rightsonword

Is that all? That hardly constitutes a difference in foreign policy. Didn't Rand Paul also vote against tougher sanctions on Iran in late March wanted an amendment demanding a clause saying nor war with Iran or Syria? I'm starting to think the real reason people don't like Ron is because he is old. I've already had some people tell me, "I like his ideas, but he just looks too old and weak to be a strong president." Looks matter to a lot of people in this superficial world.

Well, that sucks. I enjoyed the freedom of purchasing as much or as little as I wanted.

The one "about" Obama has infor about Rand. The "blog" is has a video of Rand outlining his foreign policy. And him defending his father's position shows support of said position. There are plenty more videos and links if you care to search yourself. I'm not here to argue, but you said something very interesting and can't or refuse to support it with evidence. I just don't see why you would vote for Rand and not for Paul when a simple google search shows his foreign policy is like his fathers for the most part. I'm don't mean to be rude or condescending, but sometimes it's just better to say you misspoke than to continue supporting an erroneous idea.

Ok, I see you can't support your claim. So, I'll do the work for you. A simple google search shows that Rand Paul's foreign policy calls for non intervention, withdrawal of troops, and he has spoken out against over seas bases and withdrawal from the UN. sounds like his father to me. They may defer on a execution, but the meat of it is the same. So again, why would you vote for Rand and not Ron? My link Rand's Foreign Policy Defenind Ron Paul's Foreign Policy

You said Rand and Ron are not carbon copies (which I never said they were, btw) and that I need to do research on Rand, implying that they are different enough for you to vote for Rand but not Ron. So, unless you can provide something different between the two to merit voting for one and not the other, then you spoke prematurely. This isn't a "Ha, i gotcha!" attempt. I would really like to know why you would vote for Rand but not Ron. What are the differences between the two besides age? They hold the same views on the constitution, NDAA, TSA, bailouts, Patriot Act, the Federal Reserve, and I'm sure they hold the same or near the same foreign policy. So what is so different that you or anyone else would vote for one but not the other? Saw your post about foreign policy. Can you please link me to an article or something showing Rands foreign policy beliefs compared to his father's?

So in other words, you assertion was premature. Ok. So again, why would you vote for Rand but not Paul? From what i ve seen of Rand, they don't seem to differ very much.

Ok, educate me. In what ways are they radically different?

What? He and his father share the same views. Why would you get behind Ran if you wouldn't get behind Ron?

I'm sorry, but Kamel is in the right here. Some poster said something about the POTUS without anything to back up his claim. Kamel responded with something that was hardly offensive. You're attacking him for no reason and in a very abrasive manner.

The man's an opportunist. He plays to whatever tune the crowd is playing.

That, my friend, is the terribly sad truth.

Awesome! This is why we should never be too timid to openly discuss what we believe in. Welcome to the revolution, dude!

lol, a red flag is nothing more than slang for something that calls for attention. It doesn't imply wrong doing. You act as if someone chosen to be in a position of power can't abuse that power or simply make a common human mistake and use that power in a way they shouldn't. I was not defending Scrum nor attacking the MOD. I brought up hypothetical questions since we don't have a thread to look at to see what exactly merited the deletion of the thread. I see people already painting Scrum as deserving of whatever happens to him or the thread being deleted, which is ridiculous because the only evidence to prove he was entirely at fault has been deleted. People are too quick to crucify without knowing the facts. Anyway, George Orwell was a famous writer. 1984 is probably the most famous book he wrote, along with Animal Farm. 1984 is a fictional account in which anyone who questions the government is killed. If someone even suspects you of thinking anything about the government, you disappear. In it, the people in power are perfect and can do no wrong even when it contradicts things they do or say . . . and if you question it, you're gone.

Dude, what are you rambling about? No one is saying Adam or the mods can't do whatever they want. No one is demanding a say in how this site is ran. No one is disagreeing with the rules on this site. A question was brought up about what happened to Scrum and why the threads were deleted. You sound like a character from George Orwell's 1984. Don't ask why, just say yes.

lol, O'blah. Haven't heard that one before.

I don't doubt it, but just the whole deleting of the threads raises a red flag for me. Might me something, might be nothing, but why delete the threads instead of locking it so people can see for themselves?

Sorry, I didn't see your post. Regardless, as far as I can tell from the article, that rule only applies to Nevada. But why would the parties lawyer threaten that Nevada's delegation may not be seated in August if it was packed with Paul supporters just like they did in 2008 if it is a set rule that they must vote for Romney in the first round?

I'm confused. Why doesn't Romney go do the same thing Ron Paul is doing? Perhaps he doesn't think he needs to since he won the popular vote, but if that's not working in his favor, then Romney should be worried. If what Paul is doing is perfectly legitimate per RNC rules, then Romeny should be getting his supporters at the conventions as well. Unless he can't find enough people to pay to show up? Also, if you are so big on popular vote, I'm assuming you supported Al gore's presidential bid in 2000? He did win the popular vote you know.

I agree, but with the threads completely deleted we can't even see what the mod said. What if the mod was having a power trip or being equally disrespectful? Or what if the mod simply overreacted to the situation? Was he antagonistic in any way? Yes, Scrum can be a handful with his words, but when the evidence is deleted, then we can't get the answers we need and have to rely on assumptions based on nothing other than conjecture.

So Scrum was in a debate, friendly or not, with a staff member and apparently got the boot? Who is this staff member and did he warn Scrum before he did what he did? Was this an abuse of power?

I agree, which is why I'm in the ISX. May take years to come to fruition, but at pennies to the share, I think it's a great opportunity lop or RV.

What do you think of the ISX? I know some people are selling their hard currency in preference to investing in the ISX. Is this what you did?

I agree. An RD is simple to understand even for an uneducated person. If Iraq was heck bent on lopping, I don't see a good reason why they have waited 8 years to do so and are now pushing it off again. 8 years is a long time to get everything in order bank wise. To me, this seems to indicate there is a lot more opposition internally within the government about a potential RD.

Excellent quote from the Bible. Obviously, Jesus is talking about salvation, but His words also apply to every day life. Just like when Jesus says that people are willfully ignorant. It's easier to go on about life without a care than to think about and take actions towards the things that are imprisoning us.

I apologize if i offended you. It is not my intention. Just pointing out that in some of your posts you come across as frustrated and the tone is a little less than cordial with a hint of sarcasm. You may get unfairly negged, I know, but it just comes with the territory of speaking about a LOP whether merited or not. But, yes, of all the people who bring up LOP information, you seem to be the more well spoken of the bunch. There is no doubt the others do belittle and think lowly of the intelligence of others on this board. But yes, let's discuss the article. The below seems encouraging. For one, it pushes the start of deleting zeros back and it shows there is opposition to the plan in some form. On the flip side, it also shows that Iraw may also not be ready of an RV at this time if that is what they are wanting to do due to lack of security and stability. Regardless, imo, showing opposition to the plan to delete zeroes is a great thing. What do you think? The process of deleting the zeros announced by the central bank earlier, convert thousand dinars to one dinar, are not satisfied with a number of economists, the Iraqis, who believe that Iraq is not ready for operation at the present time, because it lacks the security and political stability as well as stability economy. (finished)