- 2,706
- 14
- Joined
- May 3, 2003
The GOP loves the poor. Without the poor, they'd have no one to take advantage of. They need the poor, that's why they fight SO hard to KEEP people poor.
GOP Debates 2011 Vol. Who knew these dudes would be good at stand up comedy.
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by pleasurephd,
- Start date
- 4,716
- 597
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2006
Not gonna defend the GOP, but you NT bleeding heart liberals are a funny bunch... ... ...so I'll ask for a link to these claims of GOP hating the poor?
Free your mind from the 2 party system and you will be a much happier/informed person. Too much emotion and not enough reason goes into political thought. They say this party is a bunch of socialists... you believe it... they say this party is a bunch of white racists... you believe it. And before you get your panties all bunched up; you =/= you. Class warfare baiting from the left and right is going to destroy this country.
- 2,706
- 14
- Joined
- May 3, 2003
What are you talking about? There has to be people at the bottom for the capitalist system to work. You want a link? Use your brain.
- 857
- 43
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2009
The audacity of these fools cheering for letting a man die. Effin people make me sick.
And, to you guys liking Ron Paul, ya'll must have a lot of faith in the American people. The same people that run greedy corporations, cheer for letting people die, commit hate crimes on a daily basis, etc...
You need a governing system for certain thing. Gonna be Deus Ex: HR up in here if the government can't control corporations.
Ron Paul = anarchy. lol just kidding being extreme, but you get the point.
The GOP being about small government LOL no they don't want small government. They want THIER government. When it comes to things like abortion and stem cell research you can bet your butt they want that on lock down by the government.
And, to you guys liking Ron Paul, ya'll must have a lot of faith in the American people. The same people that run greedy corporations, cheer for letting people die, commit hate crimes on a daily basis, etc...
You need a governing system for certain thing. Gonna be Deus Ex: HR up in here if the government can't control corporations.
Ron Paul = anarchy. lol just kidding being extreme, but you get the point.
The GOP being about small government LOL no they don't want small government. They want THIER government. When it comes to things like abortion and stem cell research you can bet your butt they want that on lock down by the government.
- 4,716
- 597
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2006
you're confused son, very confused.
- 17,665
- 7,947
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2005
Let the laughs continue, there is another Republican debate tonight.
- 430
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
AYO SHOUT OUT JON HUNTSMAN UTAH #1 IN EVERYTHING LOL REALLY THOUGH MOST OVERLOOKED CANDIDATE I HAVEN'T SEEN HIS NAME ONCE AND FROM EVERYTHING IM HEARING HE DID A FANTASTIC JOB AS GOVERNOR OF UTAH. HIM AND RON PAUL ARE MY FAVORITES TO WATCH BUT JON HUNTSMAN MIGHT JUST BE THE BEST THE REPUBLICANS HAVE TO OFFER.
- 4,837
- 215
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
Libertarian Legacy? Ron Paul's Campaign Manager, 49, Dies Uninsured, Of Pneumonia, Leaving family $400,000 Debt
What a testament to the Libertarian creed, which abhors the idea of universal health care. This loyal, passionate man who died too young left his family a debt of $400,000 in medical bills. And who knows whether he put off getting treatment for the pneumonia that killed him because he was uninsured.
Kent Snyder did some amazing work on the Ron Paul Campaign and as remembered as a "libertarian giant"- by Lew Rockwell, on libertarian site, Lew Rockwell.com.
The Wall Street journal reports that Kent, more than anyone else, persuaded Ron Paul to run for president. And Kent, according the the WSJ said, "ultimately became a $35 million operation with 250 employees that helped deliver more than one million votes for the Texas congressman's bid in the Republican nominating contest."
Ron Paul posted this message about Snyder on his website: ""Like so many in our movement, Kent sacrificed much for the cause of liberty, Kent poured every ounce of his being into our fight for freedom. He will always hold a place in my heart and in the hearts of my family."
Sadly, the Libertarian heart apparently does not include health care. The poor guy raised tens of millions of dollars and couldn't afford the $300-$600 a month that COBRA medical insurance would have cost.
�Paul has some good ideas -- get out of Iraq, get the US out of a lot of other countries. But his opposition to government, to universal health care-- these ideas just don't work and his campaign manager's death makes a tragic example of it.A website has been created to help raise the $400,000 to pay the medical bills.
I don't understand what you are trying to prove with this. The man received care, but unfortunately he died because he had a pre-existing condition. What's your point? He was in the hospital for weeks receiving care. Ron Paul should be responsible for someones inability to pay?
Sadly, the Libertarian heart apparently does not include health care.
Lord, this is so misleading. Show me where Kent Snyder did not receive health care. Receiving health care and the ability to pay is not the same. That's like Obama's pathetic comparison of Car insurance and health insurance.
Essential1, you have single-handedly killed and killed again any Ron Paul support and supporters here on the boards. Anytime somebody has something positive to try and say about Paul you soon follow-up with an article or statement that discredits Paul's claim. More power to you champ, your bringing the laughs and good insight to this thread.
Stop it. He's also not telling you that the hospital almost 4 years later, hasn't even put in the claim for the outstanding balance, and Kent Snyder wasn't married or had kids. So it doesn't fall on his family.
Senoj
formerly adidas freak
- 1,696
- 352
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2006
So should Ron Paul have to foot the 400k bill just because it's the right thing to do? Why don't you go out and help people who can't afford health care rather than sitting in a thread trying your hardest to make Ron Paul look bad. Who do you work for? CNN? Fox? MSNBC? Must be one of the big three. You're pretty mad bro. The point of this whole health care debate is that it costs too damn much for insurance and it costs even more for treatment if you don't have the insurance in the first place. Dr. Paul has said the main solution to the problem is to lower health care costs, then people wont have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep themselves healthy. Show me anyone else in Congress with the same voting record as him. But I'm sure you'd rather have that liar Barry in office rather than someone who is going to tell the truth no matter what it is.
- 2,706
- 14
- Joined
- May 3, 2003
Let the party begin.
- 17,665
- 7,947
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2005
How many times are these clowns going to mention Reagan's name, the man is dead and has been for quite some time. Let him go.
- 430
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
Phil Knight is on Jon Huntsman's economic team.
- 4,837
- 215
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
I didn't watch, but I just happened to flip through when the GOP audience "booed" a gay service member before Sanscrotum was yapping.
Conservatives are such evil, evil people.
Conservatives are such evil, evil people.
- 2,706
- 14
- Joined
- May 3, 2003
The crowd then cheered when he said he would reinstate DADT.
- 17,665
- 7,947
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2005
Originally Posted by rashi
the GOP audience "booed" a gay service member before Sanscrotum was yapping.
Yeah I was in disbelief when that happened. Just when I thought conservatives couldn't sink any lower they find a way to do so.
- 36,216
- 11,036
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Adidas Freak wrote:
So should Ron Paul have to foot the 400k bill just because it's the right thing to do? Why don't you go out and help people who can't afford health care rather than sitting in a thread trying your hardest to make Ron Paul look bad. Who do you work for? CNN? Fox? MSNBC? Must be one of the big three. You're pretty mad bro. The point of this whole health care debate is that it costs too damn much for insurance and it costs even more for treatment if you don't have the insurance in the first place. Dr. Paul has said the main solution to the problem is to lower health care costs, then people wont have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep themselves healthy. Show me anyone else in Congress with the same voting record as him. But I'm sure you'd rather have that liar Barry in office rather than someone who is going to tell the truth no matter what it is.
Four things on his record...
Opposed extending federal benefits to homosexuals which Snyder was... So in the case he had a "life partner" or husband The Mystical Dr. Paul felt they shouldn't have the same benefits afforded to heterosexual married couples...
He was the sole vote against outlawing genetic discrimination by medical companies (Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act).. So if his view passed Snyder had even less of a chance...
Does not think there should be a ban on outlawing "pre-existing conditions" practices by Health Insurance...
And even more fun is his top guy was gay... And Ron Paul thinks his lifestyle is immoral...
Work for the big three?It's all a conspiracy.. OBVIOUSLY... Because anyone who questions the MYSTICAL Dr. Paul must be a corporate media plant who is angry at his candidacy, and not a free thinking citizen who thinks Ron Paul, his policies, and his followers are jokes who live in a mythical eutopia and need to step out into the real world with the rest of the average world.
- 36,216
- 11,036
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Adidas Freak this as well
- 359
- 10
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2002
Four things on his record...
Opposed extending federal benefits to homosexuals which Snyder was... So in the case he had a "life partner" or husband The Mystical Dr. Paul felt they shouldn't have the same benefits afforded to heterosexual married couples...
He was the sole vote against outlawing genetic discrimination by medical companies (Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act).. So if his view passed Snyder had even less of a chance...
Does not think there should be a ban on outlawing "pre-existing conditions" practices by Health Insurance...
And even more fun is his top guy was gay... And Ron Paul thinks his lifestyle is immoral...
Work for the big three?
How do you come up with this stuff? First, the laughable "90% tax" argument which showed misunderstanding for how the tax code functioned. Now, this.
1) Not voting for the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act because he believes it falls outside the Commerce Clause and is a proper function for state and local government is not the same as opposing the measure.
2) I don't see how believing a lifestyle is immoral for religious reasons and then employing someone with that lifestyle is hypocritical (or whatever you were implying) at all.
- 1,606
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2009
I swear you can never talk sense to republicans, because their minds are so over-saturated with #%$!
- 36,216
- 11,036
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
How do you come up with this stuff? First, the laughable "90% tax" argument which showed misunderstanding for how the tax code functioned. Now, this.Originally Posted by Kobefan23
Four things on his record...
Opposed extending federal benefits to homosexuals which Snyder was... So in the case he had a "life partner" or husband The Mystical Dr. Paul felt they shouldn't have the same benefits afforded to heterosexual married couples...
He was the sole vote against outlawing genetic discrimination by medical companies (Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act).. So if his view passed Snyder had even less of a chance...
Does not think there should be a ban on outlawing "pre-existing conditions" practices by Health Insurance...
And even more fun is his top guy was gay... And Ron Paul thinks his lifestyle is immoral...
Work for the big three?It's all a conspiracy.. OBVIOUSLY... Because anyone who questions the MYSTICAL Dr. Paul must be a corporate media plant who is angry at his candidacy, and not a free thinking citizen who thinks Ron Paul, his policies, and his followers are jokes who live in a mythical eutopia and need to step out into the real world with the rest of the average world.
1) Not voting for the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act because he believes it falls outside the Commerce Clause and is a proper function for state and local government is not the same as opposing the measure.
2) I don't see how believing a lifestyle is immoral for religious reasons and then employing someone with that lifestyle is hypocritical (or whatever you were implying) at all.
Taxes were 91% for years at the highest bracket.... There were loopholes and deductions then... And there are loopholes and deductions now.... 91% is far larger then 35% when you do all the bells and whistles to decrease your tax rate it comes a long way to get yourself down to 35%... You know that, I know that, and every accountant knows that.... We've been told for decades that the way to prosperity is cut taxes for the highest earners, and all of us will succeed in their newly found EXTRA wealth... We've cut taxes by 56% for the top income bracket, and what did we get... DEFICITS, LOWER PAYING JOBS, DEBT, AND MASSIVE UNEMPLOYMENT... By the way it was the marginal tax rate... No where did I say they were taxed by 91% on all income... I assumed everyone knew taxes progress on everyone's income so for a certain amount you may pay 10% and another part of the income you pay 91%.. And you can even take from Reagan's first year to now 69% down to 35% and I can still make the same point..
1) If he votes no he opposed it..... His reason is a smoke screen so idiots who follow him will say he opposes it because his rigid ideology tells him to... It's just more $$$@+%*+ from him so he can have an excuse why he doesn't believe in anything that might benefit people because it involves the government..... The state and local government have absolutely 0 POWER on the practice of insurance companies searching your genetics to deem your illness pre-existing before you even have it or have signs of having it.... States have been rather ineffective of regulating private insurance companies because they have no power over them... And the same can be said in most industries that run nation-wide... Hence why many believe the federal government would be better suited regulating health insurers with a broad brush because it discourages the #%+!*! up policies the insurers have, and actually has the ability to make the effective changes in health insurance.. Instead of the half assed measures that do nothing on the "free and open market"
2) It is more a comment on the stupidity of his followers.. This guy did more to get Paul relevant in 2008 than anyone (excluding Paul himself)... And not only may Snyder have been covered for his pre-existing condition which who knows what that would have changed had he gotten regular check ups (assuming he didn't like many uninsured), may have saved him from pneumonia, would have kept from the $400K in debt, also if the hospital didn't ever collect that $400K it got passed on to everyone else... Not to mention he thought the person Snyder truly was was immoral... What idiot follows a guy who thinks he is immoral for following the type of person he loves..
- 359
- 10
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2002
The difference is those "loopholes and deductions" were purposely more defined/substantial than they are, understandably, today. Even the wealthiest Americans were paying no more than 20-25%. To imply that our debt, unemployment, and deficits are a product of these "tax breaks for the rich" as opposed to massive entitlement spending, military spending, outsourcing, financial bubbles, etc. is a gross misrepresentation of the situation, which I am sure you understand.Originally Posted by Essential1
Originally Posted by Kobefan23
How do you come up with this stuff? First, the laughable "90% tax" argument which showed misunderstanding for how the tax code functioned. Now, this.Originally Posted by Essential1
Four things on his record...
Opposed extending federal benefits to homosexuals which Snyder was... So in the case he had a "life partner" or husband The Mystical Dr. Paul felt they shouldn't have the same benefits afforded to heterosexual married couples...
He was the sole vote against outlawing genetic discrimination by medical companies (Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act).. So if his view passed Snyder had even less of a chance...
Does not think there should be a ban on outlawing "pre-existing conditions" practices by Health Insurance...
And even more fun is his top guy was gay... And Ron Paul thinks his lifestyle is immoral...
Work for the big three?It's all a conspiracy.. OBVIOUSLY... Because anyone who questions the MYSTICAL Dr. Paul must be a corporate media plant who is angry at his candidacy, and not a free thinking citizen who thinks Ron Paul, his policies, and his followers are jokes who live in a mythical eutopia and need to step out into the real world with the rest of the average world.
1) Not voting for the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act because he believes it falls outside the Commerce Clause and is a proper function for state and local government is not the same as opposing the measure.
2) I don't see how believing a lifestyle is immoral for religious reasons and then employing someone with that lifestyle is hypocritical (or whatever you were implying) at all.
Taxes were 91% for years at the highest bracket.... There were loopholes and deductions then... And there are loopholes and deductions now.... 91% is far larger then 35% when you do all the bells and whistles to decrease your tax rate it comes a long way to get yourself down to 35%... You know that, I know that, and every accountant knows that.... We've been told for decades that the way to prosperity is cut taxes for the highest earners, and all of us will succeed in their newly found EXTRA wealth... We've cut taxes by 56% for the top income bracket, and what did we get... DEFICITS, LOWER PAYING JOBS, DEBT, AND MASSIVE UNEMPLOYMENT... By the way it was the marginal tax rate... No where did I say they were taxed by 91% on all income... I assumed everyone knew taxes progress on everyone's income so for a certain amount you may pay 10% and another part of the income you pay 91%.. And you can even take from Reagan's first year to now 69% down to 35% and I can still make the same point..
1) If he votes no he opposed it..... His reason is a smoke screen so idiots who follow him will say he opposes it because his rigid ideology tells him to... It's just more $$$@+%*+ from him so he can have an excuse why he doesn't believe in anything that might benefit people because it involves the government..... The state and local government have absolutely 0 POWER on the practice of insurance companies searching your genetics to deem your illness pre-existing before you even have it or have signs of having it.... States have been rather ineffective of regulating private insurance companies because they have no power over them... And the same can be said in most industries that run nation-wide... Hence why many believe the federal government would be better suited regulating health insurers with a broad brush because it discourages the #%+!*! up policies the insurers have, and actually has the ability to make the effective changes in health insurance.. Instead of the half assed measures that do nothing on the "free and open market"
2) It is more a comment on the stupidity of his followers.. This guy did more to get Paul relevant in 2008 than anyone (excluding Paul himself)... And not only may Snyder have been covered for his pre-existing condition which who knows what that would have changed had he gotten regular check ups (assuming he didn't like many uninsured), may have saved him from pneumonia, would have kept from the $400K in debt, also if the hospital didn't ever collect that $400K it got passed on to everyone else... Not to mention he thought the person Snyder truly was was immoral... What idiot follows a guy who thinks he is immoral for following the type of person he loves..
Only in 2011 would we call voting against a bill because you believe it violates the Constitution a "smoke screen". He's been voting 'no' for 20 years on issues that cross every part of the political spectrum for that very reason. In his own words, "A much better way to eliminate irrational discrimination is to rely on state and local regulation." (emphasis added). That hardly sounds like support for the underlying policy to me.