Why does the media pretend Ron Paul isn't running?

[Pastor Chris F]

Originally Posted by PRShrek

He’s been in public office since the Seventies, what can you point to and say ‘he started this!’ or ‘he ended that!’ or ‘he changed this forever!’ If he hasn’t really made a name for himself in thirty some odd years of constant employment as a professional mover and shaker, can you convince me that he will suddenly become dynamic once he has this office instead of that one?

Even if I agree that all of his ideas are good ones (I don’t), if he wants my vote for President he needs to prove he can make things happen, and he needs to get started about ten years ago.

it takes a majority vote to change anything so this is ridiculous to say. He has always been a shaker and his voting record proves it. The problem is he is a libertarian and the GOP is to close to the center to change. The Democrats are in left field and there are not enough like minded people to allow him to make any change. If he was smart he'd run for Senate and start filibustering both GOP and DNC garbage. But he stays on the house because they control the budget. I would never vote Ron Paul because of his stance on drugs and not using the office to stop abortion on demand in every state.

[flo]

Originally Posted by PRShrek

He’s been in public office since the Seventies, what can you point to and say ‘he started this!’ or ‘he ended that!’ or ‘he changed this forever!’ If he hasn’t really made a name for himself in thirty some odd years of constant employment as a professional mover and shaker, can you convince me that he will suddenly become dynamic once he has this office instead of that one?

Even if I agree that all of his ideas are good ones (I don’t), if he wants my vote for President he needs to prove he can make things happen, and he needs to get started about ten years ago.

Right on the money.

[PRShrek]

The ridiculous thing is for someone to hold himself forth as a leader yet plead impotence in the absence of a majority. Lincoln didn’t sit on his hands and wait for a majority. Teddy didn’t furrow fake eyebrows at the lack of consensus. Reagan didn’t fret and fuss when the Democrat majority for eight years called for his head. Leaders are leaders BECAUSE no one agrees with them; they change the world because they have the ability to share their courage and conviction with others.

[adamt]

Originally Posted by PRShrek

The ridiculous thing is for someone to hold himself forth as a leader yet plead impotence in the absence of a majority. Lincoln didn’t sit on his hands and wait for a majority. Teddy didn’t furrow fake eyebrows at the lack of consensus. Reagan didn’t fret and fuss when the Democrat majority for eight years called for his head. Leaders are leaders BECAUSE no one agrees with them; they change the world because they have the ability to share their courage and conviction with others.

um.... didn't all those people you used as examples win by majority vote????



best be careful your line of logic, you don't have a theological basis for it

i'm not voting ron paul, but i must still respect him

there are alot more similiarities between noah and ron paul, than the people you pointed out....

just saying...

[PRShrek]

Originally Posted by adamt

um.... didn't all those people you used as examples win by majority vote????

Yes, yes, they were elected: Then they accomplished things that were not popular until they made them so.

Originally Posted by adamt

best be careful your line of logic, you don't have a theological basis for it

And how would you have any idea what I have a theological basis for?

Originally Posted by adamt

there are alot more similiarities between noah and ron paul, than the people you pointed out....

Wait, you’re implying that Ron ‘Drugs and Hookers for Everyone’ Paul is a Prophet of God? I can NOT WAIT to hear the theological basis for that zinger!

[adamt]

Originally Posted by PRShrek

Yes, yes, they were elected: Then they accomplished things that were not popular until they made them so.



And how would you have any idea what I have a theological basis for?



Wait, you’re implying that Ron ‘Drugs and Hookers for Everyone’ Paul is a Prophet of God? I can NOT WAIT to hear the theological basis for that zinger!

i don't care about ron paul enough to argue with someone about him, especially someone that can do nothing but twist words and make incoherent points.

case and point, i never called him a prophet.... if you can't even get that right, then there is certainly no hope to have anything resembling an intelligent argument with you, and seeing as how i really don't care about ron paul all that much, i am not going to go out of my way to argue with someone about him....

you must love obama then.... he has no record, was in office like two months before he was president and has changed everything since he is in office....

[CAVEMAN1]

Within both parties, there is the "establishment" candidate. Dems and GOP have a good thing going and they believe Ron Paul would muck up the waters. Therefore, he's put on the back burner intentionally. Our political system is broken and needs a major overhaul, starting with term limits. No more "life time" politicians.

[flo]

Term limits would be great. Unfortunately, they almost NEVER vote for them. Our forefathers never dreamed that our representatives would make it a lifelong career.

[adamt]

Originally Posted by flo

Term limits would be great. Unfortunately, they almost NEVER vote for them. Our forefathers never dreamed that our representatives would make it a lifelong career.

+1

i can't imagine how much better it would be if politicians didn't have a chance to amass a huge financial backing and just buy their way into office, and how much better it would be if they had to keep in touch in the real world with a real job

and do away with that ridiculous policy of salary for life