i like this guy, but he'll probably just get run over by the establishment politicians, which is pretty much all of them

This guy's voice is needed. It's unique and brings a refreshing dialogue. However, until we see American's see that tax rates have to rise he's spinning his wheels. Republicans have to see defense cut, Democrats have to see modifications in entitlements, and most importantly AMERICANS have to realize we can't keep cutting taxes and magically expect a balanced budget.

(02-09-2011 04:33 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This guy's voice is needed. It's unique and brings a refreshing dialogue. However, until we see American's see that tax rates have to rise he's spinning his wheels.

You must like high unemployment.

I don't think he will make much of a difference with just his father and himself. Ron Paul needed to have 48 more children so every state would have one for his stuff to actually pass.

(02-09-2011 04:33 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This guy's voice is needed. It's unique and brings a refreshing dialogue. However, until we see American's see that tax rates have to rise he's spinning his wheels. Republicans have to see defense cut, Democrats have to see modifications in entitlements, and most importantly AMERICANS have to realize we can't keep cutting taxes and magically expect a balanced budget.

The answer is not raising tax rates, it's broadening the tax base. We actually need to lower the rates that are making us uncompetitive in the world economy. But, at the same time, broaden the tax base by killing corporate welfare, eliminating special-interest-lobbied deductions, and adding a consumption tax and we end up with rates that are world-competitive and more revenues.

We collect less in taxes than Europe does. But they collect their taxes in ways, and from sources, that impose fewer impediments to economic growth. We can and should learn from them.

By the way ... I'm amused at how many Republicans like Rand Paul and don't like Ron Paul. As though there were meaningful policy differences between the two ......

(02-09-2011 05:45 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  By the way ... I'm amused at how many Republicans like Rand Paul and don't like Ron Paul. As though there were meaningful policy differences between the two ......

Ron Paul just tends to come off as a grumpy old man at times, while Rand has a lot of energy and comes off much more positively in my view. Appearances and perceptions count. How else do you think we got our current president?

If you are implying that Mccain only lost because he was old and listless you totally weren't paying attention. He lost because he could not articulate a consistent message...and yeah...he also picked Palin...LOL

(02-09-2011 04:33 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This guy's voice is needed. It's unique and brings a refreshing dialogue. However, until we see American's see that tax rates have to rise he's spinning his wheels. Republicans have to see defense cut, Democrats have to see modifications in entitlements, and most importantly AMERICANS have to realize we can't keep cutting taxes and magically expect a balanced budget.

You've been proven wrong on this issue. Repeatedly.

(02-09-2011 09:04 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If you are implying that Mccain only lost because he was old and listless you totally weren't paying attention. He lost because he could not articulate a consistent message...and yeah...he also picked Palin...LOL

Combine old and ornery against a guy who the media played up as essentially a black James Bond. Content had nothing to do with Obama's campaign. He had a couple of feel good slogans and his messiah complex while completely avoiding any commitment to policies which might be controversial. Being against the war in Iraq or Gitmo is not controversial.

C'mon man, don't bring the overplayed media cart out again. If the media had the influence you believe, Gore and Kerry would have been easily elected.

Mccain was a lousy candidate and had no shot.

And I seem to remember that everyone was accusing candidate Obama of promising to fix everything, so I think you are way off base saying he took no positions on anything that was considered controversial.

Hear hear! Go Rand!

(02-09-2011 11:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  C'mon man, don't bring the overplayed media cart out again. If the media had the influence you believe, Gore and Kerry would have been easily elected.

False. You're ignorant if you don't believe the media impacted how the candidates were seen, especially by those voters who get their "news" from people like Jon Stewart or Oprah, or even Katie Couric. The fawning over his athleticism or his youth or his comparisons to Kennedy. The media played him up and was more than willing to allow things like "Rev" Wright to slide with barely a peep.

Quote:And I seem to remember that everyone was accusing candidate Obama of promising to fix everything, so I think you are way off base saying he took no positions on anything that was considered controversial.

And how many of those times did you see those people actually mention how he had said he intended to fix the problems? Obama rarely actually said how he'd fix the problem. Every politician says he intends to fix social security or health insurance or look out for the troops. During the presidential debates rarely did he actually given specific details on his solutions, just merely restated generalities like "reduce dependence on foreign oil". Most of the time he just talks about what's wrong like "we can't continue these past 8 years of failed policies".

He was elected on image, not substance.

(02-09-2011 11:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  C'mon man, don't bring the overplayed media cart out again. If the media had the influence you believe, Gore and Kerry would have been easily elected.

If the media DIDN'T have the influence you believe, we never would have been dangerously close to Gore or Kerry Presidencies. Jeez, how much more proof do you need of media influence than Obama?

(02-09-2011 05:45 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  By the way ... I'm amused at how many Republicans like Rand Paul and don't like Ron Paul. As though there were meaningful policy differences between the two ......

It will be interesting to see if Ron runs for Kay Bailey Hutchinson's seat.

I hope he does instead of that d1ckhead Texas State Senator Dan Patrick, a former TV sportscaster from Houston.

I never said the media did not play a role.

My only point is that McCain lost my vote because he could not articulate a position. I liked McCain and voted for him in the primary when he was running for the nomination against Bush in 1999.

I can only tell you that the media had little influence on me and my vote for Obama.

Bottom line, this is something that can never be proven to a reasonable certainty, yet you guys won't even open yourself up the slightest possibility that Obama voters actually came to a logical choice between the two candidates.

And please...continue to play the media card if it means you won't touch the even more ridiculous "Rev. Wright" card again

(02-10-2011 08:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I never said the media did not play a role.

My only point is that McCain lost my vote because he could not articulate a position. I liked McCain and voted for him in the primary when he was running for the nomination against Bush in 1999.

I can only tell you that the media had little influence on me and my vote for Obama.

Bottom line, this is something that can never be proven to a reasonable certainty, yet you guys won't even open yourself up the slightest possibility that Obama voters actually came to a logical choice between the two candidates.

That's easy to prove, b/c Obama couldn't articulate a position either.

Yes, McCain blew it. Obama just shut up long enough to let McCain blow it.

Quote:And please...continue to play the media card if it means you won't touch the even more ridiculous "Rev. Wright" card again

If you understood the "media card" then you'd realize that the job they profess to do is not let a candidate like Obama just play dumb.

This is a center/right country and yet some of the farthest left people in this country come close, or in Obamas case, win the Presidency. What further "reasonable certainty" do you need?

(02-09-2011 09:12 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(02-09-2011 04:33 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This guy's voice is needed. It's unique and brings a refreshing dialogue. However, until we see American's see that tax rates have to rise he's spinning his wheels. Republicans have to see defense cut, Democrats have to see modifications in entitlements, and most importantly AMERICANS have to realize we can't keep cutting taxes and magically expect a balanced budget.

You've been proven wrong on this issue. Repeatedly.

That never has stopped a committed liberal.