Ron/Rand Paul 2012

[Rockntractor]

what about putting tariffs on everything but raw materials.

That makes more sense but I still like the idea of free trade better in most cases.
We have a growing labor union problem that hopefully will be dealt with before it gets out of hand.

[txradioguy]

what about putting tariffs on everything but raw materials.

Sure...if you want to start a trade war with every single country that we trade with. They can turn around and do the same thing to us. ANd they can set them just as high or higher than we do.

Then we're paying 5...10 times the price for stuff we import because of silly policies like that.

[Odysseus]

what about putting tariffs on everything but raw materials.

Then you still drive up the cost of manufactured goods and destroy our export market. GM, Ford and Chrysler get freed up from competition, which makes them complacent and less inclined to innovate or watch their quality control standards, just as they did during the late sixties/early seventies, when Japanese and German imports began crushing them. They were completely unresponsive to the markets because they were secure in their dominant position in the US market. The unions, seeing the big three as a permanent fixture in the economy, made unsustainable demands which were granted by corporations that believed that they'd be on top forever. The combination of complacent leadership and complacent labor resulted in autos that were as bloated and inefficient as their manufacturers. Eventually, people were willing to pay a premium for better products from overseas, and the US auto industry has been in the tank ever since. Now, when you go to any third world country, you see that the work vehicles are Isuzus, Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans and Mercedes. If you see a US-made vehicle, it's almost always military. Our auto export market is in the toilet, too.

Is that what you want to impose on the rest of our industry, or what little remains? Instead of trying to protect our economy from competition, you should be looking at policies that remove impediments to competition, such as excessive regulation, absurd tax policies and open hostility to business in the government.

[Molon Labe]

when he has his picture taken with they guys from Stormfront

yeah, he doesn't agree with them

So if I show a picture of someone with Obama and they happen to be a military officer....that means Obama supports the military?

Fail.

[Odysseus]

So if I show a picture of someone with Obama and they happen to be a military officer....that means Obama supports the military?

Fail.

We can be ordered to appear with the Commander-in-Chief. Who ordered Ron to appear with the Stormfront boys?

[Articulate_Ape]

We can be ordered to appear with the Commander-in-Chief. Who ordered Ron to appear with the Stormfront boys?

Did he know who they were? Based on the video of the event (assuming it's the same one) he had no idea who they were at the time.

[Molon Labe]

We can be ordered to appear with the Commander-in-Chief. Who ordered Ron to appear with the Stormfront boys?

Yes.. I'm aware of that

You have made the point. The point is....there is always more to it. Politicians may not be ordered to do so, but they are obliged to take photos with their consituency.

Using the logic in this thread......Great then....Joe Arpaio is a neo nazi supporter



Vito Lombardi.

And Rummy is best buds with Saddam...



well he was once...but you get the idea


Neo Nazi's had rallies in favor of a Rush proposal on busing several years back. Does this mean he supports said beliefs? Cause their's people here who are saying that if what people say is posted on sites like Stormfront then they must be one. I doubt anyone here believes any of that about Rush. And I'm supremely confident there are plenty of pictures of Limbaugh in the early 90's at his Rush to excellence tours with shady types. He routinely took photos with people.

So your completely comfortable with the belief that in a politics, with the thousands of pictures politicians take on a daily basis that taking a picture with someone who asks you, whom you may or may not know, is a representation of accepting that person's viewpoints? How ignorant and sad. :(

[txradioguy]

Yes.. I'm aware of that

You have made the point. The point is....there is always more to it. Politicians may not be ordered to do so, but they are obliged to take photos with their consituency.

Using the logic in this thread......Great then....Joe Arpaio is a neo nazi supporter



Vito Lombardi.

And Rummy is best buds with Saddam...



well he was once...but you get the idea


Neo Nazi's had rallies in favor of a Rush proposal on busing several years back. Does this mean he supports said beliefs? Cause their's people here who are saying that if what people say is posted on sites like Stormfront then they must be one. I doubt anyone here believes any of that about Rush. And I'm supremely confident there are plenty of pictures of Limbaugh in the early 90's at his Rush to excellence tours with shady types. He routinely took photos with people.

So your completely comfortable with the belief that in a politics, with the thousands of pictures politicians take on a daily basis that taking a picture with someone who asks you, whom you may or may not know, is a representation of accepting that person's viewpoints? How ignorant and sad. :(

Scratch a Ronulan...find a Libtard/DUmmie.