Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 305 of 1141 FirstFirst ... 300301302303304305306307308309310 ... LastLast
Results 3,041 to 3,050 of 11402

Thread: POFO Anything Goes Thread. ((Warning do not enter if you can't handle fire))

  1. -3041
    Spesh's Avatar
    Fat Kid

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2007
    Posts:
    7,172
    vCash:
    4777
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Locke View Post
    You're trying to argue a point I never made. I never specified what kind of ideologues. I named them in general. I find some of the ideologues in PETA to be just as destructive as the ideologues in Westboro.

    I don't get you man. You're obviously a smart dude. And you seem educated. You always seem to have a grasp on what you're talking about, even if I don't agree with it. But then you'll just pop in out of nowhere and make ridiculous claims like that birther bull**** you posted earlier today. At least with someone like Statler there is consistency on what's going on. You're all over the place...
    Found your problem.
    Quote Originally Posted by finfan54 View Post
    its all right, Im a rice dick apparently.
    Quote Quote  

  2. -3042
    GoFins!'s Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Feb 2008
    Posts:
    492
    vCash:
    1096
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Locke View Post
    You're trying to argue a point I never made.
    I'm not yet arguing anything nor have I accused you of making any points. I'm just trying to get a clear understanding of what you meant before I, in typcial Finheaven POFO fashion, go off half-cocked and start arguing points you never made while insulting your family heritage.


    Quote Originally Posted by Locke View Post
    But then you'll just pop in out of nowhere and make ridiculous claims like that birther bull**** you posted earlier today.
    Isn't "birther bull****" an example of someone being uncompromising and dogmatic?

    Whether or not there ever should have been questions is legitimate. Regardless, there were questions and he finally put them to rest four years into his Presidency.

    We have a tendency to angrily dismiss concerns we don't think are valid rather than address them. "Birther bull****" is an example of that. Birther questions are generally easy to prove invalid yet the only response was that McCain's service isn't proof he was born in this country and this country was built on immigrants. It's as ridiculous as trying to prove McCain's eligibility by bringing up Obama's birth certificate.

    So, do you believe this forum has ideologues from both sides of the political aisle?
    ďIím somewhat disappointed that more African Americans donít think for themselves and just go with whatever theyíre supposed to say and think."


    - Dr. Benjamin Carson
    Quote Quote  

  3. -3043
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    6,747
    vCash:
    18812
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by GoFins! View Post
    Isn't "birther bull****" an example of someone being uncompromising and dogmatic?
    Making fun of people who dispute immutable facts isn't being uncompromising or dogmatic, no. The sky is blue. We landed on the moon. 9/11 was not an inside job. Obama was born in Hawaii.

    If people want to assert a bunch of crazy **** that's their right, but not all dissenting viewpoints are equally valid. After a certain point "maturity" and open mindedness demands not that you consider everyone's opinion respectfully, but that you call a spade a spade.
    I'm giving you a choice: either put on these glasses or start eatin' that trash can.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -3044
    Locke's Avatar
    They looked like strong hands.

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2008
    Posts:
    8,608
    vCash:
    2867
    Loc:
    Albuquerque, NM
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by GoFins! View Post
    I'm not yet arguing anything nor have I accused you of making any points. I'm just trying to get a clear understanding of what you meant before I, in typcial Finheaven POFO fashion, go off half-cocked and start arguing points you never made while insulting your family heritage.


    Isn't "birther bull****" an example of someone being uncompromising and dogmatic?

    Whether or not there ever should have been questions is legitimate. Regardless, there were questions and he finally put them to rest four years into his Presidency.

    We have a tendency to angrily dismiss concerns we don't think are valid rather than address them. "Birther bull****" is an example of that. Birther questions are generally easy to prove invalid yet the only response was that McCain's service isn't proof he was born in this country and this country was built on immigrants. It's as ridiculous as trying to prove McCain's eligibility by bringing up Obama's birth certificate.

    So, do you believe this forum has ideologues from both sides of the political aisle?
    No, there were no questions as his legitimacy. He had to pass a background check performed via both the FBI and CIA before he could declare himself a candidate during the Democratic primaries. It was a race issue and it remains one to this day. He was a black man with a funny name, so of course he had to be foreign, right? This is what I'm talking about. Everyone knows only a natural born citizen can run for President, and of course the CIA would verify that before allowing them into the race. Yet you still questioned it? Seriously?

    And no, I don't think this forum has ideologues on both sides...

    If I could take your pain and frame it, and hang it on my wall,
    maybe you would never have to hurt again...

    Quote Quote  

  5. -3045
    rob19's Avatar
    Soul Rebel

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2006
    Posts:
    6,839
    vCash:
    3271
    Loc:
    Georgia
    Thanks / No Thanks
    1972 Dolphins Logo
    I think a guy with some principles who doesn't pander, compromise, or play the political game in order to get elected is actually refreshing. I don't like politicians who constantly do one thing & say another. Whether you agree or disagree with him, you know where Ron Paul stands, & that's more than I can say for most politicians. Dude also has a heart, & with politics being the cesspool for sociopaths that it is, I think that's a quality that's undervalued.




    Locke in case you were curious:

    Inflation and the Federal Reserve

    In the words of the New York Times, Paul is "not a fan" of the Federal Reserve.[52] In his own words, Ron Paul advocates that we should "End the Fed". Paul's opposition to the Fed is supported by the Austrian Business Cycle Theory, which holds that instead of containing inflation, the Federal Reserve, in theory and in practice, is responsible for causing inflation.
    [53] In addition to eroding the value of individual savings, this creation of inflation leads to booms and busts in the economy. Thus Paul argues that government, via a central bank (the Federal Reserve), is the primary cause of economic recessions and depressions. He believes that economic volatility is decreased when the free market determines interest rates and money supply.[54] He has stated in numerous speeches that most of his colleagues in Congress are unwilling to abolish the central bank because it funds many government activities. He says that to compensate for eliminating the "hidden tax"[55] of monetary inflation, Congress and the president would instead have to raise taxes or cut government services, either of which could be politically damaging to their reputations. He states that the "inflation tax" is a tax on the poor, because the Federal Reserve prints more money which subsidizes select industries, while poor people pay higher prices for goods as more money is placed in circulation.[56]

    Paul adheres to Austrian School economics and libertarian criticism of fractional-reserve banking, opposing fiat currency and the monetary inflation.[57] He views monetary inflation as an underhanded form of taxation, because it takes value away from the money that individuals hold without having to directly tax them. He sees the creation of the Federal Reserve, and its ability to "print money out of thin air" without commodity backing, as responsible for eroding the value of money,[58] observing that "a dollar today is worth 4 cents compared to a dollar in 1913 when the Federal Reserve got in." In 1982, Paul was the prime mover in the creation of the U.S. Gold Commission, and in many public speeches Paul has voiced concern over the dominance of the current banking system and called for the return to a commodity-backed currency through a gradual reintroduction of hard currency, including both gold and silver.[59] A commodity standard binds currency issue to the value of that commodity rather than fiat, making the value of the currency as stable as the commodity.

    He condemns the role of the Federal Reserve and the national debt in creating monetary inflation.[60][61] The minority report of the U.S. Gold Commission states that the federal and state governments are strictly limited in their monetary role by Article One, Section Eight, Clauses 2, 5, and 6, and Section Ten, Clause 1, "The Constitution forbids the states to make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debt, nor does it permit the federal government to make anything a legal tender." The Commission also recommended that the federal government "restore a definition for the term 'dollar'. We suggest defining a 'dollar' as a weight of gold of a certain fineness, .999 fine."[62] On multiple occasions in congressional hearings he has sharply challenged two different chairmen of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke.

    He has also called for the removal of all taxes on gold transactions.[63] He has repeatedly introduced the Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act since 1999,[64] to enable "America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our Nation's founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold". He opposes dependency on paper fiat money, but also says that there "were some shortcomings of the gold standard of the 19th century ... because it was a fixed price and caused confusion." He argues that hard money, such as backed by gold or silver, would prevent monetary inflation (and, thus, would inhibit price inflation), but adds, "I wouldn't exactly go back on the gold standard but I would legalize the constitution where gold and silver should and could be legal tender, which would restrain the Federal Government from spending and then turning that over to the Federal Reserve and letting the Federal Reserve print the money."[65]

    Paul supports legalization of parallel currencies, such as gold-backed notes issued from private markets and digital gold currencies.[66] He would like gold-backed notes (or other types of hard money) and digital gold currencies[67] to compete on a level playing field with Federal Reserve Notes, allowing individuals a choice whether to use sound money or to continue using fiat money.[68][69][70] Paul believes this would restrain monetary and price inflation, limit government spending, and eventually eliminate the ability of the Federal Reserve to "tax" Americans through monetary inflation (i.e., by reducing the purchasing power of the currency they are holding), which he sees as "the most insidious of all taxes".[71]

    He suggests that current efforts to sustain dollar hegemony, especially since the collapse of the Bretton Woods system following the United States' suspension of the dollar's conversion to gold in 1971, exacerbate a rationale for war. Consequently, when petroleum producing nations like Iraq, Iran, or Venezuela elect to trade in Petroeuro instead of Petrodollar, it devalues an already overly inflated dollar, further eroding its supremacy as a global currency. According to Paul, along with vested American interests in oil and plans to "remake the Middle East", this scenario has proven a contributing factor for the war in Iraq and diplomatic tensions with Iran.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -3046
    Locke's Avatar
    They looked like strong hands.

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2008
    Posts:
    8,608
    vCash:
    2867
    Loc:
    Albuquerque, NM
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Interestingly, we have not had a depression since moving off of a gold standard. How many did we have before then?

    But that was just the first thing that came to mind. Most of his ideas were like that. Just disband all the different departments and let the states govern themselves? If Kansas wants to teach Creatism as fact, that's OK? If Maine wants to ban all guns within it's border, there's no issue with that? Sorry, he had a lot of big ideas and no real plans on how to implement them or deal with the aftermath. And the free market? No regulations?

    I'm glad he has respect for sticking to his guns and not compromising. That's something unique to him. But he has never been close to the White House. His son has a better chance, and that's because he is turning into a FoxNews Lunatic...
    Quote Quote  

  7. -3047
    GoFins!'s Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Feb 2008
    Posts:
    492
    vCash:
    1096
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Locke View Post
    No, there were no questions as his legitimacy. He had to pass a background check performed via both the FBI and CIA before he could declare himself a candidate during the Democratic primaries. Everyone knows only a natural born citizen can run for President, and of course the CIA would verify that before allowing them into the race.
    You just made the questions/concerns about Obama invalid by actually addressing them. In response to perceived questions about Obama's eligibility, you focused on Obama's eligibility. I think I can safely assume that you find the questions, whether they were asked or not, to be bat-**** crazy, yet, you didn't feel the need to say that. You stuck to the facts. Anyone who would maintain a serious birther outlook after your answer would be implying they thought both the CIA and FBI were in on it, that someone had the foresight to fake a birth announcement over 50 years ago, etc, etc, etc.

    When you have a strong argument it's easy to make someone look foolish without advertising the fact that you're making them look foolish.


    Quote Originally Posted by Locke View Post
    Yet you still questioned it? Seriously?
    "You're trying to argue a point I never made." Not a big deal though.


    Quote Originally Posted by Locke View Post
    And no, I don't think this forum has ideologues on both sides...
    Whether idieologue means "uncompromising and dogmatic" or "someone who pushes for things that are unrealistic", I doubt any of the ideologues in the Political forum realize they're ideologues.
    Last edited by GoFins!; 02-27-2013 at 02:32 AM.
    Quote Quote  

  8. -3048
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    6,747
    vCash:
    18812
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Locke View Post
    Interestingly, we have not had a depression since moving off of a gold standard. How many did we have before then?

    But that was just the first thing that came to mind. Most of his ideas were like that. Just disband all the different departments and let the states govern themselves? If Kansas wants to teach Creatism as fact, that's OK? If Maine wants to ban all guns within it's border, there's no issue with that? Sorry, he had a lot of big ideas and no real plans on how to implement them or deal with the aftermath. And the free market? No regulations?

    I'm glad he has respect for sticking to his guns and not compromising. That's something unique to him. But he has never been close to the White House. His son has a better chance, and that's because he is turning into a FoxNews Lunatic...
    Exactly. "When you ain't got nothin', you got nothin' to lose."

    Ron Paul doesn't run for president to win. He runs to promote issues. That gives him the latitude to say whatever he wants but also ensures he never sniffs the nomination. He knows that and accepts it. To judge all candidates by his standard of candor is comparing apples to oranges. Sure it's technically the same race, but a world class distance runner from Kenya and a 43 year old dock worker who are both in the Boston Marathon are also running in the same race. Technically. Hardly the same thing, though.

    Our political system rewards few points for honesty. Therefore it engenders little honesty. As long as there are people ambitious enough to crave power there will be people willing to find out what behavior the system does reward... and do that.
    Quote Quote  

  9. -3049
    tylerdolphin's Avatar
    More Smug than Birthday Dog

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Sep 2005
    Posts:
    12,042
    vCash:
    2242
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Tonight's poker game featured probably the most impressive 4th place (out of 9) Ill probably ever deliver. Astounding I outlasted half the table.




    Quote Quote  

  10. -3050
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    6,747
    vCash:
    18812
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by tylerdolphin View Post
    Tonight's poker game featured probably the most impressive 4th place (out of 9) Ill probably ever deliver. Astounding I outlasted half the table.
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6718
    Last Post: 08-08-2013, 03:17 PM
  2. Replies: 1716
    Last Post: 02-04-2008, 03:37 PM
  3. can we keep this thread alive in the PoFo?
    By Maynard the Hammer in forum Questions and Suggestions Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-12-2006, 11:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •