CHEYNEY BOOED AT CPAC!!!

[dbackjon]

Nobody knows what his discharge says because he won't show it, nate.
But funny you should mention getting busted for drugs, because he was grounded for failing to report for a mandatory physical/ drug screen and never flew a minute afterward for the remaining two years of his obligation. The military doesn't like to have expensively trained pilots sitting around.



So lets recap, nate:

You never flew once after pilot piss testing was instituted
You were grounded for failing to report for mandatory flight physical/ drug screen
The results of the subsequent Flight Inquiry Board are missing
You won't show your DD-214
Your Texas driving record is missing
Your Dad is Congressman Bush



And you are worried about Obama's birth certificate?

Let's recap, dawg:

1. You make up a bunch of circumstantial speculation about an issue which is not Constitutional, and
2. Obama has not produced birth certificate, which his buddy Neil Abercrombie now claims may not exist; an issue which DOES have profound Constitutional implications.

Abercrombie has never said that. A conservative radio host made that up, and had to back track when challenged on it.

But as is typical for the right, they spew the lies, get the sheeple to believe it, then slink away, job done.

[Pwns]

A note about Ron Paul...look at the top contributors to the campaign of RP and compare them to the top contributors to McBama. RP's top contributors are actual members of the military, while those of McBama read like a who's-who among corporate special interest groups, and includes organizations like Goldman Sachs and Citigroup that got big bailout checks and whose execs got big bonuses instead of being held accountable by the sorry-ass republidonk government.

Maybe that's why RP can't gain any momentum...because he refuses to whore himself out to special interests.

[Skjellyfetti]

A note about Ron Paul...look at the top contributors to the campaign of RP and compare them to the top contributors to McBama. RP's top contributors are actual members of the military, while those of McBama read like a who's-who among corporate special interest groups,

Really? Ron Paul's top contributors are "actual members of the military"?

Top Contributors to Ron Paul:
1 National Assn of Realtors
2 Beal Financial
3 Credit Union National Assn
4 Corriente Advisors
4 John Templeton Foundation
6 Bavarian Waste
7 Aquent Inc
8 Biotech
8 Davis-Lynch Inc
8 Getko Holding
8 Herndon Oil
8 Huffines Communities
8 Spinnaker
8 Sun Studio Entertainment

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/ ... =N00005906" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Why do y'all insist Ron Paul is different from any other career politician? He's been a politician for ~35 years. He's brought in millions upon millions of dollars in pork for his district. He's just just the same as every other one...

[TwinTownBisonFan]

A note about Ron Paul...look at the top contributors to the campaign of RP and compare them to the top contributors to McBama. RP's top contributors are actual members of the military, while those of McBama read like a who's-who among corporate special interest groups,

Really? Ron Paul's top contributors are "actual members of the military"?

Top Contributors to Ron Paul:
1 National Assn of Realtors
2 Beal Financial
3 Credit Union National Assn
4 Corriente Advisors
4 John Templeton Foundation
6 Bavarian Waste
7 Aquent Inc
8 Biotech
8 Davis-Lynch Inc
8 Getko Holding
8 Herndon Oil
8 Huffines Communities
8 Spinnaker
8 Sun Studio Entertainment

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/ ... =N00005906" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Why do y'all insist Ron Paul is different from any other career politician? He's been a politician for ~35 years. He's brought in millions upon millions of dollars in pork for his district. He's just just the same as every other one...

AWWW YA BURNT!

[youngterrier]

That's just it, TTBF. His message doesn't get out there. He isn't one of the "chosen" house negores like Bush / Clinton / et al. So he doesn't get the airtime other candaidates get...period (just like Nader). And he never will which is why he won't get elected. Regardless of his message which, if Dems listened to without the static from spin doctors, might actually resonate with some of their populist leanings. But instead, there are political operative fucktards who make a living from character assasination in this culture of fear and who's only advantage being they know how to work the media better & how to suck the proper corporate dik for funding to accomplish this task.

But I concede. You are right. He has no chance for the same reason a documentary on the financial collapse of 2008 wouldn't stand a chance opposite of the Survivor season finale. Congratulations....you've maintained your power base with the idiot crowd until the Rep's Beck crowd / Birthers gain control on the requisite election cycle. We get the government we deserve.

bitter much? don't kid yourself, there are plenty of Paultards well versed in the same "character assassination" techniques you attribute to my profession. the problem for them is not "the media" or "the system" or even "the money"... it's inept campaign managers who haven't figured out how to get his message out.

Running a guy like RP wouldn't be hard for a decent operative with half a clue... part of the problem is the libertarian ethic that undermines a serious campaign effort. it's the same problem that plagues the greens... an innate dislike and distrust of top-down management means the troops never march in a straight line, clear objectives are never attained, and professionalism is non-existent.

the other problem for these guys is that they flat lose in the marketplace of ideas with most voters... i know that's hard for libertarians to comprehend... same as it is for the greens... but the vast majority find their agendas too extreme...

I'm a Paul fan, and you hit the nail on the head. His campaign manager, whomever he or she is, sucks. If he just came off as a fiscal conservative and social constitutionalist in the primaries, he could be the nominee. From there, he could really unleash some (but not all) of his libertarian tendencies.

[youngterrier]

A note about Ron Paul...look at the top contributors to the campaign of RP and compare them to the top contributors to McBama. RP's top contributors are actual members of the military, while those of McBama read like a who's-who among corporate special interest groups, and includes organizations like Goldman Sachs and Citigroup that got big bailout checks and whose execs got big bonuses instead of being held accountable by the sorry-ass republidonk government.

Maybe that's why RP can't gain any momentum...because he refuses to whore himself out to special interests.

Actually, I think what you're trying to say is that Ron Paul raised more money from men and women who were on active duty than any other Republican candidate in the '08 primary

hence this pwnage of McShame
[youtube][/youtube]

[TwinTownBisonFan]

A note about Ron Paul...look at the top contributors to the campaign of RP and compare them to the top contributors to McBama. RP's top contributors are actual members of the military, while those of McBama read like a who's-who among corporate special interest groups, and includes organizations like Goldman Sachs and Citigroup that got big bailout checks and whose execs got big bonuses instead of being held accountable by the sorry-ass republidonk government.

Maybe that's why RP can't gain any momentum...because he refuses to whore himself out to special interests.

Actually, I think what you're trying to say is that Ron Paul raised more money from men and women who were on active duty than any other Republican candidate in the '08 primary

hence this pwnage of McShame
[youtube][/youtube]

$10 and $20 donations from the soldiers, while a nice story... doesn't really mean much in practical terms.

Ron Paul folks should be wary of discussing where anyone's money comes from considering the source of some of his KKKash.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

bitter much? don't kid yourself, there are plenty of Paultards well versed in the same "character assassination" techniques you attribute to my profession. the problem for them is not "the media" or "the system" or even "the money"... it's inept campaign managers who haven't figured out how to get his message out.

Running a guy like RP wouldn't be hard for a decent operative with half a clue... part of the problem is the libertarian ethic that undermines a serious campaign effort. it's the same problem that plagues the greens... an innate dislike and distrust of top-down management means the troops never march in a straight line, clear objectives are never attained, and professionalism is non-existent.

the other problem for these guys is that they flat lose in the marketplace of ideas with most voters... i know that's hard for libertarians to comprehend... same as it is for the greens... but the vast majority find their agendas too extreme...

I'm a Paul fan, and you hit the nail on the head. His campaign manager, whomever he or she is, sucks. If he just came off as a fiscal conservative and social constitutionalist in the primaries, he could be the nominee. From there, he could really unleash some (but not all) of his libertarian tendencies.

Paul will never be acceptable to the Christian right... and they have the power and numbers to stop a guy like him.

[youngterrier]

I'm a Paul fan, and you hit the nail on the head. His campaign manager, whomever he or she is, sucks. If he just came off as a fiscal conservative and social constitutionalist in the primaries, he could be the nominee. From there, he could really unleash some (but not all) of his libertarian tendencies.

Paul will never be acceptable to the Christian right... and they have the power and numbers to stop a guy like him.

I don't know about that though. He doesn't believe in evolution and I'm certain that I read somewhere that he was for an amendment in the constitution banning abortion. He doesn't believe marriage is a federal issue, but other than that he lines up pretty well

[youngterrier]

Actually, I think what you're trying to say is that Ron Paul raised more money from men and women who were on active duty than any other Republican candidate in the '08 primary

hence this pwnage of McShame
[youtube][/youtube]

$10 and $20 donations from the soldiers, while a nice story... doesn't really mean much in practical terms.

Ron Paul folks should be wary of discussing where anyone's money comes from considering the source of some of his KKKash.

It was still a good comeback though

[kalm]

$10 and $20 donations from the soldiers, while a nice story... doesn't really mean much in practical terms.

That's the root cause of most of our problems.

Ron Paul folks should be wary of discussing where anyone's money comes from considering the source of some of his KKKash.

Links?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

$10 and $20 donations from the soldiers, while a nice story... doesn't really mean much in practical terms.

That's the root cause of most of our problems.

Ron Paul folks should be wary of discussing where anyone's money comes from considering the source of some of his KKKash.

Links?

i disagree about the money thing... money=speech and all individuals ought to be able to donate to candidates and causes they believe in as a fundamental right

as for paul... http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?27990797984
Second name on that sheet - Don Black, Editor of Stormfront ("white pride world wide")
and no, they never returned the money (which could be understandable, and if that were the case, i wouldn't care... you can't always know right away... but after it was brought to their attention - they chose to keep it)

[kalm]

That's the root cause of most of our problems.



Links?

i disagree about the money thing... money=speech and all individuals ought to be able to donate to candidates and causes they believe in as a fundamental right

as for paul... http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?27990797984
Second name on that sheet - Don Black, Editor of Stormfront ("white pride world wide")
and no, they never returned the money (which could be understandable, and if that were the case, i wouldn't care... you can't always know right away... but after it was brought to their attention - they chose to keep it)

Thanks for the link.

Money=speech makes about as much sense as corporation=person. Both statements are non-sensical and are at the root of most of our political problems. But I'm not holding my breath that either situation will change anytime soon.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

i disagree about the money thing... money=speech and all individuals ought to be able to donate to candidates and causes they believe in as a fundamental right

as for paul... http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?27990797984
Second name on that sheet - Don Black, Editor of Stormfront ("white pride world wide")
and no, they never returned the money (which could be understandable, and if that were the case, i wouldn't care... you can't always know right away... but after it was brought to their attention - they chose to keep it)

Thanks for the link.

Money=speech makes about as much sense as corporation=person. Both statements are non-sensical and are at the root of most of our political problems. But I'm not holding my breath that either situation will change anytime soon.

to be very clear - i stand fully against corporations having personhood rights... and their funds should not be used in campaigns...

but restricting what someone can donate to a campaign (as an indvidual) is, imo restrictive of political speech...

moreover - and this is a biggie... make all the laws you want - guys like me will find a way around them.

[kalm]

Thanks for the link.

Money=speech makes about as much sense as corporation=person. Both statements are non-sensical and are at the root of most of our political problems. But I'm not holding my breath that either situation will change anytime soon.

to be very clear - i stand fully against corporations having personhood rights... and their funds should not be used in campaigns...

but restricting what someone can donate to a campaign (as an indvidual) is, imo restrictive of political speech...

moreover - and this is a biggie... make all the laws you want - guys like me will find a way around them.

I know the argument and a good example would be someone putting an election sign up in their front yard. We would be infringing upon their rights to tell them they couldn't or restrict how large the sign could be. But I think there are still ways to improve the process by getting the big money out of it. And I don't expect either party to be on board with this. So I'll agree to disagree.

[Pwns]

A note about Ron Paul...look at the top contributors to the campaign of RP and compare them to the top contributors to McBama. RP's top contributors are actual members of the military, while those of McBama read like a who's-who among corporate special interest groups,

Really? Ron Paul's top contributors are "actual members of the military"?

Top Contributors to Ron Paul:
1 National Assn of Realtors
2 Beal Financial
3 Credit Union National Assn
4 Corriente Advisors
4 John Templeton Foundation
6 Bavarian Waste
7 Aquent Inc
8 Biotech
8 Davis-Lynch Inc
8 Getko Holding
8 Herndon Oil
8 Huffines Communities
8 Spinnaker
8 Sun Studio Entertainment

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/ ... =N00005906" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Why do y'all insist Ron Paul is different from any other career politician? He's been a politician for ~35 years. He's brought in millions upon millions of dollars in pork for his district. He's just just the same as every other one...

Fail, Jelly. The sum of the contributions from the top 5 on that list doesn't even top $50,000. Obama and McCain both got well into the seven figures from corporate interests, and well into the six figures from a lot of the big banks.

And even if the contribution amounts were comparable, which list of interest groups would you rather have a politician tied to? The groups on RP's list or the ones on McBama's lists?

Does that list even count contributions from the military? I don't think it does.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's a well-known fact that RP has more contributions from military than any other candidate.

[Skjellyfetti]

The sum of the contributions from the top 5 on that list doesn't even top $50,000. Obama and McCain both got well into the seven figures from corporate interests, and well into the six figures from a lot of the big banks.

That's because Ron Paul was a longshot. If he was actually competitive... or actually won the nomination... more money would have flowed in. Do you disagree with that? Do you believe he would turn it down?

It's a well-known fact that RP has more contributions from military than any other candidate.

Really?

Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Ron Paul have little in common politically, except their opposition to the Iraq war.

Both top a new list of presidential candidates receiving campaign contributions from people who work for the four branches of the military and National Guard, according to a study released Thursday by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.

Obama, an Illinois senator, brought in more donations from this group than any White House contender from either party. The Democrat announced Wednesday his plan to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2008.

Paul, a Texas congressman and the only GOP presidential hopeful who supports an immediate troop withdrawal, comes in second.

The center tallied money from donors who list the Air Force, Army, Marines, Navy and National Guard as an employer. Overall, these donations are miniscule: Obama got 44 contributions worth about $27,000 and Paul 23 for about $19,300. Republican John McCain, an Iraq war supporter and Vietnam prisoner of war, was third with about $18,500 from 32 donors.

In 2004, military personnel contributed $1.2 million to presidential and congressional candidates, the center said. This year, those donations are about $200,000.

The analysis also found that military personnel have shifted their donations. In 2002, the center said Democrats received 23% of contributions from military workers; Republicans got 77%. This year, 40% of their donations have gone to Democrats running for Congress and president. The GOP got 59%.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3601542&page=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HI54UNI]

Thanks for the link.

Money=speech makes about as much sense as corporation=person. Both statements are non-sensical and are at the root of most of our political problems. But I'm not holding my breath that either situation will change anytime soon.

to be very clear - i stand fully against corporations having personhood rights... and their funds should not be used in campaigns...

but restricting what someone can donate to a campaign (as an indvidual) is, imo restrictive of political speech...

moreover - and this is a biggie... make all the laws you want - guys like me will find a way around them.

Does this go for unions too?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

to be very clear - i stand fully against corporations having personhood rights... and their funds should not be used in campaigns...

but restricting what someone can donate to a campaign (as an indvidual) is, imo restrictive of political speech...

moreover - and this is a biggie... make all the laws you want - guys like me will find a way around them.

Does this go for unions too?

nope. Unions are different. I also think PACs should be legal (groups banding together in common interest supporting a political agenda - protected under the constitution)

[HI54UNI]

Does this go for unions too?

nope. Unions are different. I also think PACs should be legal (groups banding together in common interest supporting a political agenda - protected under the constitution)

How?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

nope. Unions are different. I also think PACs should be legal (groups banding together in common interest supporting a political agenda - protected under the constitution)

How?

Unions aren't corporations - they are a group of people united in common interest. they are altogether something different.

keep in mind, it's already illegal for dues to be paid to campaigns - each union has a pac fund that is strictly voluntary (and most of the rank and file don't participate)