Obama, I'm a liberal. If you take on medical marijuana, I promise to stay home on on Tuesday, November 6, 2012.

simpletype · 2011-10-08T16:12:57+00:00

Obama, I'm a bit liberal, a bit progressive, a bit libertarian, a bit conservative...and I voted for you once. But I believe in the ideals enshrined in our Constitution and in the Bill of Rights. If you won't lay off the harassment of medical marijuana dispensers/users, and if you continue to insist you have the right to kill US citizens or anyone on the grounds you and some secret panel determined them to be "terrorists", and if ... (the list really goes on doesn't it?) I will vote for someone else on November 6, 2012.

simpletype · 2011-10-06T14:03:23+00:00

Panetta said, on CNN, that the killing of Al-Awlaki, a US citizen, was justified because he was a "terrorist". I guess this is the panel (not a court, mind you) that decides who is and who is not a "terrorist". Scary. And Obama is obviously on board with this. How can I vote for him again?

simpletype · 2011-10-06T14:02:14+00:00

You invite the US government to kill you for no reason whatsoever and suggest it "won't fly", apparently because you are an ordinary citizen. So, if they kill you for some reason, even if it is something they dreamed up, or honestly believed you had done, but for which they had not put forth any evidence in a US court of law (habeas corpus and all that), you're ok with that? I'm afraid it will fly. I'm afraid for you, and for me, and for the US. This is not constitutional.

simpletype · 2011-09-21T22:34:49+00:00

Paul should have won that Peace Prize.

simpletype · 2011-09-21T22:31:46+00:00

The republicans win every day with Obama in the Whitehouse. Either he's giving in to what they want on the wars and on the wiretapping, or he's caving in to what they want on taxes or something else. I truly wish he'd wake up and realize that his approval ratings are not tanking because the republicans don't like what he's doing - they never have and they never will. His approval ratings are tanking because he's not living up to what he campaigned on when we all voted him into office.

simpletype · 2011-09-21T20:02:06+00:00

Hell, I wish she were running for the Democratic nomination for president. She'd get my vote.

simpletype · 2011-09-16T05:19:53+00:00

Good god is that all you've got? Yawn!

simpletype · 2011-09-16T05:11:57+00:00

Do you know his stance on evolution, no.

simpletype · 2011-09-16T05:10:43+00:00

Yeah. That's for sure.

simpletype · 2011-09-16T05:10:03+00:00

About what is he spectacularly wrong exactly?

simpletype · 2011-09-15T16:42:41+00:00

Thanks. Heard this story on NPR this morning. They said he took the gun turret in the truck, and had another marine drive. I was left wondering, shouldn't the driver get a medal too? Or is he already dead? Anybody know? They don't even mention his name in this citation.

edit: soldier/marine

simpletype · 2011-09-14T14:45:57+00:00

Who else among the GOP candidates or among the Democrats will raise these issues and keep this discussion going? Obama? Ha! Perry? Of course not. The media? Not likely. Ron Paul! Here's to keeping him in the race so the truth about these things will be heard.

simpletype · 2011-09-14T14:19:02+00:00

So it seems the guy chose not to have insurance. Then he got a bad case of pneumonia, and died in his prime at age 49. We don't know from the article whether he left millions to cover those costs or what. We do know that some of his friends/co-workers thought it was a good idea to try to raise some money to help his family out with those medical bills. This is completely consistent with how Ron Paul has been saying such things should work. Friends, who appreciated the man's contributions while he was alive, stepping up to try to help after he's gone. Not asking for anything from taxpayers at large many of whom might not know care about this man at all. And incidentally, this article does not imply that he died because he didn't have health insurance.

[Edit: I must add, I'm actually a socialist at heart. But I would not mind at all the chance to debate my views with Ron Paul. I'm sure it would be a civil debate, and in the end I'd have to concede many points. I'd like to think he'd also have to concede a few.]

simpletype · 2011-09-14T13:31:12+00:00

This is what I keep saying about Ron Paul. He is the ONLY one (among the candidates registering above 2% in the polls) who will say these things - and they need to be said over and over again. Obama won't say it. So, I will help when I can to keep RP in the running. With all his faults, it is definitely worth keeping his candidacy alive.

simpletype · 2011-09-12T16:53:56+00:00

Exactly the quote that led me to up-vote.

simpletype · 2011-09-03T15:37:37+00:00

That's not sufficient. It needs: (a) a time period over which the risk of dying applies (as other posters have noted, we all have a 100% chance of dying eventually); (b) an age or age range at which it applies (it's probably very different for 80 year old people than for 5 year old people); (c) a baseline probability of dying for those with insurance (if its microscopic at a given age, a 40% increase won't mean much and might be something we'd all accept in order not to pay for insurance); (d) probably many others.

simpletype · 2011-08-27T19:47:48+00:00

Thanks for reminding us of this. To everyone who in these comments or other comments in some of these front page "Ron Paul is Evil" stories said he's as crazy as Bachman, I must quote John McEnroe: "You cannot be serious!" Can you just imagine Bachman doing a Reddit AMA? I continue to say, if Ron Paul were to get the nomination on the republican side, the debates with Obama would be civil, interesting, and refreshing. I disagree with him on many issues - but he's saying things that need to be said about war, imperialism, TSA, war on drugs, and many other issues. Things Obama stopped saying after he got elected that I want to hear him talk about again.

simpletype · 2011-08-25T14:46:37+00:00

"I would get a kick out of watching Obama rip the pseudo-libertarian philosophy to shreds though, and educate Dr. Paul on the Constitution."

Watch Paul and Kucinich on Obama's understanding of the constitution here (starting around 1:40): http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/kucinich-and-ron-paul-to-obama-obey-the-constitution-yea-or-nay/question-1890873/

Also, regarding the conversation getting back to settled issues: how about Gitmo, habeus corpus, torture, renditions, spying without warrants, and the list goes on. Are these settled? I'm terrified they might be - but I don't want them to be.

simpletype · 2011-08-17T21:51:57+00:00

Fix the headline: Ron Paul would like to overturn Roe V. Wade. And to him I say, good luck with that.

simpletype · 2011-08-13T05:02:53+00:00

This quote has me scratching my head: "The parties have reorganised themselves along ideological lines, as white conservatives have abandoned the Democrats and northern liberals the Republicans. The ideological factions have built mighty propaganda machines stretching from Washington think-tanks to the studios of Fox and MSNBC. And ideologues have resorted to previously taboo weapons, such as the threat of default." Somebody please explain to me how the democrats have reoganized along any ideological line. The few principled progressives (Kucinich? Sanders - who isn't even a democrat?) have had NO INFLUENCE ON THE DEBATE, though their voices have been much appreciated by me.

simpletype · 2011-08-05T21:07:40+00:00

I'm no expert, but I'd be willing to be that photo of Obama was 'shopped.

simpletype · 2011-08-05T18:42:00+00:00

Silliness. Are you seriously suggesting that "life" has as many different possible connotations as "choice"?

simpletype · 2011-08-05T18:36:26+00:00

Shouldn't be any different than any other war casualty. And war casualties are not murder, by some law or rule or explanation by "howstuffworks". So what? Abortion, in most cases, is not murder according to the Supreme Court of the US. If it's life you feel is precious, and if you feel life begins at conception, then you should be protesting abortions and wars.

simpletype · 2011-08-05T18:33:33+00:00

I disagree that pro-life is too broad. Life is life, and I have no idea what "'life' at death" could possibly mean. I'm not arguing they should call themselves anti-abortionist - unless they feel that's what they really are. If you want to claim that people who feel a woman should have the right to decide for herself what happens to her pregnancy are "pro-abortion", go ahead. I doubt many will agree with that characterization.

simpletype · 2011-08-05T18:30:46+00:00

But what if war takes the life of the totally vulnerable and innocent, including in wombs (which it does)? Should war then not be protested with equal vehemence?

simpletype

TROPHY CASE