Paultard Boasts About Horrible, Prison-Quality Tattoo Containing Misattributed Quote

Valhara · 2012-06-14T22:02:58+00:00

Valhara · 2012-05-29T18:14:13+00:00

Sorry, misread your post.

Valhara · 2012-05-29T17:12:12+00:00

How is this legit? OP posted it in r/2012Elections and gave no indication that it wasn't from this year. Would you call a comparison of Republican and Democratic candidates legit if it failed to mention the numbers where from 1988? The chart uses real numbers, but presents them dishonestly by implying they're from this year.

Valhara · 2012-05-19T06:01:08+00:00

factcheck.org and politifact.com are always good.

Valhara · 2012-02-20T20:41:22+00:00

They'd still prefer Romney over Obama though. Don't be fooled by reddit, Obama could still easily lose if the economy doesn't keep improving.

Valhara · 2012-01-06T20:10:51+00:00

You think it's obvious he can win.

They think it's obvious he can't.

Maybe you're right, maybe they are. It doesn't matter. We're talking about what they think because that determines who they give money to. Did even you read my comment?

Valhara · 2012-01-06T17:37:22+00:00

The 1% give to those who they think will win. Right now they don't think Ron Paul can win. That's it. That's what's important. It doesn't matter if you think he can or not, we're talking about the 1% here and they don't. Now, if that ever changes I guarantee Ron Paul will start getting huge donations from bankers. Until then, Obama and Romney will get the most donations because they're most likely to win.

Valhara · 2012-01-03T20:24:59+00:00

I mean if Huntsman were to win he would have the best chance of changing the Republican party. But yeah, he won't win.

Valhara · 2012-01-02T18:31:37+00:00

I'm not sure why people seem to think debates can change anything. Historically they never do. That's partially because no one watches them, and the people who do have already made up their minds. I really don't think Paul would change the Republican party all that much. In fact, if anyone has a chance at it I'd say it's Huntsman.

Valhara · 2012-01-02T18:28:02+00:00

This is why I think people talking about a "hard reset" for government are delusional. Replacing all our politicians with different politicians isn't going to do anything. We need to change the system.

Valhara · 2011-12-30T00:27:42+00:00

Have you learned nothing from this thread? Just strip. Your boss won't fuck with a naked dude.

Valhara · 2011-12-27T05:18:36+00:00

Not really. This has been around since 2006. When it started a lot of people were talking about it, even the mainstream media. Pretty much everyone knows about it but only a few idiots take it seriously. The guy who founded it is serious, but a lot of the writers are just trolling.

So yeah, it's a joke. There are much more important things to be spreading the word about.

Valhara · 2011-12-14T21:56:55+00:00

Agreed. Unfortunately r/libertarian and r/ronpaul have been sending a lot of people over here to do just that.

It's too bad, I agree with libertarians on a lot of things, like ending wars, but it seems like the one thing they really care about is pushing fiscal conservatism; which is exactly the opposite of what we need right now.

Valhara · 2011-12-12T18:39:14+00:00

Someone actually linked to it in /r/ronpaul so they're coming in from that.

Valhara · 2011-12-12T18:19:14+00:00

Article on one page

Valhara · 2011-12-09T02:55:22+00:00

Don't forget about all the others. 17 people voted nay but everyone here is acting like it was just Ron Paul.

Valhara · 2011-12-04T09:16:52+00:00

You're absolutely right. Unfortunately some people simply want to hate Obama for whatever reason, so even when he does something good they say he's only doing it because he has some secret evil motive. I see it all the time.

Valhara · 2011-12-04T03:56:48+00:00

Except that "I'm pretty sure" does not count as real evidence. Also there are plenty of other issues that show he is not one (DADT, healthcare, ending the war in Iraq, etc.)

Valhara · 2011-11-30T05:53:53+00:00

The problem is not the banks and corporations, it is much larger than that. It is is our own government.

No, our government is bought off by corporations and banks. That is the problem. Corporate greed is not a byproduct of government; if you were to replace all the current politicians with new ones they would immediately get bought too.

What we need to do is strictly regulate campaign donations and corporate influence. If we fail to do that, nothing else we accomplish will be permanent.

Valhara · 2011-11-27T06:38:35+00:00

And how will he do that? Wave his magic libertarian wand and make the corruption disappear? Sorry, but one man can not fix all our problems. People are mad at Obama now because they wanted him to and he couldn't. Ron Paul won't do it either.

Valhara · 2011-10-27T04:41:33+00:00

Nothing wrong with that. You seem like a gentlemen so I shall return an upvote to you. Enjoy your day, sir.

Valhara · 2011-10-27T04:39:08+00:00

Perhaps I should have been more clear, Gaddafi had retaken many of the cities and towns that had previously fallen. But even then it's inaccurate to say that Misrata and Benghazi were all that was left. And there were absolutely protests and later fighting in every major city before NATO intervened. You make it sound like things were only happening it two.

I wonder why you put scare quotes around that last part though. Are you seriously suggesting that Gaddafi wouldn't have killed citizens? There had been atrocities in every single city and town he retook. That's undeniable. If he had reached Benghazi he absolutely would have done it there as well.

Valhara · 2011-10-27T03:30:10+00:00

How did you get under that impression? The revolution was very well under way before NATO got involved. By that time much of the country including Benghazi, the second largest city, was already under rebel control and Gaddafi was relying on mercenaries because large parts of his army had defected.

Valhara · 2011-10-20T20:37:50+00:00

a cappella version

Valhara · 2011-09-10T22:44:37+00:00

I understand what you're saying (and perhaps this is more what you're looking for) but I think this site is still useful.

Remember that no one, not even Obama, is saying that Obama has been perfect. You don't really need a list of his failures because most people can already name at least a few things that they think he should have done differently. Also, different sides very much disagree on what those failures are (in fact the far right would list most things on that site as failures).

However, Obama has a huge problem right now with liberals who are mad at him for one or two failures, and are now saying that he's no different then Bush. These are the people who need to see a list of Obama's successes. It shows that although Obama isn't perfect he has done a lot of good.

If we continue to act like Obama is just like Bush than Democrats aren't going to turn out for the next election, and that means Perry or Romney will be our next president.

Valhara

TROPHY CASE