pleasure engaging in a discussion wtih you when all you do is making blanket statement like "obama will attack pakisatan" etc. Also, pertaining to 'voting for lesser evil' i do not need education on this. Safe it. i do realise that lesser evil voters would have to face shame and regret when their candidate they vote turn out contrary to expectation. But i am not one of those who attempt to delude myself that the politician i voted in office is a perfect candidate, in order to prevent painful cognitive dissonance. Yes, in your mind the wasted vote is the unprincipled lesser evil vote, but in reality a wasted vote is when you vote knowing your candidate will not win... you can say all you want to make you make you cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost by voting for principles.. but i do not cherish this kind of feel good thingy. To each his own. Thats what i say.





"They are all the same" i hear this so many times. But please convinc"They are all the same"e me how they are all the same when even RP suggested in the debate they have much similarity and attract the same young crowd. Try convince me Obama is not anti-iraq war. i am open to what you have to say. i am not receptive to blanket statement like "They are all the same".

Once again, Quantized, I'll point out that YOU are the one who is trying to push Obama on RONPAULFORUMS.COM. 95+% of your posts are about him. And you say that I'm fanning the flames? NO. I am rebutting every ridiculous argument you have in your attempts to push your agenda.

Now, as far as it goes with you being a 'scientist'--I'll ask again, what kind of scientist are you? You choose a candidate without doing any research on them? How does that jibe with your scientist self? Just so you know, I'm a scientist and have serious doubts that you are, but then again I've worked with a lot of scientists who must have gotten their degrees from the 'net. One of the principles of making a scientific decision is being informed. All of us who are arguing against you know far more than you do about the candidate you are pushing.

Do BO and RP attract some of the similar crowd, yes. Why you ask? Isn't that obvious with very little thought? Many of the younger people who found out about RP did so via the 'net, not all of these people actually researched Paul-but when tides changed and BO became popular, they jumped off the RP bandwagon and right onto the BO bandwagon, again, without doing research, but just based on what was "cool." BO is a far better public speaker than RP and uses a lot of the same techniques in oration that televangelists do. But don't you realize that he has changed his stance on the war, just to tell people what they want to hear? He's Dr. Feelgood. While RP goes into very complex economics theories that ordinary people know nothing about, but if you do the homework, you'll see that he's speaking the truth.

BO, HRC and JMc are all the same: 1. Very similar economic policies, overspending being key. McCain's proposals are far lower (which looks great on the surface), but it's a lie because he can't continue the war(s) without a hell of a lot more money and people. 2. Iraq war/Afghanistan/Iran/Pakistan. HRC and BO "won't take Iran off the table" they said it, not me. JMc definitely wants to go into Iran. Obama definitely wants to go into Pakistan. HRC has not mentioned any other country as far as I know. 3. Gun Control-all the same. JMc is like a Dem in this regard. 4. Patriot Act-All voted for it's renewal. 5. All voted for continuing the war in Iraq via funding.

The list goes on. You need to start doing your OWN research rather than submit to being told what to think. The burden of proof on whether or not BO is the best choice is on YOU because YOU are the one trying to convince other people to vote for him. And once again, I'll say--you are on ronpaulforums.com. We are voting for Ron Paul via write-in OR possibly a third-party candidate that he endorses (if that person measures up.)

I'm NOT going to be the kind of person who is wishy-washy about who they support. And someone who doesn't think critically, or research who they are voting for is certainly not a person that can convince me to do anything, much less change my vote.

 

[brandon]

What amy said + GTFO YOU OBAMA TROLLS.

I wish the mods would ban people more around here. Anyone who's sole mission here is promoting another candidate with views completely contrary to RP should be banned ASAP. Now I know what redstate felt like when they were invaded by Paul supporters.

Go here www.barackhusseinobamaforums.com

If it doesnt exist, then create it. Talk about him all you want over there. Please leave us alone. I hope you enjoy your slavery.

 

[acptulsa]

Simply put, Obama is a bad choice on the war because he won't commit to getting out. Try to put yourself in Iraqi shoes, Obamanations. If you're in one of the power structures, you don't make the compromises necessary for self rule because you're too busy trying to figure out how to use the screwed up situation of our occupation to your advantage. Besides, what would be the point of trying to rule yourselves if you're occupied? If you're just an ordinary citizen, you're occupied. Do you like it? Don't you try to resist our soldiers (which then gives us an excuse to say they aren't ready for us to leave)?

The choice you espouse is a false choice. All the major candidates are major candidates and not subject to the MSM blackout because they're in the military industrial complex's pocket and that's why they aren't promoting realistic approaches. How obvious is that?

 

[amy31416]

Quantized, if you really want to help ensure that McCain doesn't get in the White House, do something viable--Read up on this website and donate, they need the help:

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/cin_iwanttohelp.htm

See this thread: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=124710

That's a lot more substantial than prattling on about Obama.

 

[acptulsa]

Word

 

[Aratus]

jennifer flowers went public again...

she wants to sell historic relics.

normally this would be a totally
off topic observation save for the fact
that hillary clinton is trying to win
texas, ohio, vermont and rhode island.

in good faith, people can now directly vote for
ron paul. i think obama is going to have a big
lead over ms. clinton in the next four days

 

[quantized]

Once again, Quantized, I'll point out that YOU are the one who is trying to push Obama on RONPAULFORUMS.COM. 95+% of your posts are about him. And you say that I'm fanning the flames? NO. I am rebutting every ridiculous argument you have in your attempts to push your agenda.

Oh yeah. There you go again. Your dare to bet all your money on your claim that "95+% of my posts are about BO"? A classic example of what i call you out on... bassless accusations. My Ridiculous argument? Huh. Tell me now. How is voting for lesser of evil ridiculous? If you have to choose between killing a 100,000 and 50,000 people, and i choose the latter, how is this ridiculous?! Yeah. and you will go with your higher than thou reasoning of not choosing either as a principled choice. Hypocritical is what you are becasue you choose not to save the 50,000. If this is what it takes to be a principle person, i rather do the 'unprincipled'. Next time when you think you are a libertarian, look yourself twice and trice in the mirror. Will a believer in liberty silence other people just because he has a different opinion? Again. Hypocrite.

Now, as far as it goes with you being a 'scientist'--I'll ask again, what kind of scientist are you? You choose a candidate without doing any research on them? How does that jibe with your scientist self? Just so you know, I'm a scientist and have serious doubts that you are, but then again I've worked with a lot of scientists who must have gotten their degrees from the 'net. One of the principles of making a scientific decision is being informed. All of us who are arguing against you know far more than you do about the candidate you are pushing.

Cool. Another of your personal attack. You doubt my degree? i can tell you i got my PhD from a world renowned university. i am a condensed matter scientist. Go ahead and challenge me on bandstructure, quantum and transport theory. Now what kind of scientist are you then. Yeah. You can boast all you want about how much you know more than me, if you consider making blanket statement as being knowledgeble. i had ask you a simple question earlier and all you know is to dock and making personal attack rather than engaging in intelligent argument. Let me ask you again. If US have overwhelming intelligence that AlQeada is in Paskitan, should RP approve the congree bill to attack the SPECIFIC target when Pakisatan refuse to corporate. Let me see how you answer this.

 

[Aratus]

gennifer flowers link!

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/02/helloisthatu.html

 

[quantized]

Kucinich, another politician whom i respect had lend his support to Obama. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/01/542614.aspx

So Amy, is Kucinich also wrong? What makes you the all-knowing person that your opinion/judgement of obama is more accurate than Kucinich's?

 

[jason43]

I hate to say this, but I think that Hillary is probably the least worrysome of the three... hear me out...

McCain- Continued wars, poor understanding of economics, domestic "security" hawk = disaster.

Obama- wants to raise taxes, pretty much declare war on business, government healthcare, interventionist foreign policy apart from Iraq, ex:'peacekeeping' missions to Africa, etc...

Clinton- judging by her husband, would be moderate on most issues because she is more concerned about her legacy than about anything else. She also follows the mood of the country, i/e she was supportive of the war, now that the mood has shifted, she shifts with it. She wouldn't go to war with Iran because she knows the disaster that would result.

Economically (the only measure that matters) Clinton is the best choice (of the three)... Obama second and McCain worst. McCain doesnt get that the economy is affected by the war. Obama thinks that the government can solve everything through playing Robin Hood and by regulating everything. Hillary has been forced to the left, but if you look at her history, and her husbands presidency, she would be much more moderate than the other two.

And, no, I am no fan of Hilldogg but given the "lesser of evils" I think she would be it.

 

[acptulsa]

Yeah, Amy, you do something bassless? What the hell kind of jazz is that? You can't have jazz without a bass! I, too, think you should look in the mirror in a trice if you won't believe his claim that your vote for Ron Paul will kill fifty thousand. After all, he knows condensed matter, so you should take his word on political matters.

After all, if the liberal Kuchinich is endorsing another liberal, Lord knows it's no longer safe to be a true conservative!

 

[acptulsa]

And, no, I am no fan of Hilldogg but given the "lesser of evils" I think she would be it.

Damned with faint praise. You people haven't learned yet that as long as we continue to play their game of Pick the Least Evil we won't get anywhere. Someone has to stand up and say, we will vote on principle no matter how often the MSM tells us it is a waste, no matter how seldom we hear our candidate's name, because until enough of us do this critical mass will never be achieved and nothing will change for the better.

You can join us now or you can wait for the ship of state to sink further before you join us. But if you won't lead, and you'd rather follow down the garden path again this time, get the hell out of the way!

 

[jason43]

Damned with faint praise. You people haven't learned yet that as long as we continue to play their game of Pick the Least Evil we won't get anywhere. Someone has to stand up and say, we will vote on principle no matter how often the MSM tells us it is a waste, no matter how seldom we hear our candidate's name, because until enough of us do this critical mass will never be achieved and nothing will change for the better.

You can join us now or you can wait for the ship of state to sink further before you join us. But if you won't lead, and you'd rather follow down the garden path again this time, get the hell out of the way!

I'll be voting third party for the record... and Hillary won't be the nominee in either case...

This was just my thoughts on the three.

 

[amy31416]

Yeah, Amy, you do something bassless? What the hell kind of jazz is that? You can't have jazz without a bass! I, too, think you should look in the mirror in a trice if you won't believe his claim that your vote for Ron Paul will kill fifty thousand. After all, he knows condensed matter, so you should take his word on political matters.

After all, if the liberal Kuchinich is endorsing another liberal, Lord knows it's no longer safe to be a true conservative!

I used to have a Rickenbacher bass, so yes, he got me on that. I am, in fact, bassless (sic).

Our alleged PhD of condensed matter who had to do scads of research, can't take a half-hour to research Obama.

I'm merely a chemist and only have a crappy master's degree in biotech from JHU, no wonder I'm so inferior to this obvious genius who can't form sentences or spell (despite the fact that there are spell checkers.)

And you're so right about Kucinich.

 

[acptulsa]

I'll be voting third party for the record... and Hillary won't be the nominee in either case...

This was just my thoughts on the three.

I bow to you, sir. Pray don't vote third party for the record, vote for the children who would breathe free. And I expect you're right about Clinton in more ways than one. If there would be any bright spots in a win by her, though, I expect it would be when people realize it has been Bush Clinton Bush Clinton and finally begin to ask themselves what the hell they think they're doing.

 

[quantized]

Yeah, Amy, you do something bassless? What the hell kind of jazz is that? You can't have jazz without a bass! I, too, think you should look in the mirror in a trice if you won't believe his claim that your vote for Ron Paul will kill fifty thousand. After all, he knows condensed matter, so you should take his word on political matters.

After all, if the liberal Kuchinich is endorsing another liberal, Lord knows it's no longer safe to be a true conservative!

Political Science? Together they resonates an oxymoron. Liberal or conservatism? a balance ideology i would pursue. Theorizing practice or practicing theory, the latter my daytime job, the former a worthless pursuit for the idealist. Political Science? Think again.

Vote Ron Paul as a principled vote. i endorse. Vote Obama as a lesser of evil vote. Crucified him. Silence him. Of muffled justice and silenced liberty, you practise both. Your perfect answer, I seek and yet to find. The perfect compromise is all I am left.

 

[amy31416]

Oh yeah. There you go again. Your dare to bet all your money on your claim that "95+% of my posts are about BO"? A classic example of what i call you out on... bassless accusations. My Ridiculous argument? Huh. Tell me now. How is voting for lesser of evil ridiculous? If you have to choose between killing a 100,000 and 50,000 people, and i choose the latter, how is this ridiculous?! Yeah. and you will go with your higher than thou reasoning of not choosing either as a principled choice. Hypocritical is what you are becasue you choose not to save the 50,000. If this is what it takes to be a principle person, i rather do the 'unprincipled'. Next time when you think you are a libertarian, look yourself twice and trice in the mirror. Will a believer in liberty silence other people just because he has a different opinion? Again. Hypocrite.

All I have to do is look at "all posts by quantized" take a look at it yourself. I've already explained the "lesser of two evils" as ridiculous several times. You can take some initiative and look it up yourself. Your "reasoning" that a vote for Ron Paul is a vote to kill 50,000 more people is inane.

Did you go to that anti-McCain website? Did you actually do anything to support your anti-war principles aside from drone on and on about BO?

How am I silencing you, crybaby? I haven't suggested you be banned. I haven't reported your posts. You are so immature that you can't take the heat when you pimp another candidate on ronpaulforums?

Cool. Another of your personal attack. You doubt my degree? i can tell you i got my PhD from a world renowned university. i am a condensed matter scientist. Go ahead and challenge me on bandstructure, quantum and transport theory. Now what kind of scientist are you then. Yeah. You can boast all you want about how much you know more than me, if you consider making blanket statement as being knowledgeble. i had ask you a simple question earlier and all you know is to dock and making personal attack rather than engaging in intelligent argument. Let me ask you again. If US have overwhelming intelligence that AlQeada is in Paskitan, should RP approve the congree bill to attack the SPECIFIC target when Pakisatan refuse to corporate. Let me see how you answer this.

Yeah, I do doubt your degree. I can tell a thoughful person from one who isn't. YOU admitted to not knowing squat about BO aside from what you've been fed by the media "Hope!" "Yes We Can!"

If you know anything about scientists, you know that we are often obsessive-compulsive when it comes to research on ANY topic. That's why, when I found Paul, I spent an entire weekend and every day since, obsessively researching political things in my off-time. Mostly because this war is so tragic and devastating.

I've made every effort to actually answer your questions, but I'm becoming rather frustrated by your seeming REFUSAL to educate yourself from independent sources. Why the HELL would you come to a RP forum to push BO not knowing anything substantial about him, then ask people AT THIS FORUM why you're wrong?

Can't you realize that you're asking for information from a biased source? If you know anything about research you should know, first and foremost that YOU DON'T GO TO A BIASED SOURCE FOR INFORMATION. And you wonder why I question that you're a scientist? I'm more sure than ever that you aren't. While I get a lot of good information here, I always recognize that the source is biased and I research anything that I question, even if it's positive info about RP, OUTSIDE OF THIS SITE.

Good GOD man.

 

[acptulsa]

This nation has been compromised all to hell. We stand by our line in the sand. Practice what you will--someone had to discover the principles. If they hadn't, you would have nothing to practice but alchemy--and with Obama, we will have nothing but alchemy in practice. Enjoy. I know you won't.

 

[amy31416]

This nation has been compromised all to hell. We stand by our line in the sand. Practice what you will--someone had to discover the principles. If they hadn't, you would have nothing to practice but alchemy--and with Obama, we will have nothing but alchemy in practice. Enjoy. I know you won't.

Don't you go smearing alchemy by associating it with Obama. My profession has it's roots in alchemy

Although I have learned that you can't make gold from manure. We've been trying to do that for years in this country.