I'm not one to usually talk politics, much less push them, but anyone who gives a damn about equal rights but everyone who lives in America needs to watch this video and Dislike it. This man cannot be allowed to govern this country... or state, county, or city. It's clear that he's insane, and this is our time to make it known. I ask people to watch the video below and Dislike it on Youtube. It may not be much, but each Dislike puts that bar a little closer to 100% red!
Disliked
Btw, he made me lol
The sad part is that nobody's shocked that he said this. It's a total career killer and he doesn't even think he did anything wrong.
"Stupid redneck bigot. If you think you're so wise (wise enough to run a country), then you should actually learn about other people rather than judging them from the sanctity of your 'pews'. "
Epic win
Strength through Unity
Unity through Faith
Yeah I saw this yesterday.
It's hilarious, depressing, disgusting, and facedesk worthy all at the same time.
Rest assured, Rick Perry is not getting the presidential nomination, and this is one of the big reasons.
PS: I reported it for promoting hate based on sexual orientation.
Been following the primaries since they started, rick perry won't even get close, no worries. RON PAUL FTW
LOL LOOK AT THE DISLIKES AND COMMENTS DISABLED
Wow over 230,000 dislikes to like 4,000 likes... Fail haha
It had 177,000 dislikes when I added mine a few hours ago.
He's an idiot, I don't care if you like cawk or vaginas if you're fighting in our armed forces. All I agree about what he said is secularizing christmas, you don't have to like christmas, but you have no right to change it.
Dude, nobody cares about Christmas one way or the other. This whole ATTACK ON CHRISTMAS!1!!!!11 thing is just a scare tactic to keep old people voting for the party that wants to cut their gov't benefits. Same with the OMG SOCIALISTS thing, same with CHINESE DING DONG CHING CHONG ARE COMING TO GETCHA.
An aside: The Chinese have so many fucking problems right now that there really is no way they can threaten us militarily, barring a bunch of cyberattacks, but then we'd just retaliate with our long-range nuclear arsenal. And is anyone betting that Assad (the dictator is Syria) will nuke his own people to prevent a foreign intervention?
Quote from: Eternal248 on December 08, 2011, 11:12:41 am
The sad part is that nobody's shocked that he said this. It's a total career killer and he doesn't even think he did anything wrong.
Career killer? Not really. This is a calculated move to appeal to evangelical Christians and the religious right. However, it means that he'll turn off independent voters even more, meaning that he probably can't win a general election.
Quote from: Pickle Girl Fanboy on December 08, 2011, 05:55:41 pm
Dude, nobody cares about Christmas one way or the other. This whole ATTACK ON CHRISTMAS!1!!!!11 thing is just a scare tactic to keep old people voting for the party that wants to cut their gov't benefits.
You do realise that the government is essentially boycotting its own holiday, right? Christmas has been a FEDERAL holiday for 141 years. The whole attack against Christmas in general is kind of... ridiculous.
Also, Havermayer, as a representative of both Christianity and 19th century Liberalism (falsely called conservatism today), I can say he is a complete moron and jerk face. He's turning off everybody equally... I hope. Otherwise the other people are a lost cause and are blind.
Perry is done, I have been following this crap for the longest here. It's down to ron paul/mitt romney. could do worse with romney
Quote
You do realise that the government is essentially boycotting its own holiday, right? Christmas has been a FEDERAL holiday for 141 years. The whole attack against Christmas in general is kind of... ridiculous.
I fail to see any attack on christmas, barring making things actually constitutional. Cities can still put up wreathes or whatever, just not religious symbols. Private citizens can put up whatever.
Secularization is not a bad thing, especially for a country that purports to not promote any religion. People go on about taking the "christ" out of "christmas," but that's only a bad thing for christian religions to do, and a good thing for governments to do. If you wanna bring the "christ" back to "christmas" the big thing you should rally against is the materialistic sentiment (especially gift giving) that surrounds it, not trying to make it so your town can put up a nativity in front of city hall or in the park using public funds.
Quote from: GeneralStrife on December 09, 2011, 01:34:27 am
It's down to ron paul/mitt romney.
What have you been smoking? Ron Paul has his small dedicated core of true believers, but that's about it. He doesn't have any major support. It's the same thing that happened in 2008.
I call Ron Paul plays Nader this election.
Maybe im doing wishful thinking that ron paul wins
Quote from: GeneralStrife on December 09, 2011, 03:21:27 pm
Maybe im doing wishful thinking that ron paul wins
Ron Paul and Nader are pretty chill. I wish I was career driven as Nader ;-; he never had a girlfriend. He always worked fighting for the people.
Quote from: GeneralStrife on December 09, 2011, 03:21:27 pm
Maybe im doing wishful thinking that ron paul wins
While I understand that Ron Paul is probably the least scumbaggish Republican running (and he is certainly less of a scumbag than a great many Democrats in Congress and working as Governers), I have some serious problems with his platform.
Let's take the FDA - the Food and Drug Administration. The FDA has two purposes, which often exist in conflict with each other. The first purpose is to safeguard public health in matters related to food and drugs. The other purpose is to basically lobby for American food and drugs, which, these days, means they work for massive corporations like seed-giant Monsanto and pharmaceutical giant Glaxco-Smith-Kline.
What does this mean for average Americans? It means that, a lot of times, corporations can delay, hide, and even destroy evidence that the chemicals and procedures that they use to make food and drugs are unsafe, or even violently toxic. A clear example of this is
bisphenol A (BPA for short), which is used in almost every consumer product manufactured in the world.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080422114734.htm
They get away with this because corporations are required to test any new chemical they create for toxicity, but
they are the ones required to test it, not the FDA. So, while I agree with Ron Paul that the FDA has no business lobbying for anybody, their testing authority and testing funding should be increased, so that they can test all new chemicals before they are approved, not the companies that make the chemicals.
I have similiar misgivings about Ron Paul on the EPA, on regulation of banks and financial institutions to prevent fraud and deceit so consumers can make informed decisions, and on the gov't right to regulate money in politics and the people's right to a Republic where those who have more money than me, do not also have more free speech than me. Because we are becoming a nation where everyone is equal, but those with money are more equal than those without it.
Quote from: Pickle Girl Fanboy on December 09, 2011, 04:46:11 pm
While I understand that Ron Paul is probably the least scumbaggish Republican running (and he is certainly less of a scumbag than a great many Democrats in Congress and working as Governers), I have some serious problems with his platform.
Let's take the FDA - the Food and Drug Administration. The FDA has two purposes, which often exist in conflict with each other. The first purpose is to safeguard public health in matters related to food and drugs. The other purpose is to basically lobby for American food and drugs, which, these days, means they work for massive corporations like seed-giant Monsanto and pharmaceutical giant Glaxco-Smith-Kline.
What does this mean for average Americans? It means that, a lot of times, corporations can delay, hide, and even destroy evidence that the chemicals and procedures that they use to make food and drugs are unsafe, or even violently toxic. A clear example of this is bisphenol A (BPA for short), which is used in almost every consumer product manufactured in the world.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080422114734.htm
They get away with this because corporations are required to test any new chemical they create for toxicity, but they are the ones required to test it, not the FDA. So, while I agree with Ron Paul that the FDA has no business lobbying for anybody, their testing authority and testing funding should be increased, so that they can test all new chemicals before they are approved, not the companies that make the chemicals.
I have similiar misgivings about Ron Paul on the EPA, on regulation of banks and financial institutions to prevent fraud and deceit so consumers can make informed decisions, and on the gov't right to regulate money in politics and the people's right to a Republic where those who have more money than me, do not also have more free speech than me. Because we are becoming a nation where everyone is equal, but those with money are more equal than those without it.
Ron Paul does have some wrongs in his platform like you said, but he's for equal rights, a constitutionalist. I know he gets my vote. I agree the FDA plays a necessary role, and the EPA....meh....I guess they play an important roll. But the rich need to start paying taxes again, and this unlimited spending bullshit needs to go. This is the worse supreme court we've ever had jesus. And the senate is passing shit taking away the 4th amendment and stuff. It's republicans AND democrats. Trust me.
Quote from: Zaen on December 08, 2011, 11:38:15 pmAlso, Havermayer, as a representative of both Christianity and 19th century Liberalism (falsely called conservatism today), I can say he is a complete moron and jerk face. He's turning off everybody equally... I hope. Otherwise the other people are a lost cause and are blind.
The far right vote liked that though. There's strong, strong opposition to gays/lesbians in that base.
If I could have just one wish, I wish that there was no money allowed in politics.
Quote from: Pickle Girl Fanboy on December 09, 2011, 05:59:37 pm
If I could have just one wish, I wish that there was no money allowed in politics.
ME too. Cause Direct Democracy doesn't work either if you someone suggested that, look at california.
Prreeetyyy sure one example of one state of over 250 countries is not conclusive proof.
But anyway, I don't get Ron Paul fans. He's a honest guy, yes, but he's still a rightwing bloke, anti-abortions, dosen't think church should be separated from state, tss.
Meanwhile, I would prefer him to the other guy. *cough*
The one that denies the existance of some others.
Quote from: Kokojo on December 09, 2011, 08:05:06 pm
but he's still a rightwing bloke,
Because he believes in the constitution's examples of personal liberties and values life?
Blah, whatever. There are idiots on both sides of the fence. Like the republicans AND democrats supporting SOPA. I hate those fools. Supporting that unamerican bill
It'd be great if we could somehow nuke the two party system. I'm tired of choosing between the lesser of two evils, or picking someone whom I agree with on an important issue but disagree with on a lesser one.
The whole elected officials thing inherent to republics might just be inherently broken like that, though.
Quote from: Kaijyuu on December 10, 2011, 01:33:42 am
It'd be great if we could somehow nuke the two party system. I'm tired of choosing between the lesser of two evils, or picking someone whom I agree with on an important issue but disagree with on a lesser one.
The whole elected officials thing inherent to republics might just be inherently broken like that, though.
We need an independent elected
But this nation is full of sheeples
We need people who deliberately aren't affiliated with any party, because if you are affiliated with a party, then your first loyalty is to the party, and your second loyalty (if that) is to your voters.
Plus, if an idea works, you should steal it and use it, regardless of where it came from.
That's one reason I'm digging Ron Paul myself. He's an individualist and doesn't even really fit in with the rest of the Republicans at all. I just saw a Republican debate and he was the only one not seeming completely out of his mind; quite the opposite.
Quote from: Lijj on December 16, 2011, 03:04:46 pm
That's one reason I'm digging Ron Paul myself. He's an individualist and doesn't even really fit in with the rest of the Republicans at all. I just saw a Republican debate and he was the only one not seeming completely out of his mind; quite the opposite.
Ron Paul is the only true conservative in the race, he believes in equal rights for all groups of people and limited government, because whens the last time the goverment didn't screw up?
Quote from: GeneralStrife on December 16, 2011, 08:42:28 pmwhens the last time the goverment didn't screw up?
The Clinton administration.
Well they screwed up a lot too. But less than usual.