Some good stuff From Rick Perry

[UberTong]

One nutter doth not a "group" make.


But yes, there are non Muslim terrorists out there ... thing is the VAST majority of terrorists currently active ARE Muslim. So for now UberTong's statement is mildly hyperbolic but not 100% inaccurate.

But give it time ... I expect in the next couple years we'll see a rise in leftist/democrat/union violence.

Seriously, when do we get to start calling SEIU a terrorist organization?

Thanks again Zund. +1

[sniper7]

That's why I like Michele Bachmann. HERE'S her stance on 2A issues.

Yeah I really like her. I have seen a few of her interviews and read some on her. Definitely a strong candidate.

[Ronin13]

Actually Zund, what's extremely funny is the report I read in 2010, just after our deployment ended and I was just looking over some stuff on SIPR (that's the secret internet .mil uses) and there was an unclassified report on current terrorism figures... guess who was in the lead on # murdered? Well I'll back track- the list showed groups related to Christian Extremism (it was at the bottom), Extreme Judaism, Soviet/Neo-Communist, Extremist Right Wing: Europe, Extremist Right Wing: American, Left Wing, African (non governmental/warlord related), and then waay at the top with more deaths caused than any other by leaps and bounds: Islamic Fundamental/Extremist Groups. The link to each group included the most prominent examples (of course they cited Tim McVey for the American extremists) like Al Qaeda, AQI (Iraq), Hezbi Al Islami, Hamas, Hezbollah, PLO, and the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood- the group behind the Sadat assassination where Dr. Ayman Al Zawahiri first came onto the scene. And who can be attributed to the most deaths in the west you ask? OBL's happy little group. So there you have it, not all terrorists are Muslim, but the worst of the worst sure do keep a copy of the Koran on their nightstand.

[Ronin13]

My friend just posted this on facebook with a big LOL... must be a very libtard infested church! Not cool.

[Zundfolge]

...must be a very libtard infested church! Not cool.

Episcopal = libtard
Kinda like United Methodists ... only without the cool music.

[bryjcom]

It's really funny how the majority of RP fanboys have to accuse those who don't share their views of Ron Paul of following the talking heads on Fox News or O'Reilly. If that's all you got, bryjcom, you're wasting your breath (or bandwidth in this case) trying to convince me to vote for Paul

They view it as undeniable fact that RP is the ONLY desirable candidate and their narrow minds can't comprehend that many people, I'd venture to say MOST people since that's been proven the case in the past, don't find him as desirable a candidate as they do.

Be an RP follower all you like. But don't try to convince me he's the only desirable candidate. I find him highly undesirable overall. An overwhelming majority of voters have obviously felt that way in the past. Will that change this time around? I doubt it but we'll have to wait and see. I suspect when it's all said and done that RP will not be chosen by the voters to be the Republican nominee and RP fans will still cling to their assertion that they're right and everyone else is wrong.

I do agree with some things he says but I disagree with others. And I'm really tired of hearing how everyone snubs RP. For cryin' out loud...he polled in single digits in the last two presidential elections. In terms of presidential candidates he's been a lightweight the last two times he's ran. That's because people don't like him. Hell...even Ross Perot polled at close to 40% when he ran, then withdrew, then ran again and he got almost 20% of the vote in the election. Paul hasn't come close to any of those numbers and there's a good reason for that. It's not because the media ignores him, it's because most people don't agree with him.

Get over it already.

Actually his polls aren't that low this time around. He actually polls very good against Obama and better then Bachmann.

Why do I think you guys get your talking points from the pundits?? Because your general theme about Ron Paul is he can't win. And thats exactly what the pundits say.

Keep loving Bachmann. You do know she voted for the patriot act, don't you?


http://www.gallup.com/poll/125843/election-2012.aspx

[Bailey Guns]

Actually his polls aren't that low this time around. He actually polls very good against Obama and better then Bachmann.

Why do I think you guys get your talking points from the pundits?? Because your general theme about Ron Paul is he can't win. And thats exactly what the pundits say.

Keep loving Bachmann. You do know she voted for the patriot act, don't you?


http://www.gallup.com/poll/125843/election-2012.aspx

I got news for ya. I don't need to listen to pundits to form my opinions of Ron Paul. All I have to do is listen to Ron Paul.

So, let me ask you this. Where do you get information from (on any subject, not necessarily this one) and how do you form opinions.

This whole "stop watching FoxNews" is about the most lame argument I can possibly think of. If I watch a news report, regardless of the channel, I'm smart enough to form my own opinions in terms of the slant or bias that is presented by the reporter. I think lots of people are.

Unless you get information from some sort of non-biased, Divine source, gimme a fuckin' break. It's biased, too.

If I watched Fox News and ABC News and CNN and all the pundits and talking heads said, "On a clear, sunny day in Colorado the sky is blue," it wouldn't take a genius to go outside on a clear, sunny day, look into the sky, and independently confirm that, in fact, on a clear, sunny day in Colorado the sky is blue.

Maybe people are capable of listening to Ron Paul and figuring out on their own he's a nutjob on national security/foreign policy without watching the news/pundits. Themes are oftentimes common for a reason. In Paul's case, I think it's self-evident. He's been trounced both times he's previously ran for president. In his case, the reason I say he can't get elected to the presidency is because he's proven twice now he can't get elected to the presidency. Not because the media says so.

I could say the same thing about Ron Paul fans. "Stop listening to all the Ron Paul fanboys out there and form your own opinions."

Geez...come up with something original for chrissakes.

[bryjcom]

Do you live on your computer!!

We will never agree on this subject. Doesn't mean I hate you though.

[Zundfolge]

One of the things that annoys me most about the Ron Paul fanboys is that they can't figure out who their real enemies are.

The Democrats are your enemy bub, not Republicans that don't happen to slavishly support Ron Paul. Until you get that straight I can't take you seriously.

Now this is the primary season, so I expect dogmatic support for whatever candidate you support, but the problem with the RP guys is that if Ron Paul isn't the GOP candidate, they get all pissy and "take their ball and go home" (voting for the LP candidate or not voting at all).

Remember the words of Ronaldus Maximus; "If I agree with you 80% of the time and disagree 20% you are still my friend."

And frankly a LOT of Republicans should remember his 11th commandment; "Thou Shall Not Speak Ill Of A Fellow Republican."

[Ronin13]

Keep loving Bachmann. You do know she voted for the patriot act, don't you?

Most will tell you how evil the patriot act is and how un-American it is... but the original intent (the first through third draft) was actually pretty good. So Bachmann voted for it? Okay... There was a lot Bush did in his first term I didn't exactly agree with (like the final draft of the patriot act as we know it today), but that sure as hell didn't sway me to vote for the r-tard Kerry. One black mark doesn't make me want to jump into someone else's boat. I never thought I'd see a day we had a female president, but then again I never thought I'd see a black one either... who better to be the first than Michelle Bachmann?