Epic Ron Paul/existence debate truck

Epic Ron Paul/existence debate truck

General — Page [1] 2
Rockbomb
Dog fucker (but in a good way now)

2009 Nov 13 • 2045
So I want to continue on our conversation about this, but didn't feel like hijacking AJ's truck anymore (grand theft auto is a serious crime, and I'm too pretty for prison).


So anyway, in response to DR, I agree (almost) completely with everything you said. Religion does sound like bullshit... all of them do (especially Mormonism). But, while we've gathered a lot of information over the years, and are able to make some pretty solid theories, my point is that we still have no way of proving that they are true... likewise, we also have no way of proving that religions are false (I'm not saying that that gives them any credibility, just saying that they can't be ruled out entirely).

I myself am agnostic, and my personal beliefs are that religion AND the current scientific theories are probably ALL wrong. I think there is something else out there (whether it be a deity, or some sort of force, or something else) that is beyond our comprehension as human beings. I think that as the dominate species on earth, we tend to think a little too highly of ourselves most of the time, and in turn we assume that we're the greatest power there is... I tend to think the opposite... maybe we're just ants in an ant farm for some sort of much greater being... who knows.
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 08:38 PST
phoenix_r

2009 May 13 • 902
17 ₧
Fuck it, Dude, let's go bowling.
BOO
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 11:03 PST
SRAW
Rocket Man

2007 Nov 6 • 2525
601 ₧
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 12:36 PST — Ed. 2011 Dec 27 at 12:36 PST
SRAW
Rocket Man

2007 Nov 6 • 2525
601 ₧
Anyway in response to DR in the other truck, I'm just asking who you would vote for, since would you seriously pick newt gringrich or oBOMBma over Ron Paul?

Ron Paul is the only guy in the house who wants to pull out all of our troops by 2 weeks if he's in presidency, and to remove US troops from all our bases over the world and want to default on our debt.
Free Steam Games
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 12:44 PST
Mate de Vita
Kelli

2008 Oct 4 • 2453
159 ₧
SRAW said:
Ron Paul is the only guy in the house who wants to pull out all of our troops by 2 weeks if he's in presidency, and to remove US troops from all our bases over the world and want to default on our debt.

I'm fairly certain obama said something of the sort when he ran for presidency.
...and that's the bottom line because Mate de Vita said so.
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 13:29 PST
SRAW
Rocket Man

2007 Nov 6 • 2525
601 ₧
Obama is a democrat, Ron Paul is a libertarian
HUZzAH BITCH
Free Steam Games
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 13:41 PST
Rockbomb
Dog fucker (but in a good way now)

2009 Nov 13 • 2045
Mate de Vita said:
SRAW said:
Ron Paul is the only guy in the house who wants to pull out all of our troops by 2 weeks if he's in presidency, and to remove US troops from all our bases over the world and want to default on our debt.

I'm fairly certain obama said something of the sort when he ran for presidency.

The difference is, Obama said that kinda spur of the moment, in order to get votes. Ron Paul has been saying our troops need to be in America, and not all these other countries, since he got into politics. This isn't something he just recently started saying should happen.

If there's one attribute that I'd say makes Ron Paul the best candidate, it's how consistent he has been on all of his views over the years. The stuff he's saying now is the same stuff he was saying 30 years ago.

What's kinda scary, is that through time he has pretty accurately predicated the exact outcome of things. From the economy, to the wars, to... pretty much everything. And what's scary about that, is not that he was able to predict all that stuff (anyone who bases their thoughts on logic would come up with the same results), but that all of the other people who have ran in office before, and all of the other candidates for the upcoming election HAVEN'T been able to predict that stuff... which means they're basing their thoughts on... well, who knows... definitely not logic, though.

But anyways, the point I was trying to make is that if you don't believe Ron Paul would actually pull back all (or most of) our troops from around the world, go watch some interviews of him from the past, and I think you'll change your mind.
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 14:02 PST
Rockbomb
Dog fucker (but in a good way now)

2009 Nov 13 • 2045
Also, I think this is a video everyone should see, whether you support Ron Paul or not. It shows just how corrupt the media is:
Sick vid



And after that, this is what they aired on CNN:
Sick vid
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 14:06 PST
SRAW
Rocket Man

2007 Nov 6 • 2525
601 ₧
Err my father apparently predicted this stuff would happen in the 70's, when he was in the defense language institute.
Free Steam Games
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 14:19 PST — Ed. 2011 Dec 27 at 14:19 PST
Rockbomb
Dog fucker (but in a good way now)

2009 Nov 13 • 2045
SRAW said:
Err my father apparently predicted this stuff would happen in the 70's, when he was in the defense language institute.

Like I said, anyone who uses logic and facts as the basis for their thoughts should have been able to come to the same thoughts on what would come in the future. But instead, our leaders have chosen to base their thoughts off of... whatever they feel like at the time, I guess, and that's what lead us to be in the state we're in now. It's scary to think that such careless and misinformed people are the ones at the head of the country.
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 15:32 PST
Down Rodeo
Cap'n Moth of the Firehouse

Find the Hole II Participation Medal
2007 Oct 19 • 5486
57,583 ₧
Your thoughts above in the thread about there being some kind of being, and about our current theories being wrong... I suggest you research them some more. Clearly lots of work needs to be done but a key point to remember is that our current theories make predictions, predictions which have been experimentally verified. Any theory that superseded the ones we have currently would have to make the same predictions to explain that which we currently observe.

I am also intrigued by your other comment, about some sort of higher being. What would this thing be? Why do you feel there should be something like that out there? Why, in fact, assume at the moment? Do you believe it's a creator of some sort? Anyway, answer as much or as little as you feel like, I am interested.

As far as politics goes, I'd probably vote Obama. As I said, I hold intelligence and willingness to learn in high esteem and am extremely sceptical of those with neither.

Newt Gingrich is a terrible human being and I'd not so much as give him the time of day, never mind a vote.

EDITS; because I started writing this about an hour ago and forgot things. The cut of Ron Paul's interview I have heard is a shocking lapse of good judgement. Every time I see or hear about something like this journalists everywhere are hurt and it is total bullshit.

Taking all US troops out of everywhere in the world... doesn't that seem a little consequence-y? I mean, they're there for a reason. And once you get them back, what are they going to do? I can only see that leading to job losses.

Predictions: OK, sounds like he know's what he's on about. I'm sure he's a smart guy. Also, you claim that Obama wants to bring all the troops back, is that right? I'd never heard of it but to be honest, I only care because America is so influential. Every time your country elects someone that would *get nowhere* in British politics I cringe a little, but I am more concerned with what's happening in my own country. I'm probably not the best to talk to about this. Of course, it is impossible to deny that I've hacked out 400 words on it in this post alone.

Oh yeah, one last thing: it is impossible to "prove" some kind of theory about the universe correct. All a theory can do is repeatedly stand up to experiment. Rather appropriately, Einstein once said "No amount of experimentation can prove me right; it takes only one to prove me wrong", quite apt in the light of the recent ATLAS experiments at CERN. IMHO they're probably wrong with that one, but if they're not... shit gets SO INTERESTING.
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 17:46 PST — Ed. 2011 Dec 27 at 17:56 PST
Rockbomb
Dog fucker (but in a good way now)

2009 Nov 13 • 2045
Down Rodeo said:

I am also intrigued by your other comment, about some sort of higher being. What would this thing be? Why do you feel there should be something like that out there? Why, in fact, assume at the moment? Do you believe it's a creator of some sort? Anyway, answer as much or as little as you feel like, I am interested.


Well, unfortunately, I don't really know how to put into words exactly how I feel. I believe there is something, and when I say "something" I don't necessarily mean a physical "thing", that is beyond our current knowledge. I guess the reason I can't find any words to describe it, is because there aren't any. Perhaps it would be some sort of alternate world, maybe it's a deity, maybe it's some sort of force in nature that we aren't familiar with... but, I think that the answer to our existence isn't one that can be found with our current knowledge and discoveries, and is probably something that we are incapable of understanding at all.



Down Rodeo said:

As far as politics goes, I'd probably vote Obama. As I said, I hold intelligence and willingness to learn in high esteem and am extremely sceptical of those with neither.

Taking all US troops out of everywhere in the world... doesn't that seem a little consequence-y? I mean, they're there for a reason. And once you get them back, what are they going to do? I can only see that leading to job losses.

Also, you claim that Obama wants to bring all the troops back, is that right?


Well, I guess I'd like to first start my response to all that by saying... doesn't invading random countries and killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians seem a little consequence-y?

You say our troops are there for a reason... what reason?

I think it's definitely very risky to pull all the troops back, but I think it's even MORE risky to continue on as we currently are.

To answer your last question there... short answer: yes
Long answer: If you pull up videos of the 2008 debates, Obama repeatedly said that he wanted to bring the troops back as soon as he could. He said that he was going to bring the troops back quicker than G W Bush's plan had set for... and under GW's plan, the troops would have been back 2 years ago, yet they're still not. Also just recently, within the last month or so, Obama said that we no longer needed our troops to be in Afghanistan and that he was bringing them all back... and, he did bring a portion of them back, but most of them are still there... so we'll see if he follows through with that. But even if he does, that's only the troops that are in Afghanistan... we've got troops in tons of different countries, and there's no real reason for them to be there other than the fact that we want to police the world.

You do bring up a great point... with a pretty large percentage of US citizens not being able to get a job, what are all the military personnel supposed to do when they get back? Well, I'd assume most of them won't be able to re-enlist once their contract is up, so they'll have to get civilian jobs. But we have run out of civilian jobs, because all of the huge companies are sending them overseas. So... I would hope that this would push us over the edge and FORCE the government to get rid of all of the ridiculous expenses and restrictions that they put on businesses, and encourage the big companies to set up shop here at home. Granted, this obviously isn't going to happen overnight, so... for quite a while, they WON'T have jobs.




Idk if I replied to everything in your post, and I'm too lazy to read what I've just written, so if there's something I missed that you'd like a response to let me know :D
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 18:24 PST
SRAW
Rocket Man

2007 Nov 6 • 2525
601 ₧
Down Rodeo said:

As far as politics goes, I'd probably vote Obama. As I said, I hold intelligence and willingness to learn in high esteem and am extremely sceptical of those with neither.


Well Hitler was willing to learn, but I'm sure the average bum on the street was a better guy than him
Free Steam Games
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 18:27 PST
aaronjer
*****'n Admin

Comrade General 5-Star
2005 Mar 21 • 4663
1,227 ₧
Rockbomb said:
If there's one attribute that I'd say makes Ron Paul the best candidate, it's how consistent he has been on all of his views over the years. The stuff he's saying now is the same stuff he was saying 30 years ago.

What's kinda scary, is that through time he has pretty accurately predicated the exact outcome of things.


^This. This is why I like Ron Paul. He's practically the only politician ever that isn't full of shit.

Also, on the creation thing... there's no point in talking about it because people who have decided they want to believe in a higher power regardless of the evidence before them aren't going to change their minds no matter what anyone says or does.
 
 
2011 Dec 27 at 20:06 PST
Down Rodeo
Cap'n Moth of the Firehouse

Find the Hole II Participation Medal
2007 Oct 19 • 5486
57,583 ₧
SRAW said:
Down Rodeo said:

As far as politics goes, I'd probably vote Obama. As I said, I hold intelligence and willingness to learn in high esteem and am extremely sceptical of those with neither.


Well Hitler was willing to learn, but I'm sure the average bum on the street was a better guy than him


Godwin's Law; pretty certain you lose now.

aaronjer said:
Also, on the creation thing... there's no point in talking about it because people who have decided they want to believe in a higher power regardless of the evidence before them aren't going to change their minds no matter what anyone says or does.

That's a valid point but I don't think it means you shouldn't talk about it. I've little else to do at the moment. Actually I've decided, I also disagree with you on that point.

Rockbomb, I think you covered most things. When I said "they're there for a reason" I meant "presumably" but the alcohol demons STOLE MY WORDS. I feel it's a tad disingenuous to say that Obama's plan failed while Bush's plan would have executed flawlessly, but even then McCain might have chosen some other course of action.

I'm interested to know what ridiculous restrictions on businesses you're talking about. I'm sure you'll have many but I am an ignorant foreigner! I guess you could be advising that America adopt similar working legislation as China and India, such that the US can become as competitive as they are in the global market, but that would be weird.

See, one of the problems I have with Ron Paul is that he's just another old white rich guy. I mean, really? If the Republicans chose their candidate as, say, Condoleeza Rice, or had done four years ago, I think there would have been a very different outcome. But I'm cynical (and the word was that she didn't want to do it, but that'll be right, y'know, "I don't *want* to be president").

Last point here. I think it is one hell of a supposition to look at our universe and assume that there's something "more" out there. Truthfully, I still don't know what you mean by that. For the whole of history the approach of experiment-theory-better experiment-better theory has been a success. Why should it change now, at our point in history? Why should that change at all? I mean, think of people just before the renaissance, and try telling them that one day people just like them will walk on the moon. They'd not believe you. Actually that's not even slightly relevant. Try telling them that eventually man will alter crops to have the features he desires; to change them to resist disease, to produce more food, to be able to grow in more climates... they'd say that was the realm of god or something similar. They'd say it was beyond our current knowledge, and quite possibly beyond us forever.

I suppose I ought to stop ranting at you; you are, of course, entitled to your own beliefs, and I shouldn't give a toss
 
 
2011 Dec 28 at 14:49 PST
Rockbomb
Dog fucker (but in a good way now)

2009 Nov 13 • 2045
Down Rodeo said:

Rockbomb, I think you covered most things. When I said "they're there for a reason" I meant "presumably" but the alcohol demons STOLE MY WORDS. I feel it's a tad disingenuous to say that Obama's plan failed while Bush's plan would have executed flawlessly, but even then McCain might have chosen some other course of action.


Oh, I didn't mean to imply that Bush's plan would have worked flawlessly. His plan was bullshit from the beginning, and it should have never been executed to begin with. He used the attacks that took place on 9/11 as an excuse to start this "war against terror", which might sound good on the surface, but really it was just used as a reason for us to be attacking all these other countries. And look where we are now... the two main targets we were going after, Saddam Hussein and Obama Bin Laden, are both dead, yet we continue attacking...




Down Rodeo said:

I'm interested to know what ridiculous restrictions on businesses you're talking about. I'm sure you'll have many but I am an ignorant foreigner! I guess you could be advising that America adopt similar working legislation as China and India, such that the US can become as competitive as they are in the global market, but that would be weird.


Well, to start... we have a minimum wage that keeps getting raised higher and higher. In fact, I believe they just raised it again last week. Businesses can't afford to pay all of their employees at the minimum wage, so they send the work to other countries who will work for much, much less. To add to that, it seems that most people in the US always come up with the same excuse of "Well, Americans wouldn't work for that little of money anyway.", but... I guarantee if you ask anyone that's been searching for a job, they'd be HAPPY to work for even 20% of what the current minimum wage is. So I think that lifting the minimum wage would be a great place to start.

On top of that, there are all kinds of fees that (most) businesses have to pay here, that they don't have to pay if they send the work to other countries. I don't know any numbers off the top of my head, but I'll do some Googling and see if I can come up with some for you.

Also, to start up a new business in the US can take several years to get everything done. Then, once you finally get it started up, you've got to meet all sorts of different inspection standards and whatnot, or you'll get shut down and have to start the process over.




Down Rodeo said:
See, one of the problems I have with Ron Paul is that he's just another old white rich guy. I mean, really? If the Republicans chose their candidate as, say, Condoleeza Rice, or had done four years ago, I think there would have been a very different outcome. But I'm cynical (and the word was that she didn't want to do it, but that'll be right, y'know, "I don't *want* to be president").


What's wrong with being old, white, and rich?
White we can cross off the list completely, unless you're racist, in which case... go fuck yourself
Old... I don't see anything wrong with being old. In fact, I see that as a good thing. He's been around for quite a while, and has had more time to learn.
Being rich... well, I don't really see how that's a bad OR a good thing. Also, he wasn't born into a rich family or anything... any money that he has now, he earned on his own. Before he got into politics, he was an obstetrician gynecologist... he worked his way through med school (actually, iirc his wife payed for him to get through school... I'll have to double check on that one), and when he got out he worked for a living.




Down Rodeo said:
Last point here. I think it is one hell of a supposition to look at our universe and assume that there's something "more" out there. Truthfully, I still don't know what you mean by that. For the whole of history the approach of experiment-theory-better experiment-better theory has been a success. Why should it change now, at our point in history? Why should that change at all? I mean, think of people just before the renaissance, and try telling them that one day people just like them will walk on the moon. They'd not believe you. Actually that's not even slightly relevant. Try telling them that eventually man will alter crops to have the features he desires; to change them to resist disease, to produce more food, to be able to grow in more climates... they'd say that was the realm of god or something similar. They'd say it was beyond our current knowledge, and quite possibly beyond us forever.


Yeah, you're absolutely right... it IS one hell of an assumption. But, wouldn't you say the same thing about religion, as well as theories like the big bang? Well, I guess stuff like the big bang isn't as far of a stretch, as we do have a lot of discoveries that support it. But, even in that case, the big bang theory only covers how we came to be in our current state of being, not how the existence of everything came into being. So, even if we we're to find solid proof that would make the big bang factual, we'd still be left of the question of "How did that matter get there in the first place?". Which is why I think there's something more.

You do leave a good point, however... hell, it wasn't that long ago that we thought we could sail off the edge of the earth. So, maybe the answer is within reach, but I think at the very least it'll be a long reach, and it's going to be quite some time before we're able to grasp it.



Down Rodeo said:
I suppose I ought to stop ranting at you; you are, of course, entitled to your own beliefs, and I shouldn't give a toss

By all means, please DON'T stop. I love having conversations like this
 
 
2011 Dec 28 at 15:57 PST
SRAW
Rocket Man

2007 Nov 6 • 2525
601 ₧
 
 
2011 Dec 28 at 16:49 PST
Down Rodeo
Cap'n Moth of the Firehouse

Find the Hole II Participation Medal
2007 Oct 19 • 5486
57,583 ₧
Any president at the moment would have to ask fora debt limit increase.

Yes, you're right. In many ways America should not have been involved in wars abroad. It's funny though, you look at those that were involved in organising the war et al and not a one of them actually did time in Vietnam, they all had deferments and the like. Kind of makes sense, right?

I completely disagree with you on the minimum wage front. I think it is ridiculous to say that businesses should not pay people to some standard - which might not even be enough to live on. Like McDonald's, for instance, you really think that they get worried about how they're going to pay minimum wage? These laws are designed to target big companies that would otherwise extract even more profit from their workers.

I stand by my old white guy statement. Look at that:

That is not cool. The black guy's gone because frankly he knows nothing and then you have one woman who... well, you're probably better placed to say if she'd win than I am. I can't see it though.

You say the big bang is an assumption... it isn't. When you look at the universe, everything is moving away from everything else. Everything is expanding. So if you wind that backwards, you arrive at the idea that everything was once completely compressed and expanded from there. There's a competing "steady state" theory, now known as "quasi-steady state", but it has been discredited repeatedly. Rather than its predictions being verified, the theory has had to be modified to accommodate observation. Also note that the theory says nothing of what happened *before* the BB. In fact, the theory claims there is no before; there is merely some t = 0 at which point things kick off; likewise there is no "outside", this was not an explosion in space but an explosion of space. Hope that helps!
 
 
2011 Dec 29 at 08:56 PST
Rockbomb
Dog fucker (but in a good way now)

2009 Nov 13 • 2045
Down Rodeo said:
I completely disagree with you on the minimum wage front. I think it is ridiculous to say that businesses should not pay people to some standard - which might not even be enough to live on. Like McDonald's, for instance, you really think that they get worried about how they're going to pay minimum wage? These laws are designed to target big companies that would otherwise extract even more profit from their workers.


I, as well as many others, would be more than happy to flip burgers at McDonalds for $4 an hour. Is that enough to pay the bills? Nope. But it's a hell of a lot better than being jobless, and will at least put some money in your pocket to buy some food and clothes with.
I do see where you're coming from though, and do partially agree with you. So, maybe they should change the minimum wage law to something along the lines of... if your company nets more than 10 million dollars a year, you need to follow a minimum wage. But even then, the minimum wage needs to be lowered from where it is now. The current minimum wage is $7.25/hr, and I know for a fact that you can live on much less than that... in fact, now that I think about it, I retract my previous statement about being able to pay the bills on $4 an hour. If you work 8 hours a day, that would be $32 a day that you make, and with 30ish days in a month, that'd put you at around $1000 a month. With $1000 you could rent a shitty apartment and enough food to live on... it won't be a luxury life for sure, but it sure as hell beats being homeless and without a job.
The current estimate on the number of homeless people in the US is 3.5 million, and there's estimated to be another 1.5 million more in the next 2 years.




Down Rodeo said:
I stand by my old white guy statement. Look at that:

That is not cool. The black guy's gone because frankly he knows nothing and then you have one woman who... well, you're probably better placed to say if she'd win than I am. I can't see it though.


Well, idk what to say to you about that, other than I think it's pretty stupid to base your decision on race and age. We already voted Obama into office cuz he was a young black guy who seemed cool, and look where that got us.

You are right though, that the black guy (Herman Cain) won't win, because he's an idiot... and because he has officially withdrawn as a candidate. The woman (Michelle Bachman), also won't win, because she's an idiot. Rick Perry won't win, because... well, just watch his ad:
Sick vid

Mitt Romney, despite being kind of a doucher, I think has a shot at winning.
Rick Santorum isn't going to win, because if you ask most people what they think about them, they will say "Who the fuck is Rick Santorum?"
Newt Gingrich, despite being the absolutely worst candidate that's running, has been leading a lot of polls, and scarily has a pretty good chance of winning. But, if he does win, he has a very low chance of surviving... there's a lot of people that have a pretty significant hatred for him.

That's just my views, of course, but I think they're pretty spot on.




Down Rodeo said:
You say the big bang is an assumption... it isn't. When you look at the universe, everything is moving away from everything else. Everything is expanding. So if you wind that backwards, you arrive at the idea that everything was once completely compressed and expanded from there. There's a competing "steady state" theory, now known as "quasi-steady state", but it has been discredited repeatedly. Rather than its predictions being verified, the theory has had to be modified to accommodate observation. Also note that the theory says nothing of what happened *before* the BB. In fact, the theory claims there is no before; there is merely some t = 0 at which point things kick off; likewise there is no "outside", this was not an explosion in space but an explosion of space. Hope that helps!


How do we know that everything is expanding? Not saying you're wrong, I just don't know how we could know that.
I can somewhat believe the whole expanding part of the theory, but the part that says that everything 'just started' I think is ridiculous. When someone can prove that something can be created out of nothing, then I'll believe it.
 
 
2011 Dec 29 at 10:54 PST — Ed. 2011 Dec 29 at 10:54 PST
Down Rodeo
Cap'n Moth of the Firehouse

Find the Hole II Participation Medal
2007 Oct 19 • 5486
57,583 ₧
Again, the theory doesn't talk about creation, or anything like that. Stop thinking of a before - there wasn't one. Everything is expanding and we can prove it by redshift! Here's an article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift

I'm not basing my decisions on race Well yes, I am. But surely the choices of president should represent the demographic of the US? Rather than an old rich white guy. You know?

When I think of Rick Santorum, I inevitably think of... well, you know. The stuff. I've seen Rick Perry's ad, and I am not often speechless, but there we go, he managed. It's not everyone that would shout "I HATE GAYS" on national TV but he pretty much did.

As I said before, Newt Gingrich is scum. It'd be nice if people read more of the stories about him.

You say, after electing Obama, "look where we are now", well, where is that exactly? Things are bad but he has been trying to fix them, particularly with a set of republicans who essentially hate him. Do you think that, for instance, you'd be better off with McCain/Palin? Actually, that's unfair. Don't feel you have to respond to that.
 
 
2011 Dec 29 at 11:21 PST
Rockbomb
Dog fucker (but in a good way now)

2009 Nov 13 • 2045
Well, I'm by no means an expert on quantum physics, so I'll just take your word on the expansion stuff (while I take the time to educate myself so I can understand it, of course :D). But when you say "there was no before", I just can't bring myself to believe that... Matter can't just pop up out of nowhere, as far as I'm aware... so, until we find some theory that would show show how matter came into existence in the first place, I'm not gonna be sold on that. I wish I could just pass it off, as you seem to, but it just doesn't seem logical at all to me



I think it's pretty ignorant to say that we should elect a president just because they represent the majority demographics. If the country was full of assholes who don't know what they're talking about, would you say that Newt Gingrich should be elected because he best represents the people?



You say that Obama has been trying to fix all these problems, but what has he really done? Our debt has increased significantly because he continues to spend billions of dollars on useless wars and bail out companies. He's starting undeclared wars with multiple different countries, which is obviously pissing off those countries, and creating issues for us, while accomplishing practically nothing. He extended the patriot act, which is a direct violation of the constitution. He's trying to pass a bill that would allow the military to indefinitely imprison US citizens without trial. I could go on for days about things he's done that are wrong... can't think of much that he's done that's good.


And yeah, I don't think I need to answer your last question xD
Actually, I'll do it anyway... Ron Paul ran for presidency in the 2008 election as well, and I think he would have done much better.
 
 
2011 Dec 29 at 12:06 PST
Down Rodeo
Cap'n Moth of the Firehouse

Find the Hole II Participation Medal
2007 Oct 19 • 5486
57,583 ₧
Well, it's not QP, it's relativity for the most part :D Notice that I am not saying anything about the origin of this matter. It's equivalent to saying things have always been this way. I mean... asking what happened before the big bang. Is that really a question that can be answered? It's like asking "what is the (spatial) direction perpendicular to up, left and forward?", we can't answer that because for us there are only three perpendicular directions and everything else is a combination of those three.

Now, I am being slightly deceitful, as this was the view taken quite a few years ago before more modern ideas. Now there are lots of theories about what might have happened before, but then you kind of lose the idea of some t = 0. WHATEVER

OK, fair enough. I think you're winning on the politics front, because the highly filtered news I get only brings talk of these new rights-infringing bills and a stream of shit, so I dunno. I just feel that another republican White House is not what the world needs... I think that makes me highly partisan.
 
 
2011 Dec 29 at 15:02 PST
Rockbomb
Dog fucker (but in a good way now)

2009 Nov 13 • 2045
Down Rodeo said:
I just feel that another republican White House is not what the world needs... I think that makes me highly partisan.

Well if it helps, Ron Paul is actually a libertarian



Down Rodeo said:
Now, I am being slightly deceitful, as this was the view taken quite a few years ago before more modern ideas. Now there are lots of theories about what might have happened before, but then you kind of lose the idea of some t = 0. WHATEVER

If you don't mind, could you throw the names of some of those theories my way? I wanna read up on them



Down Rodeo said:
OK, fair enough. I think you're winning on the politics front, because the highly filtered news I get only brings talk of these new rights-infringing bills and a stream of shit, so I dunno. I just feel that another republican White House is not what the world needs... I think that makes me highly partisan.

YouTube is the place to be. Though, you probably don't care enough about US politics to be sitting there looking up videos online, but... if you do, go to YouTube. Most, if not all of the major interviews/debates and whatnot should be on there.
 
 
2011 Dec 29 at 16:14 PST
SRAW
Rocket Man

2007 Nov 6 • 2525
601 ₧
Down Rodeo said:
OK, fair enough. I think you're winning on the politics front, because the highly filtered news I get only brings talk of these new rights-infringing bills and a stream of shit, so I dunno. I just feel that another republican White House is not what the world needs... I think that makes me highly partisan.


The only info that most americans know about Iran is via cnn or fox or whatever channel they watch, and since these channels are of course anti-Iran, most of the news will be negative and so the very smart masses will fall for this stuff
Free Steam Games
 
 
2011 Dec 29 at 18:11 PST
Down Rodeo
Cap'n Moth of the Firehouse

Find the Hole II Participation Medal
2007 Oct 19 • 5486
57,583 ₧
I don't know the names of the theories, sorry. There is a branch of physics known as String Theory. It's quite clever and has its roots in some really beautiful ideas but sadly is not fully understood; in fact, it is far from it. But one idea that came from this is that two universes - 'branes' in the theory - collide along some 5th axis; we perceive this as the big bang. It's pretty crazy. There is of course eternal big bang theory, where the universe expands up to a point, but there's too much matter so it begins to contract and then there is a big crunch. Physicists hypothesise this could lead to a big bounce where it happens all over again. Currently the universe is expanding at an increasing rate, so this seems highly unlikely.

This might be where I get off on the US politics side of things. I'm clearly out of my depth though I will admit you have made me rethink the Obama administration, as well as the possibility of a Ron Paul ticket. I think he's probably their best candidate. But that's not saying much sadly :(

SRAW: the Iran point is an interesting one. Ahmadinejad is clearly a nutter, but the country's changed so much in the past 40 years, it's insane. There's a lot wrong in that area of the world, but I'm not sure how it can be fixed :(
 
 
2011 Dec 30 at 08:07 PST
Page [1] 2