See other Health Articles
Title: HEALTH DIFFERENCES BETWEEN AMERICANS & EUROPEANS
Source:
doctorwascher.com
URL Source: http://doctorwascher.com/Archives/2-22-09.htm
Published: Feb 22, 2009
Author: Robert A. Wascher, MD, FACS
Post Date: 2009-11-02 16:41:11 by Destro
Keywords: None
Views: 2034
Comments: 150
By, Robert A. Wascher, MD, FACS Last Updated: 02/22/2009 HEALTH DIFFERENCES BETWEEN AMERICANS & EUROPEANS I have commented before about the striking discordance between the amount of money that we spend on health care in the United States and the health outcomes that we achieve with all of those dollars. At more than $2 trillion dollars per year, or more than $7,000 per citizen per year, the U.S. spends more on health care than virtually every other country in the world. One would, therefore, assume that all of those trillions of health care dollars would translate into a globally unsurpassed level of health and wellbeing in America. However, one would actually be mistaken in this assumption, as the United States lags behind many other countries of the world, including a few relatively underdeveloped countries, in several very important public health benchmarks. As if this were not bad enough, the world’s richest nation has an estimated 47 million uninsured citizens, with millions more possessing utterly inadequate health insurance coverage (millions of us in this country are just one serious illness away from financial ruin). Health care reform in the United States continues to be a political “third rail,” although virtually all stakeholders are in agreement that our healthcare system is dysfunctional and inefficient, and that it offers the American people very poor value for their money. However, there is considerable disagreement regarding the root causes that underlie the acknowledged deficiencies in our health care system, which means that there is also pervasive disagreement regarding the best interventions to undertake. Amidst the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and with no end in sight to the ongoing Not-Quite-As-Great-Depression, it is unclear whether or not the fledgling Obama Administration will be able to assemble the political capital and the will to wade into the treacherous waters of health care reform within the foreseeable future. A new research study, just published in the American Journal of Public Health, provides a rather stark comparison between the health status of rich and poor adults in the United States and Europe. In this study, more than 17,000 adults between the ages of 50 and 74 years were interviewed from among 10 European countries. Nearly 7,000 Americans of similar age were also interviewed for this study. The researchers assessed these 24,000 middle-aged and elderly adults for 6 chronic illnesses that are commonly accepted as indicators of the overall health of a society. In general, the American adults reported poorer overall health than their European counterparts. While the differences in health between the two groups of adults were, not surprisingly, more pronounced among poorer patients, even the wealthier Americans reported more problems with their health when compared to wealthy Europeans. At the same time, the gap in health status between rich and poor was much smaller among Europeans than was observed among the American patients who participated in this study. (As a striking example of the health disparities between Americans and Europeans, heart disease, the number one cause of death in most developed countries, was present in 18 percent of Americans, but in only 11 percent of Europeans, in this study.) This study puts some important numbers on health trends that have become increasingly obvious over the past few decades. When comparing health outcomes between two populations of patients that live in similarly modern, industrialized, and western societies, the United States fares very poorly, indeed. Our nation’s focus on disease prevention is haphazard and poorly executed, resulting in unacceptably high rates of preventable diseases and disease-related complications. Rather than investing our nation’s wealth in disease prevention and screening programs, we, instead, backload our inefficient and byzantine health care system with trillions of dollars, every year, to treat the complications of diseases that are, in many cases, almost entirely preventable. European countries spend, on average, only 50 to 60 percent as much on health care, per capita, as we do here in the United States, and yet their health outcomes frequently exceed ours in multiple critical areas of public health. While we may not all agree on every detail, almost all of us agree that our health care system is fundamentally broken, and that we cannot go on with “business as usual” any longer. Despite the ongoing implosion of the economy, we must somehow find the will and the foresight to overhaul our current fractured and wasteful health care system, including a much greater emphasis on promoting healthful lifestyle habits, and improved disease prevention and screening programs. As the average age of our population continues to rise, our ongoing failure to step up to the plate and fix our dysfunctional health care system will, increasingly, cost our nation dearly. Poster Comment: Doctor Wascher's Biography@ http://doctorwascher.com/Doctor%20Wascher%20Bio%20-%202008.htm
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Scrapper2, mirage, christine, Jethro Tull, Prefrontal Vortex, Original_Intent, Brian S (#0)
fyi
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
And do those European countries have large minorities of non whites included. I didnt bother to read the rest.
What's the url to the research study in the American Journal of Public Health referred to in the article? And why is this study - one that is based on "interviews" - yet another one you managed to scrape up - a valid measure of health care systems?
Oh goodie. Goldi Bans this Anti-American pervert, and now he's over here posting his Anti-American Nonsense. The reason why Americans have poorer health, is because we work 40 Plus hours a week, just to cover the taxes of our Socialist, Traitorous Masters levy against our productivity. Europeans work less, than we do. 30 hours a week or less, and get a mandatory month's vacation. Why you are letting this NON-American piece of filth to post here is beyond me.
Better to be hated for what you are, than loved for what you are not.
The 'stro kind of reminds me of a johna(hole) on meth...hmmm
So your contention is America's healthcare is OK for the white guy and that is how you like it? LOL!
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
That's OK, tea party pig - I got Goldie banned as well. Also, this article is written by an American doctor and former Army colonel: In 2006, Dr. Wascher retired from the Army at the rank of Colonel, and was appointed as the Director of the Division of Surgical Oncology at Newark Beth Israel Medical Center, and as a Clinical Associate Professor of Surgery at the University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey. So I guess he is an anti-America traitor to Europe as well? Loser LPer trying to make up an excuse why Dr. Wascher, a smarter and more accomplished man than you is wrong. What other trailer park wisdom are you going to throw down to discredit this accomplished doctor?
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
Your words not mine. Fairly simple question, do those countries have a large minority?
Your words not mine. Fairly simple question, do those countries have a large minority? Of the wealthiest nations in Europe the British are the only ones that have a true socialist health care system and it is the worst of the bunch - but even the British socilaist system - to answer your question - when comparing white Brits with white American ONLY the crappy socialist health care system of the UK still outperforms the American healthcare system. Now what trailer park wisdom will you come up with in answer to a peer reviewed statistical and medical study? Why are British men healthier than American ones? Earlier this month, a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association compared the health of a group of men in the United States with that of a very similar group of men in England. The researchers found a striking difference in the quality of health of the two populations—the Americans were sicker and died younger than their British counterparts. The results are anxiety-provoking because they can't easily be accounted for—and because one of the study's authors, Dr. Michael Marmot of University College, London, is a giant in the field. Marmot's new study compared two populations, one in England and one in the United States, totaling about 8,000 in all, with many similar characteristics. All were male, non-Latino whites between the ages of 55 and 64. The researchers curbed diversity in this way in order to weed out extraneous factors. But in each group, the men ranged widely in terms of income and educational attainment. Thus, though the study primarily compared the health consequences of living in the United States or living in England, the researchers also looked at the degree to which socioeconomic status contributed to the health differences they found.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
Without a doubt, we have the best health care in the world. We also have the most screwed-up billing systems in the world. Syncing up the programs should be the goal here.
Surely you know the answer, try to spit it out????? Even if it sticks in your craw.
I have found myself of late compelled to revisit the mission statement of Freedom4um. I am inviting each of you to do the same. I have determined that there are some here whose value system and opinions are not in keeping with, and are even detrimental, to the mission of this forum. freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=109510 You're no longer welcome here.
This poster whom we will not name has based his entire assault on the predicate that what is about to be foisted off on us is for our own good. The Europeans, Germans, whatever - developed whatever they have over there in terms of a health care system over a hundred years or so of political given take and whether they love it or hate it is immaterial to the struggle that is going on this country of ours today. This week were are menaced by thousands of pages of bureaucratic boiler plate aimed at our access to alternative medicine, our right to purchase the supplements that we need, the privacy of our medical histories and records, as well as our psychological and psychiatric profiles. I trust Reid and Pelosi with my health like you'd trust your daughters with the neighborhood cat burglar.
I think your call here is unwise, unless you want an echo chamber. I enjoyed reading Destro's opinions and input. He backed his stuff up pretty well, including on this thread. Whatever.
THAT picture is worth 1,000 words and more, Jethro. I couldn't have said it better.
Fred, how is it possible to 'back up pretty well' a grab by central government of nearly 20% of our GDP? The word for that is socialism, a vile form of government that shouldn't be debated, but rather rejected outright.
Destro posts regularly on ELPee.
I asked him three times to answer one simple question. No answer as his agenda is so biased he cannot think outside his own little box.
Under what screen name?
I didn't bother to read the rest. Same here.
I'm certain other observers might make the same comment about you.
Fred Mertz, same agenda, same bias.
did you miss that he bragged he made good on his threat to Goldi? who needs that kind of character here? he's also made it clear in numerous postings his disdain for us. i choose to no longer give him a venue to vent it.
Anytime someone posts with bias dripping out their sewer pipe, it is a hint they have an agenda, and are social misfits.
No answer as his agenda is so biased he cannot think outside his own little box. Big red flag. I get that from two posters whose agenda is equally transparent. I can't deal with people who are too timid to behave like American nationalists.
Hey, Mertz ... step out of your little box and into the sand box. The box you are now in is serving you poorly.
Cyni's thinkin' is as big as the great outdoors. That cat has been around, don't you know.
His box is larger than most all the rest of us. We should pay attention, and try to understand, what he brings to us.
We should pay attention, and try to understand, what he brings to us. Lod, you obviously are one of those on this site that appreciates what Cyni brings to us ... if we just "pay attention, and try to understand what he brings ..." Perfect analysis.
I thank you kind Sirs... The checks will be in the mailbox first light tomorrow.
His threat wasn't a threat from him although he phrased it that way. He basically said that he was going to continue to post his opinions and positions knowing that the 'haters' (my term) would attack and chastise him with their nasty innuendos of him being gay, sex with animals, etc. And WebSense or whatever filters would take his opponents' words and give the site a cautionary rating. They were pretty brutal to him in the past week. He was absolutely correct. I see a similar situation happening right now with War on elPee. i.e. He's not parroting the party line and the attack dogs are coming out in force. Watch and learn.
I have seen Cyni state "the check is in the mail" before. You suppose he is jooish? I always heard the joos in NYC telling their creditors the very same thing. MUHAHAHAHA
Fred... I have known both you and Destro for a very long time. For quite some time, ElPee has been nothing but name calling in a childish manner, with all of my friends now gone. One by one they called it quits. Rooster being the last. As far as I am concerned the majority there now add little if anything towards any intellectual discussion. Post after post of insulting vulgarity. Then there are those that indulge in nothing besides trying to alienate everyone in sight, an agenda that sooner or later causes good people to leave. Destro was such.
Top of the list.
He rarely fails to give an interesting perspective and make other posters think and have to back up their arguments. I don't see that as a problem to those who come prepared. Anyway... there is a Bozo filter on this site that should be used by those who need a higher comfort level.
Well, I don't post much anymore for many of the reasons you mention. I read and watch alot. I don't have time to watch every single post. A few hours a day I'm reading here and there. I learned things from Destro. I try to do the same with many posters on several sites. Maybe he had an agenda or maybe he liked to stir the pot, but I don't think he should have been banned from here. I like to stir the pot on occasion. That is all.
That stirring is what drives good people away, people that come here expecting civil and polite discussion and discourse. Stirring has never added anything and has led to many forums going down the drain.
I agree with you.
Say what? Did Destro ever effectively back up his "interesting perspective" when challenged with facts that discredited his "interesting perspective?" You must hold "interesting perspectives" too to appreciate Destro's childish attacks on anyone who offered evidence contrary to his pedestrian AND redundant posts. He never even bothered to read the original source material that he tried to pass off as the word from the Medical Mount. He could not answer questions about the material he posted because his research and readings were so shoddy and limited, he COULD NOT. Please spare me your admiration of that intellectually shallow, ill-informed, socialist goose stepper. I did not call for Destro's departure but to be honest I am not unhappy that christine reached the conclusion that Destro had no interest in making positive contributions to open and honest discussions on political issues we face today. Frankly after I saw the link to the threats a few days ago that Destro made to another political discussion forum moderator, I am now breathing a sigh of relief that Destro can't pursue his anti-free speech philosophy against this forum's moderator owner. We all are very lucky that christine offers this loosely moderated forum as a safe environment to exercise our free speech and discuss our opinions about a breadth of issues. I am more concerned about christine's continued ability to offer us this forum, than fretting about the exit of a hostile poster who offered little in the way of objective, agenda-free material.
Amen, indeed he could not and did not.
What "things" did you learn from Destro, pray tell? I wait with bated breath to read your list of "Destro's teaching thingies."
Says the fascist goose stepper...
See what 4um does not care for Fred????? That is typical ELpee. Why not give the lady a civil answer?
I agree with you.
Please provide evidence that supports your insulting characterization of me, Fred. Thank you.
Agree??? How so??? You insulted the lady and gave no answer. That is what Destro was doing, no answers to anything, always attack attack attack. Agenda Fred.
I agree with you, too.
I must say that I rarely agree with banning..........but I'm behind Christine all the way on this one. Fred, this is a brazen bragging about lashing out against forum owners. You know that I don't agree with the way GL runs her little show, the hypocricy and selective enforcement of forum rules. In this case, you have a brazen crap thrower who, on another thread, refused to answer direct and pointed questions asked by Christine regarding his intentions. Why should she be expected to put up with this bs? Cui Bono? Not Christine and not Freedum4um.
I agree. I should be banned from here. If I can, I'll check back in the morning. Good night.
I agree with you.
That Destro does get some panties in a wad. You can tell the ones that would destabilize easily in a crisis. lolol
I like the way you listen to sound reasoning, Fred. : ) You're a good egg.
Ah now Fred. Why not join in, we mean no harm. I have been thrown out of every forum I ever posted in, except this one. I have no agenda and still tick off a lot of people, including Scrap, but I mean no harm, and I do try to add something besides name calling.
lolol At least the posters you allude to are women who have a valid physiological reason for wearing panties. What's your excuse?
A - He likes to keep in touch with his feminine side. B - He's a leftist wacko C - All of the above Take your pick
Ted Kennedy Is Now Eligible To Vote In Chicago.
What's your excuse? I have no idea who is a woman here or not and frankly dear I don't give a damn, I just hate to see posters banned evidently unlike so called tough "scrappers" like you. lololol
Saw this this morning and couldn't believe it. There's a cheap, obnoxious slap at a forum member whose posts are humane, thoughtful and well considered. When I read scrapper's stuff, I hear a pretty good mind tickin' over - I sure don't hear jackboots. You are cruisin' for a bruisin' as they say Mertz. We're still waiting for you to back up this drive by.
mininggold has been on my bozo for more than a month. She is a wacko LP troll from LP who melts down when you mention anything negative about California. She insists I'm an R, despite me not having voted for them in decades. When someone, without evidence, continues to use the same line over and over, their intentions are clear. She should find Destro, and then seek out a more pleasant posting experience.
Agreed Hopefully hangin with the Weasel is in her future.
Ted Kennedy Is Now Eligible To Vote In Chicago.
I enjoyed reading Destro's opinions and input. He backed his stuff up pretty well, including on this thread. Whatever. Yeah, that sums you up purdy well. whatever...
Yes, Traitors like 'stro and his merry band of cocksuckers like YOU...
You don't 'get' freddie by now ?
LOL - brains, trains, so I took a trip...
would that be the Eurotrash Kommie Democrat Party ?
Get back to us when you and Ron Paul reconquer the GOP...LOL
you pitched in with the obamalamadingdongs during the selection didn't you...
several years of the 'stro is enough for any decent American to suffer...IMO
thank you, scrap.
Who used the term goose stepper first? I was just replying in kind.
And on other forums you are yukon's side kick or are you afraid to admit it to your "friends" here. Bragging there how you post here ands everyone thinks you are just one great poster. lolol Free speech, my ass, this site is just another clique gathering just like most of them. And until it changes it and posters can show they can take the heat and examine their positions on issues without getting their panties in a bunch this site deserves to stay small and ineffective....like your LP rifle. lololol.
Tribes always give passes to fellow members.
I'm a little surprised that Jethro Tull has you on bozo. I didn't realize he was so thin skinned. Well, at least I learn something new every day.
Being a quitter or wanting a coup, is that your only choices? But other than that it's nice to see that you are cleaning up your language. If any poster deserves banning for getting this site kicked out of libraries.......I don't think it would be Destro.
LOL stick to the horses freddie...
I think I was just told JT is a girl. But the he/she has friends in high places. lolol But whatever... he doesn't like me throwing up what should be his obvious delemma of years of lying to civilians for a living all the while now promoting sedition here. And hijacking every thread, to post his yukon type Obama pictures.
just stop logging in. no one will miss you...
Don't forget to report back to your handlers. lololol Your conduct today is rather good though, I see more libraries in this site's future.
The people's nest has room, that's for certain...
You're either stooooopid, blind or one of them. Or a combo of course...
You voted for Obamalamadingdong, din't you mg ? I get it now. You are one of the fucking losers that jumped from Ron Paul to Barry Soetoro the Kenyan usurper puppet...
you seem more nervous than usual today mg...
JT doing the spinning as usual so you can email it. I have never insisted it is an R but I do not consider a serial nonvoter as even having the right to a opinion much less calling other posters to commit sedition and other illegal acts, even wishing for nuclear holocaust.... as a former cop who is probably still under oath???? But being it needs Christine to come to it's rescue now and then I did have my doubts about it being male, or else it's a big donor. Something I had not wanted to think Christine capable of until yesterday.
It would do no good to tell you who I voted for as YOU hate the R Candidate I voted for. Maybe I should be a serial non voter bitching about who won. There ....that would get your respect!!!lololol
That's just your hands shaking from your weekend binge and DT's you are recovering from.
Where do you people hatch and grow ?
as you keep saying...
lolololololol
Now that is the best question you have asked today. There are 130 million losers out there that did their "patriotic duty" as programmed and voted for the "loser" of their choice. You need to bone up on the terms..GULLIBLE...NAIVE...PROGRAMMED.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but I still don't believe you are quite telling the truth. Keep up the good behavior though. You are just tooo funny. I do wish gramps had dropped young Master Nixon on his head, since he later made spinning into an art form imitated far and wide.
You're still not even interesting. Will you be offended if I completely ignore you ? I hope so...
I would miss Fred. : )
And hated by republican regulars and spinners. Just mentioning or even inferring Ron Paul often brings out the true colors of many a poster as they sidle around the dratted offender trying to disenfranchise without appearing obvious. lolol
I hope so... Sob, sob..... Why I'm just devastated to be ignored by a drunk. What if the revo happens and you are in a blackout?
There was no "choice" beyond Paul in the last fraud election. As time passes, it becomes more evident that Paul being just another professional politician, ran for a purpose, however not a run for president. Paul served the "system" in that he kept any other legitimate third party candidate from getting off the ground. When his mission was complete, he folded his tent and stole back into his beloved republican party, welcomed with open arms, for a job well done. With Paul a non factor from the opening bell, the system had scammed the process one more time. A nation of programmed sheep is proven by what we now see happening this very day...wonder of wonders the republican most likely will awaken from the dead and move into the spotlight... It is nothing but a shell game.
Since I'm not a seer I can only act on info I had garnered up until the election. Really... I need to go now as a dear friend and mentor, a woman who made Sarah Palin seem like a rank amateur in the hunting department died over the weekend and her funeral is tomorrow. I need to get tomorrow's chores done today.
bump
how many days without fred posting (nothing) before you notice you miss the mertz ?
(nothing) is so subjective, Rotara. : ) Fred is always nice to me, this was true when I was over at LP too. He's never said an unkind word to me.
Bump #95 again, please.
Here's the difference between what you said and what I said, Fred. Destro earned the term "socialist goose stepper" through his posts. The material he posted was consistently of the socialist persuation and he could not defend the content when challenged because he had accepted its ideology on blind faith and had not reflected on the pros and cons or even read outside the party line, so to speak. Indeed Destro was a closed minded follower of dogma and I referred to his behavior accordingly. When I asked you for evidence to support your knee jerk label of me as a fascist goose stepper, you would not because you could not. Your response to randge demonstrates the depth of your reasoning.
Who were these "legitimate third party candidates" that Paul single handedly, like a super hero, kept "from getting off the ground"? And what is this "stole back to the republican party" business? Paul ran as a republican and remains a republican, far more republican that Juan McAmnesty or Mittens Romney could ever fathom with his truly small government ways and mentality. This is the silliest arguement of Paul having dubious and sinister aspirations that I have ever heard, Cyni.
I love it when you do that...
What's more important; the repubican party, the RAT party or America ? What time do you think it is ??
I would have never used or thought to use that term until I saw your reply. So I replied to you in kind.
America, of course. Paul came into this election with the experience of having run previously as a viable third party candidate. He already knew that the game was rigged against any third party opposition. He felt that the only way he could help this nation was to run as a republican and bring the issues that this party ignores to light, to show that many still believe in our Constitution and small government principles. His contention had long been that the party had turned its back on core principles, but he did not. He took the most viable route through the election process for the good of this nation. You can lament the viability of third party candidates until the cows come home, but that does not change the fact that the entire system is rigged to keep them out. Paul didn't make this true, he simply acknowledged this sad truth and planned his strategy accordingly.
thinking=good reacting=not so good
Well said.
Lets assume you watched one of the first republican debates held in New England that played on national TV. If indeed you watched and listened, did you find something strange that Paul was laughed off stage by several of the other pubs? Do you recall what if anything Paul said to defend himself??? The other debates played out much the same way, with Paul seemingly unconcerned by the abuse heaped upon him by his fellow republicans. Anyone remotely vetted in politics cast a jaundiced eye on such apathy. And then out of the blue, after collecting millions of dollars from the rubes, came the Trotski memo. What an oddity that was. Paul went to great extreme to profess his fidelity to the republican party and he would always remain a republican. How odd, he quit to "fight" for his seat in congress. He won easily as usual. Now Paul is allowing his son to use his donor mailing lists to solicit more millions for his run for the Senate. Total loss of integrity there. Politics is a dirty business and regardless of what they say, each and everyone of them are professional politicians.
it depends on what your definition of effective is. i think my Mission Statement is quite clear about for whom i created this forum. it is first and foremost for America Firsters. of what value is having those who have admitted that they are anti-American and hold a world view and ideology that is completely anathema to my/our values and attack me and us at every opportunity? i wouldn't offer my home to a person like that nor will i provide a forum.
But, Cynicom, as I recall, Ron Paul stated right from the start that he was not planning to run as anything but as a GOP Pres candidate. He made it abundantly clear that he would not be switching to run as a Third Party Pres candidate so that meant he was willing to ride out the predictable back stabbing from his own party to get media exposure for his conservative ideas. He also made no bones about the fact that of the 2 national parties we currently have, he identified more closely with the GOP. The fact that in current federal elections, conservative candidates are actually challenging GOP anointed RINO ones, is not accidental - I think it comes from Ron Paul's GOP Pres candidacy run - he has given courage to other conservatives within the GOP who would otherwise be silent, and that in itself is quite an accomplishment. I'm guessing this is what Ron Paul came to realize over the years he's served in Congress - ie. that this nation will continue to have a 2 party political system for many many years to come and of the 2 parties the one that might have an iota of hope for reform from within is the GOP, and not the Dem Party. You can argue that this type of thinking may seem too pragmatic or too pessimistic, but I don't think you can label it a double cross or a betrayal or Trotsky-like. Ron Paul ran his GOP Pres candidacy campaign as long as he could. He called it quits when the numbers clearly showed there was no chance and that point he focused his attentions on campaigning to retain his congressional seat. What else should he have done, in your opinion? Regarding Ron Paul's call for donations, paying for a Pres candidate campaign is an incredibly expensive undertaking. Are you suggesting that Ron Paul profited personally from the donations he collected - that he didn't use the $ to pay off the campaign debts he had accumulated? Regarding Ron Paul's son using his father's donor list, it's to be expected - Rand is an aspiring politician - where else would he start to find potential donors for a platform that is based on conservative principles he shares with his Dad?
Anyone that seriously concerns themselves with politics has to sweep from their minds those arcane labels that are so easily applied to politicians. Left, right, lib, con, moderate, extremist and of course republican and democrat. All of those labels are used for a purpose, in theory, to assure the voters that there are differences across the political spectrum. In practice, ALL politicians have but one goal in mind, the possession of power, no exceptions. If acceptance of that premise is not possible, any further study will be flawed. My political awakening was way back, when the most used terms were dem and pub, and Eisenhower was considering running for president. Both major political parties overwhelmingly offered Ike the candidacy on a silver platter, with NO pre conditions, with NO examination of his views, none. Mind you, both major parties were made up of all those labels above, left, right etc etc, yet no one asked what label Ike was under, no one. How was this possible entered my mind. The answer is really quite simple, all of those labels are there to program the voters, to make sure he knows dems are all bad and out to destroy capitalism and that pubs are equally bad and will aid only the super rich. Proof you ask??? Statistics gives you the answer, do you find it odd that there is a huge difference in parties, and yet in most national elections there is but...one or two percent difference...in the total vote count???? Just perhaps it is manufactured that way??? Just perhaps there are a few people staging the entire charade. I had doubt about "parties" from that time on. Ike as a pub had his turn, then it went to the dems for eight years, then back to pubs for eight years, with few exceptions it is akin to a pendulum. Evenly balanced, back and forth, very nicely orchestrated, fifty fifty, with the voters fully convinced they are making a choice.
I would have never used or thought to use that term until I saw your reply. So I replied to you in kind. So by virtue of the fact that scrapper used the term "goose stepper," she is therefore a fascist, nazi, goose stepper - whatever. Tautologically tremendous & splendid logic. We'll keep you around for laughs.
I take offense when anyone uses twenty dollar words.
You may safely ignore my nickel-plated diction. When I get a wild hair, I like to brandish it at odd moments like a cheap revolver.
What you say, Cynicom, is true and as you point out has been known for a long time - both parties are slimey and corrupt and have become more similar than dissimilar. BUT as abraxas pointed out, and I agree with abraxas, whether we like it or not, our nation is based on a 2 party system. Ron Paul years ago thought that a Third Party was viable and he quickly found out he was wrong. And he came to the realization that the system is what it is - he did not create it but he needed to work within it in order for his conservative ideals to have any hope of seeing the light of day in the public political theater. Ron Paul made a considered pragmatic decision that of the 2 parties, the GOP was the best vehicle to use for getting those ideals out for the public's consideration and possibly to even effect changes within the GOP party itself by attracting other conservatives. As I stated previously, you may not like Ron Paul's decision but I don't think you can fault him for keeping his decision under raps, and only revealing his intentions to his surprised supporters at the last minute. From the get go, Ron Paul said he was planning to run as A GOP CANDIDATE and whenever he was asked if he would consider running as a Third Party candidate, he said "no." Ron Paul did not deceive his supporters but some had hopes that he was going to eventually change his mind and were disappointed when he simply followed through on what he said he'd do.
Exactly correct. I only wish that he'd spoken out, and challenged, the electronic vote fraud that began in NH and continued throughout the country.
In fact it is NOT true. We have a one party system of government. One last example. If Ike had run as say a socialist, he would not have won, if he ran as a dem or pub, he was a shoo in. How can that be? Same man. How is that possible? Ron Paul was the best man on the platform to be President. He never got out of the gate, he was laughed off stage with the merry help of the media. He was the hope of this country, at least those that resist the current one party system.
let me ask a question. do you believe that US presidential elections are legit or do you believe, as i do, that they are a complete fraud, and that the winner is chosen by the shadow government (years in advance, imo)?
that's where i'm going with my question.
Never at any time did Paul defend himself, never. Voting fraud. Laffed off stage, nothing. Total apathy.
I think the Presidential candidates of both parties are selected by very powerful movers and shakers and quite possibly there's collusion in that one party's selected candidate in recent years especially seems weaker, ensuring that the other party's candidate will win. However, with our two party system firmly entrenched, with our electorate having become sufficiently dumbified over time through our public system and Third World immigration, and with our MSM being controlled by a handful of owners frankly the moneyed powerful people don't need to engage in collusion. Regardless of which party's candidate wins the WH, the rich and powerful always win. Postscript: I don't think Pres candidates are selected years in advance, although there is "spotting" of those with potential or who have dark horse candidate possibilities years in advance eg. Obama and appropriate leg ups given to that person for upward mobility in the party hierarchy due to anticipated future return favors. Yes, voter fraud is rampant.
Yes, that I found curious indeed. But things have come to such a pass that the federal railroad and the coroner decide these things. The federal railroad for Traficant, Nixon or whoever sets up significant roadblocks to "operations." The coroner for those who know too much, may say to much, or who might actually take undesirable action: Tower, Wellstone, Kennedys, etc. RP is squeaky clean and it would be hard to put him on the federal choo-choo. But my prediction is that he will survive to retirement.
....like your LP rifle. lololol. I haven't posted on El Pee since I was banned about 5 years ago To say you are totally full of shit is an understatement, now go screw yourself... lololol
Ted Kennedy Is Now Eligible To Vote In Chicago.
Americans do not have any different quality of life, other than the fact that our taxes have to subsidize people like you who come here illegally and suck the teat of America. We work longer hours to pay taxes to a government who spends our money like drunken sailors on the whores of Europe and the third world. To think that you are telling me that this man is smarter or more accomplished than I am is laughable. The idea of a European Socialist, telling me what it's like to live in America, is akin to you telling me what it's like to be a man. You didn't get Goldi banned, how could you? It's her website. Christine, if you have a brain in your head, you'll ban this clown. He's nothing but an American Hating traitor and disruptor. Oh, and by the way, I posted here long before you did Destro.
Better to be hated for what you are, than loved for what you are not.
I'll agree with this scrapper, but I'd like to add the following. RP entered the race as an after thought. He never expected his effort to grow as it did. It took him off balance, and he said as much. When the money and movement he benefited from was at it's zenith, he then had an opportunity to change American political history. That would have meant him leaving the Rs and either going as an I, L, or create a new party. The *record breaking money* he was raising made his opportunity unique to all others to date. It was pure grassroots and Internet driven. The establishment was dazed and confused. When he chose to remain loyal to the Rs and not the movement, his political soul was exposed. If the nation was at the precipice he claimed it was (it is), wasn't a chance to save it the only option for him? For him to claim he wouldn't have been reelected to his TX seat as anything but an R was a bucket of Texas hogwash. He had money, name recognition and volunteers enough to easily pull out a district victory. In the end, RP will best be remembered as a loyal Republican who occasionally authors bills that go nowhere. Give me Traficant.
Destro(y) is gone. None of my business really, but I would have counseled that action although I am really opposed to bannings. Anyone who starts talking about lawsuits in respect of a forum owner's interests is asking for it. This person was already spinning fantasies of what the lawyers would be asking for in discovery. I'll own that some disgusting stuff was said over that at the place-we-needn't- name, but the poster in question is master at the art of stirring up the rubes.
We have a one party system of government. Respectfully I'd submit that is your opinion, not fact. I don't agree with your opinion. Though both parties have drifted more left ward over time -both parties promise entitlements up the wazoo to the increasingly more benefit conscious electorate and though both parties have become equally militaristic inclined due to campaign donations from similar sources [MIC and AIPAC], I think there still are enough intrinsic differences in the parties' membership composition that eschews a 1 party label. For example, the extremist element of the GOP are the evangelicals whereas the extremist element of the Dems are the socialists - there's no similarity what so ever in their respective aims. Another example of irreconcilable differences are the traditional constituencies the 2 parties serve - the GOP are more small business friendly/supported ( Chamber of Commerce) whereas the Dem Party is more labor union friendly/supported (IBT, SEIU,UAW).
But then as some cynics will claim, the result is WAR and SOCIALSM. That's the proof in the pudding for those that hold with the "one party" hypothesis.
Jethro - you're a dreamer with respect to what Ron Paul "could have/should have" done. Imo, Ron Paul followed through with the only option available to him that guaranteed a modicum of success for himself and for the conservative movement politically speaking. On the one hand you admit that Ron Paul's candidacy run was a spur of the moment decision and that he was genuinely surprised, even shocked that there was such a ground swell of support for his ideas and for him. But then you say after being shocked at the support, he should have jumped ship and run as a Third Party Pres candidate. Wow! That's a tall order for a humble 74 year old obgyn turned Congressman from Texas. Grassroots financial support via the internet is one thing but it's quite another thing altogether to field viable Third Party Senate and House candidates across the 50 states in such a limited time frame to stand as a credible political party to vote for to the electorate. Ron Paul recognized that there was no way a Third Party could mount a successful campaign in the November 2008 election. What he saw as possible and a realistic goal to achieve was what he pursued - he was able to give a higher profile to common sense fiscal conservative small gov't ideals - which had never been done before in a reasonable and respected fashion -for the general public's consideration and the popularity of his views has given confidence for other conservative minded political candidates "to come out." Also, Ron Paul was able to keep his political seat as Congressman to continue to represent his constituency's interests in DC and to speak out to Americans at large about the wasteful and perfidious legislation being promoted. Without his insider's voice who else is there in Congress who would fill RP's role as DC's good conscience?
Bump this.
He's 74 going on 60. He looks fit and trim, and if McCain at 70? garnered 48% as a surviving cancer victim, Sir Paul could have done 12-15% as an Independent. Winning was never in my calculation with Paul but a permanent movement was, and it could have been. I'd like to know one thing RP has in common with today's Republican party. For the life of me I can't think of any. If he's there for the ease of ballot access alone, he isn't the man many think/thought he was. The real sad part about the entire Paul affair for me was watching well meaning people give him their precious little money and time, while I knew the establishment (read GOP/DNC) would never put forward a man with his convictions. I'll never believe a man with his political acumen didn't realize that either. Those that know me best will tell you I saw the RP effort for what it was; he was never, ever going to be selected as the GOP nominee. Last year's fisaco was about him, not the nation. In that respect, Paul was the dreamer, not me.
Now Paul is allowing his son to use his donor mailing lists to solicit more millions for his run for the Senate. Total loss of integrity there. I watched all the debates and felt that Paul was excellent, gracious and demonstrated the highest level of integrity among those on the stage. Would you have preferred that Paul threw a tantrum or kept his demeanor and answered the questions as hand truthfully and in the best interest of this nation, despite the pathetic middle school responses by other candidates? I did not find his responses apathetic in the least, nor did the viewing audience that gave him the largests rounds of applause of any candidate on the stage. He knew his audience and it wasn't the other idiots sharing the stage. It was the American people. That's why on those opinion polls he won every debate. Again, I completely disagree. His son is the best candidate running for the Senate seat. I have no qualms with being on his mailing list. I agree with most of his positions. No loss of integrity when the candidate has America's best interests as his main reason for running. Also, he's not paid off by a bunch of lobbyists. He's running a clean campaign based on the will of the people like his father did. There could be no more integrity than a politician running on that platform. By the way, Cyni, you speak of all these viable and legitimate third party candidates. Who are they? Can any of them get on a ballot in all 50 states? This second question is key as that's the only way they can be considered viable, even if they are legit.
LOL! Maybe the cynics are correct after all? No, the results you name have come into prominence because the extremist elements of the 2 parties got their "man" in the WH - W and O. But this was not a result of collusion and the power of the extremists will wane in time. I have a strong belief in the seductive nature of power to individuals and I don't think power is as satisfying if it is made to be purposely shared by taking orchestrated turns. That's why I don't see a 1 party system ...yet...our politicians crave absolute power for themselves and are unwilling to be told that this year it will be theirs to enjoy for a while but come the next election, they need to agree to stand down and let the other party's candidate win. It goes against human nature.
HE DEFENDED HIS POSTITIONS, which is what a candidate should do. Others tried to make it all personal, but Paul refused to take the bait. For this he should be respected, not ridiculed. Geez, should all races and debates be denegrated to the level of school yard insult exchanges? I, for one, am sick of that crap. It's a damn shame that more politicians do not demonstrate Paul's level of integrity and character.......sad that the people do not lament this as well and, instead, lament that he didn't sink to the level of idiocy that the other candidates wallowed in.
Bravo Scrapper!! Nicely stated.
Explain Ron Paul and "911 The Official Government Story®" stamp of approval plz...
Explain where you are getting your information. Paul stated, affirmed and reiterated throughout his campaign that he supported a new, independent investigation into 911.
Ron Paul Doesn't Accept 911 Investigation
I understand he wants a new 9-11 investigation, I can't think of anyone who doesn't. But tell me this; how would he enter a new investigation after having dismissed the message of the Truthers? I'm not trying to be argumentative, abraxas, but an open mind is first and foremost to getting to the truth.
First, that question by the moderator was nothing more than a red herring to divert Paul from responding to key issues. The question was quite pointed, questioning a belief in the US goobermint being "complicit" or "covered up" the events of 911. Paul responded on behalf of the First Amendment. He was the ONLY candidate on that stage to support a new 911 investigation AND the only asked about what his supporters think on any issue. Paul dismisses the key elements involved in THAT question, while offering many pragmatic questions of his own regarding the events of 911. Must one fully and unequivically accept ALL truther messages to cut the mustard? Afterall, not ALL truthers accept that the government pulled a false flag, while most question the complete and utter lack of competenance and integrity in conducting the investigation. On many issues, Paul agrees with truthers, like government incompetence, while not accepting that the government pulled off the attacks.
Well not one other Republican POTUS candidate, nor most of the Dems with the exception of Kucinich. MOST politicians do not want a new investigation into 911. Less than a handful support this.
oh, but it pains me to hear RP blame it on suicide terrorists and OBL--the official government fairy tale, in the second clip.
RP was clear to me. He divorced himself from Truthers, which is his right. The problem remains, he'd be biased for the government version of events if he were leading a new 9-11 investigation.
An independent investigation into the goobermint would not be conducted by the goobermint.........at least that was my understanding on this issue.
I don't know what other response would have been been better. What do you feel would have been a better response? He points to ineptness and "looking outward, not inward" which indicates the blame is not so squarely placed. He specifically states that the US ignores the causes of suicide bombings, which is true and, I think, needs to be stated for the best interests of our nation. In a short time span, Paul was able to bring up many issues that actually are central to much of the work done by truthers. Although there are many valid issues regarding the government fairy tale, one peep in response to this line of questioning and Paul would have been carted off to Kookyville. The interview would have denegrated into a pissing match, rather than allowing for civil discourse and very relevant topics to be broached. IMHO, he used his time wisely and for the greater good.
Thanks, scrapper. I always enjoy your thoughtful responses to provocative propositions.
i think it would have been better had he not said that he had abandoned the view that it was an inside job, had not said it was 19 suicide bombers, and not said that it was OBL. recall OBL was a friend of the bushes and that he was flown out of the country. i think he should have limited his comments to calling for a new investigation and not been so explicit in his eschewal of an inside job. how does Paul explain, i wonder, the total NORAD standdown of the most protected airspace in the world. (having said that, i can understand your point of view)
I agree, a bit more omission would have been better. He was under an attack with very pointed questions that were only for this candidate and no others, so I don't know if omission would have worked so well. IMHO, the media was out to send Paul to Kookyville from the get go and any little opportunity would have been pounced on and then aired on every channel ad nauseum. I think Paul agrees that NORAD is part of the "ineptness" he talks about that needs an independent investigation.
#2. To: Destro (#0)
(Edited)
In general, the American adults reported poorer overall health than their European counterparts
#3. To: Destro (#0)
(Edited)
#4. To: Destro, christine (#0)
#5. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#4)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#6. To: Cynicom (#2)
And do those European countries have large minorities of non whites included.
#7. To: TommyTheMadArtist, Rotara, tom007 (#4)
#8. To: Destro (#6)
So your contention is America's healthcare is OK for the white guy and that is how you like it? LOL!
#9. To: Cynicom, tom007 (#8)
(Edited)
So your contention is America's healthcare is OK for the white guy and that is how you like it? LOL!
#10. To: Cynicom, all (#8)
#11. To: Destro (#9)
#12. To: Destro (#7)
That's OK, tea party pig - I got Goldie banned as well.
#13. To: christine (#12)
Big government free zone
#14. To: Jethro Tull (#13)
#15. To: christine, Destro (#12)
You're no longer welcome here.
#16. To: Jethro Tull (#13)
#17. To: Fred Mertz (#15)
(Edited)
He backed his stuff up pretty well, including on this thread.
#18. To: Fred Mertz (#15)
I enjoyed reading Destro's opinions and input. He backed his stuff up pretty well, including on this thread.
#19. To: Jethro Tull (#17)
#20. To: Cynicom (#18)
#21. To: Cynicom (#2)
And do those European countries have large minorities of non whites included?
#22. To: Cynicom (#19)
No answer as his agenda is so biased he cannot think outside his own little box.
#23. To: Fred Mertz (#20)
Under what screen name?
#24. To: Fred Mertz (#15)
#25. To: Lod (#21)
#26. To: Cynicom (#19)
I asked him three times to answer one simple question.
#27. To: Fred Mertz (#22)
#28. To: Fred Mertz (#22)
#29. To: Fred Mertz (#22)
I'm certain other observers might make the same comment about you.
#30. To: Lod (#29)
His box is larger than most all the rest of us.
#31. To: Lod, randge (#29)
#32. To: christine, Destro, war (#24)
did you miss that he bragged he made good on his threat to Goldi?
#33. To: Lod, randge (#31)
The checks will be in the mailbox first light tomorrow.
#34. To: Fred Mertz, All (#32)
#35. To: Phant2000 (#33)
#36. To: Lod (#29)
His box is larger than most all the rest of us.
#37. To: Cynicom, Destro (#34)
#38. To: Fred Mertz (#37)
I like to stir the pot on occasion.
#39. To: Cynicom (#38)
#40. To: mininggold, christine (#36)
(Edited)
He rarely fails to give an interesting perspective and make other posters think and have to back up their arguments.
#41. To: scrapper2 (#40)
You must hold "interesting perspectives" too to appreciate Destro's childish attacks on anyone who offered evidence contrary to his pedestrian AND redundant posts. He never even bothered to read the original source material that he tried to pass off as the word from the Medical Mount. He could not answer questions about the material he posted because his research and readings were so shoddy and limited, he COULD NOT.
#42. To: Fred Mertz (#37)
I learned things from Destro.
#43. To: scrapper2 (#40)
Please spare me your admiration of that intellectually limited, ill-informed, socialist goose stepper.
#44. To: Fred Mertz (#43)
Says the fascist goose stepper...
#45. To: Cynicom (#44)
#46. To: Fred Mertz (#43)
Says the fascist goose stepper...
#47. To: Fred Mertz (#45)
#48. To: scrapper2 (#46)
#49. To: Destro, christine, Fred Mertz (#7)
That's OK, tea party pig - I got Goldie banned as well.
#50. To: Cynicom (#47)
#51. To: abraxas (#49)
#52. To: Fred Mertz (#43)
Says the fascist goose stepper...
#53. To: Fred Mertz (#51)
I agree with you.
#54. To: Fred Mertz (#48)
#55. To: mininggold (#52)
That Destro does get some panties in a wad. You can tell the ones that would destabilize easily in a crisis.
#56. To: scrapper2 (#55)
What's your excuse?
#57. To: scrapper2 (#55)
t least the posters you allude to are women who have a valid physiological reason for wearing panties.
#58. To: Fred Mertz (#43)
Says the fascist goose stepper...
#59. To: Flintlock, scrapper2 (#56)
#60. To: Jethro Tull (#59)
She should find Destro,
#61. To: fred mertz (#15)
I think your call here is unwise, unless you want an echo chamber.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#62. To: fred mertz (#22)
I'm certain other observers might make the same comment about you.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#63. To: christine (#24)
did you miss that he bragged he made good on his threat to Goldi? who needs that kind of character here? he's also made it clear in numerous postings his disdain for us. i choose to no longer give him a venue to vent it.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#64. To: fred mertz (#32)
His threat wasn't a threat from him although he phrased it that way.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#65. To: fred mertz (#32)
He's not parroting the party line
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#66. To: mininggold (#36)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#67. To: fred mertz (#37)
Maybe he had an agenda
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#68. To: scrapper2 (#40)
Please spare me your admiration of that intellectually shallow, ill-informed, socialist goose stepper.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#69. To: scrapper2 (#40)
#70. To: randge (#58)
We're still waiting for you to back up this drive by.
#71. To: Flintlock, (#60)
Hopefully hangin with the Weasel is in her future.
#72. To: Fred Mertz (#70)
Who used the term goose stepper first? I was just replying in kind.
#73. To: mininggold (#72)
#74. To: Rotara (#66)
Get back to us when you and Ron Paul reconquer the GOP...LOL
#75. To: fred mertz (#48)
I agree with you, too.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#76. To: Fred Mertz (#73)
I'm a little surprised that Jethro Tull has you on bozo. I didn't realize he was so thin skinned. Well, at least I learn something new every day.
#77. To: fred mertz (#50)
I agree. I should be banned from here.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#78. To: Rotara (#75)
stick to the horses freddie...
#79. To: Jethro Tull (#59)
mininggold has been on my bozo for more than a month. She is a wacko LP troll from LP who melts down when you mention anything negative about California. She insists I'm an R, despite me not having voted for them in decades. When someone, without evidence, continues to use the same line over and over, their intentions are clear. She should find Destro, and then seek out a more pleasant posting experience.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#80. To: mininggold (#74)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#81. To: mininggold (#76)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#82. To: mininggold (#78)
lololol
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#83. To: Rotara, Christine (#79)
The people's nest has room, that's for certain...
#84. To: Rotara (#81)
You are one of the fucking losers that jumped from Ron Paul to Barry Soetoro the Kenyan usurper puppet...
#85. To: Rotara (#82)
you seem more nervous than usual today mg...
#86. To: mininggold (#83)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#87. To: mininggold (#85)
lololololol
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#88. To: mininggold (#84)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#89. To: Rotara (#86)
Where do you people hatch and grow ?
#90. To: Rotara (#88)
lolololololol
#91. To: mininggold (#90)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#92. To: Rotara, fredmertz (#77)
no one will miss you...
#93. To: Cynicom (#89)
You need to bone up on the terms..GULLIBLE...NAIVE...PROGRAMMED.
#94. To: Rotara (#91)
Will you be offended if I completely ignore you ?
#95. To: mininggold (#93)
And hated by republican regulars and spinners. Just mentioning or even inferring Ron Paul often brings out the true colors of many a poster as they sidle around the dratted offender trying to disenfranchise without appearing obvious. lolol
#96. To: Cynicom (#95)
(Edited)
As time passes, it becomes more evident that Paul being just another professional politician, ran for a purpose, however not a run for president.
#97. To: Cynicom (#95)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#98. To: abraxas (#92)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#99. To: Rotara (#98)
how many days without fred posting (nothing) before you notice you miss the mertz ?
#100. To: Cynicom, all (#95)
#101. To: Fred Mertz, randge (#70)
Who used the term goose stepper first? I was just replying in kind.
#102. To: Cynicom (#95)
Paul served the "system" in that he kept any other legitimate third party candidate from getting off the ground. When his mission was complete, he folded his tent and stole back into his beloved republican party, welcomed with open arms, for a job well done.
#103. To: scrapper2 (#101)
excellent closer
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#104. To: abraxas (#102)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#105. To: scrapper2 (#101)
Here's the difference between what you said and what I said, Fred.
#106. To: Rotara (#104)
What's more important; the repubican party, the RAT party or America ?
#107. To: Fred Mertz (#105)
I would have never used or thought to use that term until I saw your reply. So I replied to you in kind.
#108. To: abraxas (#106)
Paul came into this election with the experience of having run previously as a viable third party candidate. He already knew that the game was rigged against any third party opposition. He felt that the only way he could help this nation was to run as a republican and bring the issues that this party ignores to light, to show that many still believe in our Constitution and small government principles. His contention had long been that the party had turned its back on core principles, but he did not. He took the most viable route through the election process for the good of this nation.
#109. To: abraxas (#102)
This is the silliest arguement of Paul having dubious and sinister aspirations that I have ever heard, Cyni.
#110. To: mininggold (#71)
#111. To: Cynicom (#109)
(Edited)
And then out of the blue, after collecting millions of dollars from the rubes, came the Trotski memo. What an oddity that was. Paul went to great extreme to profess his fidelity to the republican party and he would always remain a republican. How odd, he quit to "fight" for his seat in congress. He won easily as usual.
#112. To: scrapper2, Jethro tull, randge, All (#111)
#113. To: Fred Mertz (#105)
Here's the difference between what you said and what I said, Fred.
#114. To: randge (#113)
Tautologically tremendous & splendid logic.
#115. To: Cynicom (#114)
#116. To: Cynicom, abraxas, Jethro tull, randge, All (#112)
#117. To: scrapper2. all (#116)
From the get go, Ron Paul said he was planning to run as A GOP CANDIDATE and whenever he was asked if he would consider running as a Third Party candidate, he said "no." Ron Paul did not deceive his supporters but some had hopes that he was going to eventually change his mind and were disappointed when he simply followed through on what he said he'd do.
#118. To: scrapper2 (#116)
BUT as abraxas pointed out, and I agree with abraxas, whether we like it or not, our nation is based on a 2 party system.
#119. To: scrapper2, abraxas, mininggold (#116)
#120. To: Lod, scrapper2, abraxas, mininggold (#117)
only wish that he'd spoken out, and challenged, the electronic vote fraud that began in NH and continued throughout the country.
#121. To: christine (#120)
#122. To: christine (#119)
(Edited)
#123. To: Cynicom (#121)
(Edited)
#124. To: mininggold (#71)
And on other forums you are yukon's side kick or are you afraid to admit it to your "friends" here. Bragging there how you post here ands everyone thinks you are just one great poster. lolol
#125. To: Destro, christine (#7)
#126. To: scrapper2, Cyni, christine, all (#111)
But, Cynicom, as I recall, Ron Paul stated right from the start that he was not planning to run as anything but as a GOP Pres candidate
#127. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#125)
#128. To: Cynicom (#118)
(Edited)
In fact it is NOT true.
#129. To: scrapper2 (#128)
For example, the extremist element of the GOP are the evangelicals whereas the extremist element of the Dems are the socialists - there's no similarity what so ever in their respective aims.
#130. To: Jethro Tull (#126)
RP entered the race as an after thought. He never expected his effort to grow as it did. It took him off balance, and he said as much. When the money and movement he benefited from was at it's zenith, he then had an opportunity to change American political history. That would have meant him leaving the Rs and either going as an I, L, or create a new party. The *record breaking money* he was raising made his opportunity unique to all others to date. It was pure grassroots and Internet driven. The establishment was dazed and confused. When he chose to remain loyal to the Rs and not the movement, his political soul was exposed.
#131. To: scrapper2. all (#130)
Ron Paul recognized that there was no way a Third Party could mount a successful campaign in the November 2008 election. What he saw as possible and a realistic goal to achieve was what he pursued - he was able to give a higher profile to common sense fiscal conservative small gov't ideals - which had never been done before in a reasonable and respected fashion -for the general public's consideration and the popularity of his views has given confidence for other conservative minded political candidates "to come out." Also, Ron Paul was able to keep his political seat as Congressman to continue to represent his constituency's interests in DC and to speak out to Americans at large about the wasteful and perfidious legislation being promoted. Without his insider's voice who else is there in Congress who would fill RP's role as DC's good conscience?
#132. To: scrapper2 (#130)
But then you say after being shocked at the support, he should have jumped ship and run as a Third Party Pres candidate. Wow! That's a tall order for a humble 74 year old obgyn turned Congressman from Texas
#133. To: Cynicom (#109)
The other debates played out much the same way, with Paul seemingly unconcerned by the abuse heaped upon him by his fellow republicans. Anyone remotely vetted in politics cast a jaundiced eye on such apathy.
#134. To: randge (#129)
But then as some cynics will claim, the result is WAR and SOCIALSM. That's the proof in the pudding for those that hold with the "one party" hypothesis.
#135. To: Cynicom (#121)
Never at any time did Paul defend himself, never.
#136. To: scrapper2 (#130)
#137. To: abraxas (#135)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#138. To: Rotara (#137)
Explain Ron Paul and "911 The Official Government Story®" stamp of approval plz...
#139. To: Rotara (#137)
#140. To: Jethro Tull, Rotara (#139)
#141. To: abraxas (#140)
#142. To: Jethro Tull (#141)
how would he enter a new investigation after having dismissed the message of the Truthers? I'm not trying to be argumentative, abraxas, but an open mind is first and foremost to getting to the truth.
#143. To: Jethro Tull (#141)
I understand he wants a new 9-11 investigation, I can't think of anyone who doesn't
#144. To: abraxas (#142)
#145. To: abraxas (#143)
#146. To: Jethro Tull (#145)
he'd be biased for the government version of events if he were leading a new 9-11 investigation.
#147. To: christine (#144)
oh, but it pains me to hear RP blame it on suicide terrorists and OBL--the official government fairy tale, in the second clip.
#148. To: scrapper2 (#134)
#149. To: abraxas (#147)
(Edited)
What do you feel would have been a better response?
#150. To: christine (#149)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest