What the Hell Ron Paul?

[christagious]

+911

I guess the campaign is strong enough to turn people off that have questions. Even if it was troll bait, showing a little class by educating the OP might result in a vote for RP rather than someone pissed off voting for McLaim.

I agree here too, TwiLexia showed some class and simply countered each point that the OP made. Some of the others were more adept to scream "TROLL", "MODERATOR PLEASE". Why do we jump on getting the moderators on here so quickly? Let's give people such as TwiLexia a chance to counterargue and maybe win a vote for Ron Paul instead of taking aways somebody's freedom of speech? Just because somebody has some criticism doesn't make them a troll.

A troll is somebody who comes on here and says something like "Ron Paul can't win, he's unelectable, he's too old fashioned, the constitution works in theory, BUT.."

 

[christagious]

Yah, blah blah blah

You fucking spam troll in every thread whenever someone disagrees with you or brings up the slightest negative views. In real life many of you go around and attack media personalities and say vulgar things to them because of your devotion to a man not a cause..

If you cared so much about the cause which is freedom you wouldn't be tainting it with such vulgar behavior and language.
many of you will probably vote for one of the "top" candidates and some of you will go back to partisan bickering as usual. But anyways I'm ranting now so whatever.

You make some pretty good points here other than the fact that YOU are using vulgar language as well. I agree though, people on here complain about how unprofessional some of the other candidates acted on a debate, but you go on here, and....well, the posts speak for themselves. I've read articles that said that the number one thing that will hurt the campaign is the supporters, and I think that can be said to be true in some cases. But there are a lot of good people on here who will logically argue and debate instead of relying on attacks and calling people 'troll". there are good people on here and there are a lot of hard working people out there trying to get Ron Paul elected.

 

[TwiLeXia]

Im Just saying, Ron Paul's positions on pork and excise taxes are contradictory to the rest of his libertarian platform.

As a libertarian, I believe taxation ought to be equal, and low. THus, I reject excise taxes. They are unfair to the participants in the taxed market, disproportionate to other sales taxes, and overall non-libertarian. I figured Ron Paul would also be in opposition to such taxes. It is the belief in individual liberty and limited government that makes up the heart of libertarianism. It is the ultamite libertarian fear of the state jeopardizing the life, liberty, or property of an individual. I am disappointed Ron Paul doesnt share such views.

ON Pork:
For the longest time, I thought Ron Paul didnt bring pork home to his district. I thought he leveled with his people. I thought he must have told them, pork barrel spending is wrong, I will not engage in it, and will try to get rid of it in all states. Hell, if McCain can do it, why cant Paul?
I thought Ron Paul was the exception. I thought he didnt play to the game of DC, I didnt think he thought "everyones doing it, why not me".
Truly disappointing


And while the personal income tax is bad, so is the corporate. IN the end, wealth is not held by companies, it is held by individuals, so a corporations profits will always to to individuals, or be invested. Thus, corporate income taxes do take money away from some individual, be it a shareholder, worker, or consumer(though indirectly).


I am a Ron Paul support, have been for a while. I dont visit this site often, but I talk politics constantly, with my friends and such. They know me as a Ron Paul supporter, and at a political study program i went on, more than half the people didnt know my name, but knew me as, and called me, Ron Paul. Ron Paul is by far the best candidate, and he has my vote, but still. We are all libertarians, cant we criticize Paul when he deviates from his libertarianism?

Most of your argument comes from the basis that Dr. Paul is a complete libertarian - that is false. Dr. Paul is a conservative first with libertarian ideologies. I don't like labeling people as "conservative" or "libertarian," but unfortunately it seems like everyone else does.

Notice how Dr. Paul rarely, if ever, calls himself a libertarian. Sure, people introduce him as such, but he rarely does. Sure, it might be because he is running for the Republican Nom. right now and can't be caught on camera doing so. But I also highly doubt that Dr. Paul in his mind truly thinks that he is a libertarian infiltrating the Republican party - in fact, I would say that he more likely believes himself a (true) Republican, a fiscal conservative. That doesn't mean he doesn't believe in libertarianism - but it's just that he is more a Republican and/or (true) conservative. After all, he was a Republican congressman for 10 terms.

But I still call for an end to these "labels." Why don't we judge Dr. Paul's positions on whether they are right or wrong rather than if they deviate from one particular school of thought? This is the result of media propaganda and contemporary politics, that for some reason you are judged more by popularity or the attractiveness of your positions to the party rather than the quality of your ideas.

 

[DealzOnWheelz]

Im Just saying, Ron Paul's positions on pork and excise taxes are contradictory to the rest of his libertarian platform.

As a libertarian, I believe taxation ought to be equal, and low. THus, I reject excise taxes. They are unfair to the participants in the taxed market, disproportionate to other sales taxes, and overall non-libertarian. I figured Ron Paul would also be in opposition to such taxes. It is the belief in individual liberty and limited government that makes up the heart of libertarianism. It is the ultamite libertarian fear of the state jeopardizing the life, liberty, or property of an individual. I am disappointed Ron Paul doesnt share such views.

ON Pork:
For the longest time, I thought Ron Paul didnt bring pork home to his district. I thought he leveled with his people. I thought he must have told them, pork barrel spending is wrong, I will not engage in it, and will try to get rid of it in all states. Hell, if McCain can do it, why cant Paul?
I thought Ron Paul was the exception. I thought he didnt play to the game of DC, I didnt think he thought "everyones doing it, why not me".
Truly disappointing


And while the personal income tax is bad, so is the corporate. IN the end, wealth is not held by companies, it is held by individuals, so a corporations profits will always to to individuals, or be invested. Thus, corporate income taxes do take money away from some individual, be it a shareholder, worker, or consumer(though indirectly).


I am a Ron Paul support, have been for a while. I dont visit this site often, but I talk politics constantly, with my friends and such. They know me as a Ron Paul supporter, and at a political study program i went on, more than half the people didnt know my name, but knew me as, and called me, Ron Paul. Ron Paul is by far the best candidate, and he has my vote, but still. We are all libertarians, cant we criticize Paul when he deviates from his libertarianism?

HHMMMM.....

COuld that be why he is not running as a Libertarian??

Your judgement on corporate taxes being wrong is not supported by the constitution. The constitution really only allows corporations to be taxed on income, because income is Profits or gains. THe personal income tax is unconstitutional because there is no Profit or Gain because you are trading your time and services in exchange for money.

On Pork- Earmarks do not increase the taxes. Citizens are not taxed in order to fill earmarks. Earmarks are to appropriate taxes that are already taken. It is the duty of each member of congress to represent their constituancy. That does not however mean that congressman must vote in favor of such spending bills. I am sure Ron Paul has struggled with this because of his philosophy on government spending. What Ron Paul does is more honorable. He lets the voice of his constituants be heard as to what they would like their taxes appropriated towards, yet still votes against the overall spending bill on constitutional principle.

As a Libertarian I would be appalled by anyone who would just sit back and do nothing. I believe we should not be taxed for those purposes but we are, so if we are I will use them to benefit my constituants.

THe best analogy I could give you would be when you file your taxes. As a Libertarian you said you believe taxes should be low and equal. When you file you use any/every tax credit available to you to lower you taxes, even though you don't believe the current tax system is the proper one. So you are working within the system given to you.


Ron Paul never says the world will be perfect with small government but the amount of people hurt by smaller government would be inherently smaller. Take the Dept. of Education for example, currently all of Americas public schools are hurting right now because of the federal govts involvement. Now if you were to scrap the DOE and went to state run DOE's there could still be problems within the system but the number of people dependant on that system would be greatly reduced. This also allows for multiple forms of the same general system which means more competition which inturn leads to better performance that other state DOE's can imitate and adjust to fit their demographic.

Ron Paul is no messiah and I don't think anyone truly believes that. There may be a few over the top supporters, but for the most part his supporters are more down to earth and realistic than any other candidates.

Ron Paul has actually said in interviews that he fully doesn't understand his support because he doesn't promise us anything other than leaving us alone to make decisions for ourselves and not be taxed into slavery. He doesn't promise world peace, he doesn't promise entitlements, all he promises is Liberty to take responsibility.

That is all I want the Liberty to choose for myself.


PS- I could understand why many people would label you a troll. In the future when you disagree with a position ask in a more questionative manner as opposed to a aggressive disagreeing manner, because as proven by this thread you may not be fully educated on the issue you are discussing. There are thousands of people here and most of us are pretty well educated on Ron's positions, nobody is perfect but ask don't acuse.

 

[OrbitalGun]

I agree here too, TwiLexia showed some class and simply countered each point that the OP made. Some of the others were more adept to scream "TROLL", "MODERATOR PLEASE". Why do we jump on getting the moderators on here so quickly? Let's give people such as TwiLexia a chance to counterargue and maybe win a vote for Ron Paul instead of taking aways somebody's freedom of speech? Just because somebody has some criticism doesn't make them a troll.

A troll is somebody who comes on here and says something like "Ron Paul can't win, he's unelectable, he's too old fashioned, the constitution works in theory, BUT.."

TROLL

I don't know all the details and I find a good discussion helps me to understand RP's positions better. Peppering posts with 'Troll' takes little time and easily damages the credibility of the grassroots.

 

[tuckessee]

I know. "I have been a Ron Paul Supporter for ..." 4 posts

lol.

Are you aware that Ron Paul had supporters before the creation of this board? .

 

[RickNHouston]

Im Just saying, Ron Paul's positions on pork and excise taxes are contradictory to the rest of his libertarian platform.

As a libertarian, I believe taxation ought to be equal, and low. THus, I reject excise taxes. They are unfair to the participants in the taxed market, disproportionate to other sales taxes, and overall non-libertarian. I figured Ron Paul would also be in opposition to such taxes. It is the belief in individual liberty and limited government that makes up the heart of libertarianism. It is the ultamite libertarian fear of the state jeopardizing the life, liberty, or property of an individual. I am disappointed Ron Paul doesnt share such views.

ON Pork:
For the longest time, I thought Ron Paul didnt bring pork home to his district. I thought he leveled with his people. I thought he must have told them, pork barrel spending is wrong, I will not engage in it, and will try to get rid of it in all states. Hell, if McCain can do it, why cant Paul?
I thought Ron Paul was the exception. I thought he didnt play to the game of DC, I didnt think he thought "everyones doing it, why not me".
Truly disappointing


And while the personal income tax is bad, so is the corporate. IN the end, wealth is not held by companies, it is held by individuals, so a corporations profits will always to to individuals, or be invested. Thus, corporate income taxes do take money away from some individual, be it a shareholder, worker, or consumer(though indirectly).


I am a Ron Paul support, have been for a while. I dont visit this site often, but I talk politics constantly, with my friends and such. They know me as a Ron Paul supporter, and at a political study program i went on, more than half the people didnt know my name, but knew me as, and called me, Ron Paul. Ron Paul is by far the best candidate, and he has my vote, but still. We are all libertarians, cant we criticize Paul when he deviates from his libertarianism?

Hey, sorry your sooo disappointed, but this is America and you have a right to be and say just about anything you want to!

 

[Zyphlin]

Your points are quite valid, but the funny thing is while Dr. Paul may have a few faults, the other candidates certainly have much, much more.

But if you think about it, Dr. Paul's faults are not really faults, rather, they are practicalities. Libertarianism, Conservativism, Liberalism, and other ideologies have many different related ideas, some practical, some not.

So let's go through each of your issues one by one...

Dr. Paul supports cutting the income tax but not the corporate tax or the excise tax. In the ideal libertarian world we could cut all taxes and let the states take care of anything, unfortunately the US has amassed 65 trillion dollars in debt and we will still need some taxes to pay off the debt. However, we could certainly get a major headstart by reducing the biggest one, the income tax, to 0, and replacing it with nothing.

A non-interventionist is by no means a pacifist. Dr. Paul supports the army, supports having a strong national defense. The Constitution calls for it, and it is definitely necessary. What he doesn't support is unnecessarily intervening in other countries' affairs.

As a result of this policy, if we were to withdraw all our troops, we could save 1 trillion each year, while the income tax only accounts for 800 billion of the government's profit. So yes, it is quite possible to terminate the income tax, but only if we change our idea about our foreign policy ought to be.

The pork barrel issue is an interesting one, and this once again goes into the practicality of Dr. Paul's libertarian views. If Dr. Paul was a perfect libertarian, he would absolutely not propose any pork legislation. However, as a Congressman Dr. Paul takes the interests of the people first, and his own views second. If the federal government is being robbed by corporations and special interests daily, while the ordinary people you represent receive none of the taxes they pay, if you were in Dr. Paul's position, would you let the corporations and special interests continue to steal money from your constituents, or would you fight and try to at least win some of the money back for them?

It's a dilemma for any libertarian. In a perfect libertarian world, there would be no taxes, therefore there would be no need for pork. Unfortunately, in our welfare big-government society, it is both impossible and impractical to be a complete libertarian, with our system as messed up as it is. Dr. Paul is strongly against pork, but he also recognizes that unless you completely change the system around, playing the system is the only way to get the money back to the people. So while his actions are contrast to a small section of his beliefs, they coincide well with the larger, overall theme of Libertarianism - that is, returning the power and the money to the people, even if some early sacrifices have to be made, simply because the system is the way it is.

Finally, about the enthusiasm about Dr. Paul's supporters. Dr. Paul does not promise us a perfect world, 100% not. Maybe some supporters think that, but surely not anyone level-headed enough to really consider his policies. However, compare and contrast his views with the rest of the rat pack in the presidential race. Is there ANYONE who understands economics, reality, and foreign policy as well as Dr. Paul? And is there ANYONE who believes in the Constitution as much as Dr. Paul does?

I disagree with Dr. Paul on many issues. All of us do. But Dr. Paul isn't running to become the dictator of the United States. He's running to become the President. And being a president, you have to follow the Constitution. In the end, all of Dr. Paul's views go back to the Constitution, and that is what makes him special, and what binds us together.

Dr. Paul is not perfect, but he's our best hope for freedom. So stop being a naysayer, and realize that not all positions are perfect, and not every person is perfect (in fact, nobody is.)

Thank you for the amazing post. The OP's question about earmarks did strike a chord with me and I was very curious to see how a Ron Paul supporter would express a reason as to why he does such. You did it in a great way that makes a ton of sense and I thank you for that.

Your tone was respectful, informative, and more importantly not arrogant or self-important. You made your thoughts about the legitimacy of his posts made at first, but in a simple way, but treated him like an actual person. You gave him his voice, though you disagreed with it, and gave proper discourse (Fox News, take note). Thank you. Supporters like you are what have caused me to become interested enough in Ron Paul to try and do more research in regards to his platform.

Troll bait. Moderators please handle this.

KommanderWill,

How much did McCain pay you to come on here?

Dont feed the troll.

Perfect comment.

I've never said this before . . . Go away Troll!

For you all, you are the type of Supporters that push me away from him every single time I think I want to find information. Arrogant, condenscending, and the type that likely want to scream about Fox News stifling Ron Paul but then want moderator action because someone has the audacity to question him. While Fox could take a great lesson from TwiLeXia on how to disagree, yet be civil, intelligent, and well represented it seems you all would fit right in at the station.

I agree here too, TwiLexia showed some class and simply countered each point that the OP made. Some of the others were more adept to scream "TROLL", "MODERATOR PLEASE". Why do we jump on getting the moderators on here so quickly? Let's give people such as TwiLexia a chance to counterargue and maybe win a vote for Ron Paul instead of taking aways somebody's freedom of speech? Just because somebody has some criticism doesn't make them a troll.

A troll is somebody who comes on here and says something like "Ron Paul can't win, he's unelectable, he's too old fashioned, the constitution works in theory, BUT.."

You make some pretty good points here other than the fact that YOU are using vulgar language as well. I agree though, people on here complain about how unprofessional some of the other candidates acted on a debate, but you go on here, and....well, the posts speak for themselves. I've read articles that said that the number one thing that will hurt the campaign is the supporters, and I think that can be said to be true in some cases. But there are a lot of good people on here who will logically argue and debate instead of relying on attacks and calling people 'troll". there are good people on here and there are a lot of hard working people out there trying to get Ron Paul elected.

Dead on. Thank you.

 

[freesoul]

ON Pork:
For the longest time, I thought Ron Paul didnt bring pork home to his district. I thought he leveled with his people. I thought he must have told them, pork barrel spending is wrong, I will not engage in it, and will try to get rid of it in all states. Hell, if McCain can do it, why cant Paul?
I thought Ron Paul was the exception. I thought he didnt play to the game of DC, I didnt think he thought "everyones doing it, why not me".
Truly disappointing

Pork= attempting to get your constituents dollars back from the feds.

Ron changed to the libertarian party in 1988, then had enough sense to realize he would not get anything accomplished that way and changed back to GOP.

If you're such a libertarian then why not support George Phillies?

 

[raiha]

I am sorry you have been a victim of the great great American plague -
collectivist thinking which in its least noxious form manifests as ridiculing (look at all the other Republican nominations to see that in operation) and in it's most ugly form...fascism.

Freedom of speech is great...just don't practice it OK!
For God's sake people let people ask intelligent questions. If they are going to vote for someone it is is absolutely critical that their questions are at least explored if not answered.

He's only been here two minutes. Give the man/ woman a chance!!
Some of your childish responses make me feel like tearing my hair out with frustration.

Read my SIGNATURE. I'm not keen on louts that DON'T run countries either. I just don't like loutishness!!(God i feel like a demented old mother who lives in a shoe, who had so many loutish children, she didn't know what to do!)

 

[raiha]

Sorry everyone else who answered intelligently and articulately. Thank-you.

 

[snaFU]

You paint with a broad brush. Ron Paul is not a messiah. While I do post sometimes for entertainment value I do not "fucking spam troll in every thread whenever someone disagrees with (me)". There are plenty of things I read and disagree with that I ignore.

I have made my share of criticisms of the campaign, and Ron Paul leaves much desired in terms of a messenger for the cause of restoring to our Republic a Federal government strictly limited to following the Constitution.

I have never attacked media personalities in real life, indeed when talking to media personalities on the radio I am always polite and respectful.

Unlike you, I do not use vulgarity or profane language in my posts.

And were it not for his near impeccable voting record Ron Paul would be just another politician, worthy of no more respect than the rest of them.



Please direct us to any post in which I've used vulgar language, oh one who goes by the acronym snaFU. Of course that is not vulgar in and of itself, but most of the people reading it knows what it means oh dropper of F-bombs.

The Ron Paul movement will outlast Ron Paul, as did the Goldwater and Reagan movements outlast the men they were named for before it. Check out the Liberty Candidates subforum for a good start of where it should go.

As for claiming to know "for sure when RP drops out many of you will probably vote for one of the 'top' candidates" well your mind reading skills must be better than my own. Made any money off of them lately? I know you haven't, and I don't need to read minds to know this. That statement alone pretty much defines you as a troll, since the only reason to make it is if you wish for those reading it to be unsure of others support of Ron Paul.

I don't mind if people rant, but the OP of this thread is almost certainly a troll, and of course good trolls will make valid points in their attempt to sway others to having doubts about the topic at hand, which for this forum is getting Ron Paul elected President. For you to come out with a statement implying you think the normal Ron Paul supporter sees Ron Paul as a "messiah" is, to me, also a trollish thing to say in and of itself, and to make such a statement in support of another post which is trolling merely reinforces the impression that the respondent is as well.

Fortunately for me I finally received information which will allow me to target and directly interact with local voters in the real world, so I will not be spending nearly as much time arguing meaningless debates in cyberspace. However I have enjoyed the community that has developed here in ronpaulforums and I am saddened to see it being so overrun with trolls and moles. I take it as a sign of the success Ron Paul is having in getting his message out that so many come here and attempt to discredit it.

To be honest I haven't examined your posting record, snaFU, to make a really informed decision, so I apologize if you are a genuine Ron Paul supporter. If so, donate, sign up as precinct leader, canvass, and work to get Ron Paul elected. That's the point of being here, yes?

Finally, blah blah blah blah is not a very intelligent response and indicates you have no interest in reaching a common understanding or coming to some sort of mutual consensus. If that is the case you then must have some other reason for being here.

blah blah blah blah indicates i am in a deep state of mental thought.

As for claiming to know "for sure when RP drops out many of you will probably vote for one of the 'top' candidates"

Its actually a perfectly legitimate point since there is infact a post called WHO IS YOUR SECOND CHOICE.

I find your language vulgar,i have seen it in alot of your other post too.You seem to never have nothing nice or constructive to say and always putting people down.Why dont u just go back to eating your mommy cookies and playing world of warcraft.goodboy!!!

Oh dear me heres a tissue little girl

 

[WilliamC]

blah blah blah blah indicates i am in a deep state of mental thought.

Well, no wonder I can't follow. I'm not the deep thinker you are

Its actually a perfectly legitimate point since there is infact a post called WHO IS YOUR SECOND CHOICE.

Simple. Write in Ron Paul.

It's the message, not the man.

 

[snaFU]

Simple. Write in Ron Paul.

It's the message, not the man.

If its the message then I shouldn't be writing in the man since it would be a contradicting my point that its about the message.

 

[therealjjj77]

I have been a RP supporter for a long while, and a libertarian for much longer.

But i have some issues with him.

First, he promises to get rid of the income tax. First, does he also mean the corporate income tax? If not, i would accuse him of merely pandering to the taxpayers, and stiffing corporations with the tax burden. ie, taxing the producers but not the workers.

He has to replace it with something if he wants to maintain current entitlement spending for those on entitlements, and have a strong defense, and not borrow/inflate the money supply.

So he supports federal excise taxes, which while constitutional, are morally reprehensible and an offront to libertarianism. This is because they target a specific market, and punish the producers, consumers, and workers in that market. They tax thier market substantially, to the point where these few individuals support a disproportionate tax on them, while others dont pay for that tax at all. Excise taxes are disgusting, a threat to individual liberty and equality. No libertarian can honestly support excise taxes, how does ron paul do it? It is a respect for personal decisions, individual property rights and individual freedom which comprises the heart of libertarianism. It is a respect for all acts and all markets which do not infringe on anothers liberty. Excise taxes are 100% non libertarian, how does Paul support them????????

Also, it seems paul is pandering. He supports a strong military, but also non interventionism and ending the military industrial complex. There could easily be a conflict of interests here, and it just seems RP is trying save face with the warhawks. RP also says we should abolish the income tax, with no replacement, yet fails to point out the massive spending cuts this would entail. His ideas are good and all, but he needs to level with people. Sure, they dont deserve income taxes or inflation or war, but they also dont deserve government handouts. And that is as important an issue as any other.

Finally, pork barrel spending. In the face of criticism, he says he adds in earmarks, but votes agaisnt the bill. This is deception on the highest level. The fact is, these bills pass, and RON PAUL is the one responsible for the earmarks going to his district. THis flies in the face of his support of individual rights and property rights. Evidently, nobody should pay taxes to finance another person's unconstitutional pork, unless that pork is for RP's district. This is by far my biggest issue with him. He talks about the constitution, wasteful spending, etc, but then turns around and supports pork. And in the worst way, he decieves people about it. He knowingly writes in pork, but then saves himself the guilt and face by voting against it. What the hell ron paul?

Also, to all RP supporters, dont get too caught up in the rhetoric. Keep an eye on Paul. ALso, dont be so damn optimistic. Limited government isnt about the easy stuff, ending war/inflation/corportate welfare. It is also about ending welfare to very poor people, it is about letting people make mistakes, sometimes very bad ones that will lead them into a life of poverty. Realize also the repeal of drug laws wont make everything magical. There will still be drug users, they will be sick and suffering and poor, and the libertarian still cannot justify government action. My words to libertarians, face it, limited government isnt all candy and prosperity, bad shit will still happen, and you have to be willing to stomach that. You cant promise perfection, just keep that in mind.

Your last statement was very true. In fact, no realist promises perfection but understands that it is simply better for society. In fact, who's to define perfection? The only way change occurs is through conflict. If everyone is in a state of euphoria all the time, no change ever occurs. So what drives change is when someone experiences discomfort. However, understanding will realize that the government is not the best answer to turn to. Politicians idealistic promises cannot be kept.

Also, corporate taxes are constitutional. People choose to seek incorporated status from the government and since that privilege was given by the government and not by God, the formation of a legal entity, then it is taxable by the government. No law requires anyone to become incorporated. That would be unconstitutional.

The only inequality when dealing with an excise tax is that of inequality on certain products. There is no inequality on persons.

 

[WilliamC]

If its the message then I shouldn't be writing in the man since it would be a contradicting my point that its about the message.

Nope. Writing in Ron Paul will send a message better than voting for any other candidate on the ballot.

Since you obviously aren't into any sort of meaningful dialog, welcome to the ignore list

 

[RPFP]

See this is why I said dont feed the troll. It was out of no disrespect. I knew what this darn thread would turn into. Too all of you who felt the need to point me out in your threads, find out when this was originally posted (one day before Michigan) and read the first sentence. Anything that ever starts out with i've been a ..... is a BS post, and look where it has gone, its a spitting contest.

 

[snaFU]

Nope. Writing in Ron Paul will send a message better than voting for any other candidate on the ballot.

Since you obviously aren't into any sort of meaningful dialog, welcome to the ignore list

LMAO, pissy little girl

 

[KommanderWill]

"Also, corporate taxes are constitutional. People choose to seek incorporated status from the government and since that privilege was given by the government and not by God, the formation of a legal entity, then it is taxable by the government. No law requires anyone to become incorporated. That would be unconstitutional."

Corporations in America pre-date the federal government. Joint Stock companies like the Virginia Company, for example. Whether individuals pool thier property or invest alone shouldnt determine whether or not they are taxed.

 

[Conza88]

LoL
​