Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thailand News and Discussion Forum | ASEANNOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

President Gingrich.

Featured Replies

I watch Fox News and the genius Krauthammer had some nice things to say about Paul the day after one of the debates last week. I've noticed on other Fox programs people are starting to warm up to him.

As for how well Paul is doing...

This week, Ron Paul is likely to win more delegates to the 2012 GOP convention than either Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum. In fact, he’s likely to win more delegates than Gingrich and Santorum combined.

“Hold it”, you’re saying, “How can that be? Rep. Paul’s polling in single digits in Florida. He’s going to finish behind Gingrich and Santorum, as well as Mitt Romney, in Tuesday’s Florida primary. How can that translate into beating any of his rivals at all?”

I have to admit I would laugh very hard if Paul won the Republican Nomination.

Of course I would be happy about it because then we would see a debate between him & Obama &

more importantly the US citizens would.

Anyway we will see what we see.

Thanks for the link it was interesting

PS: the next one was even better...short & sweet 5 reasons & what is funny is these days this is called unorthodox

The roar of Ron Paul: Five of his unorthodox views on the economy

  • Replies 205
  • Views 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Following is my post made in the Kook thread in it's entirety. Not surprisingly I said some of the same things in it that I claimed in my earlier post on this thread. Those items somehow disappeared from your clip out of it. Thanks for caring, though.

_____________________________________________________

"We are supposed to read what "he" has written as opposed to what "he" has supported? Bet you wouldn't want us to apply this to all the other candidates.

By the way, I support some of the things he proposes but certainly not all of them. His foreign policy is ridiculous and unworkable and will make him un-electable.

Regardless of the outcome in Iowa, it is my hope he will gracefully retire at some point in time. If he stays in the race he will guarantee the reelection of Obama, and that is a much larger threat to the US than anything I can think of.

_____________________________________________________

The defense rests.

The defense of what rests?... Thanks for caring? About What?

Either your comprehension is bad or my explanation is lacking.

I quoted one line from your other post for one reason....

To point out that you should go to the source for a clear explanation

Not some media interpretation of what he supports

That aside….What is your point of this post now?

After all the questions you will now only address your PS: from a previous post?

PS: Can you steer me to that post you say I made. I can't remember making it.

Nothing more about your confusion between non-interventionism & Isolationism?

Nor your misinterpretation of weak military vs bloated military Industrial Complex

If so we are just wasting bandwidth & time…

Actually on 2nd & final thought we are wasting time & bandwidth

Because like I told UG… I will now say the same to you & hey we may as well include JT

Vote for who you like…. I will do the same

Really......What is the difference?

Mr. Flying:

You seem rather angry. Have you had a bad hair day? Why not chill out, have a drink and get some sleep.

Mr. Flying:

You seem rather angry. Have you had a bad hair day? Why not chill out, have a drink and get some sleep.

Not at all Mr Chuck...not at all.

Life is good where I live...easy quiet...beautiful

I just get tired of going round on everything but the topic.

Same with UG & JT why do we even talk about it

all our minds are made up.

In many ways I can see why you folks like Gingrich, Romney & Obama

Everything but the point is discussed. Same method they use to debate.

A lot of nothing...never the cause just blame the effects or symptoms

Then I remember like I said........Whats the difference eh?

Vote for who you like

Have a good day too ;)

I watch Fox News and the genius Krauthammer had some nice things to say about Paul the day after one of the debates last week. I've noticed on other Fox programs people are starting to warm up to him.

They like some of his fanancial views, but think his foreign policy is crazy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pT6AUbeVrng

That is some scary sh!t

Adelson, Gingrich, and the Selling of America

First Newt says this in 2005

“The U.S. government should become the protector of the Palestinian people’s right to have a decent amount of land. The desire of some Israelis to use security as an excuse to grab more Palestinian land should be blocked by Washington even if that requires employing financial or other leverage to compel the Israeli government to behave reasonably on the issue of settlements.

Then he gets 13Million

Upon receiving a record amount of $13 million from Adelson – the latest installment was a check for $5 million from Miriam Adelson, his Israeli-born wife – Newt the Historian woke up one morning to discover that there are no Palestinians – only a horde of drooling Orcs trespassing on Israeli land.

Then he says this

the Palestinians are an invented people

Gotta agree with LannaRebirth

"God help America if he get's in power"

That is some scary sh!t

Adelson, Gingrich, and the Selling of America

First Newt says this in 2005

“The U.S. government should become the protector of the Palestinian people’s right to have a decent amount of land. The desire of some Israelis to use security as an excuse to grab more Palestinian land should be blocked by Washington even if that requires employing financial or other leverage to compel the Israeli government to behave reasonably on the issue of settlements.

Then he gets 13Million

Upon receiving a record amount of $13 million from Adelson – the latest installment was a check for $5 million from Miriam Adelson, his Israeli-born wife – Newt the Historian woke up one morning to discover that there are no Palestinians – only a horde of drooling Orcs trespassing on Israeli land.

Then he says this

the Palestinians are an invented people

Gotta agree with LannaRebirth

"God help America if he get's in power"

"To push fake morals, insult and stare

While money doesn’t talk, it swears"

--Bob Dylan

"To push fake morals, insult and stare

While money doesn’t talk, it swears"

--Bob Dylan

Sometimes in these kinds of cases I think money has tourette's smile.png

The "article" reads like another off-the-wall conspiracy theory. Newt probably just studied the issue a litttle and realized that he had been wrong. The same thing happened to my hero Pat Condell (unless the Jews bought him off too rolleyes.gif ).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuVx_7ER09Y

C'mon UG, let's leave Israel and the Jews aside for a moment, can we? Even you must admit, this is a pretty creepy dude.

All you folks out in TV land can relax. It looks like Newt has shot his wad in Florida.

I don't see anyway he can come back at this point but, in American politics...Never say never.

C'mon UG, let's leave Israel and the Jews aside for a moment, can we? Even you must admit, this is a pretty creepy dude.

I do not think that he is presidential material. IMO he is too erratic and he lets his ego get in the way of making the right decisions. He has really blown it by getting so negative and using arguments against Romney that he does not even believe himself. However, I am not sure that he can be counted out of the race yet as he keeps rising like a Phoenix every time everyone thinks that he is gone.

Here is an interesting theory on why Newt went wacko:

http://sn140w.snt140...237de49bda&fv=1

Newt probably just studied the issue a litttle and realized that he had been wrong.

laugh.png Yes I'm sure the 13 million tuition/grant helped get that studying/reprogramming done. wink.png

What Newt said about the "Palestinians" was a fact. All the conspiracy theories in the world do not change that.

Gingrich.

Second rate historian.

Bound to be a second rate Prez.

Gingrich.

Second rate historian.

Bound to be a second rate Prez.

Second rate is better than what we have now.

Gingrich.

Second rate historian.

Bound to be a second rate Prez.

Second rate is better than what we have now.

And yet still less than we deserve/demand

Gingrich.

Second rate historian.

Bound to be a second rate Prez.

Second rate is better than what we have now.

And yet still less than we deserve/demand

Agreed.

You, Chuck and Flying, deserve and demand only the best, but the great American public gets what it deserves. The interminable selection process, far from selecting the best, selects only the least objectionable Anybody of the calibre you want (and they're thin on the ground) is bound to be too positive for the electors.

Who was the last great president you had, great not as among presidents, but as a great man in himself?

I hasten to add that the same applies in Britain. The last great Prime Minister we had, with whose policies I disagree almost right down the line, was Margaret Thatcher. She was the last who had a vision for Britain... and that is what a Prime Minister (or President) needs. Even for her, events were too much; the Falklands war gave her an undeserved boost, and then she stumbled, literally and figuratively, on the steps of the Great Hall of the People. If Thatcher's extreme right-wing policies are too much for you, you have to look back to Clement Attlee, the unsung Labour prime minister who put things back together again after WWII.

Of course, Attlee went to the same school as I did.

You, Chuck and Flying, deserve and demand only the best, but the great American public gets what it deserves. The interminable selection process, far from selecting the best, selects only the least objectionable Anybody of the calibre you want (and they're thin on the ground) is bound to be too positive for the electors.

Who was the last great president you had, great not as among presidents, but as a great man in himself?

I hasten to add that the same applies in Britain. The last great Prime Minister we had, with whose policies I disagree almost right down the line, was Margaret Thatcher. She was the last who had a vision for Britain... and that is what a Prime Minister (or President) needs. Even for her, events were too much; the Falklands war gave her an undeserved boost, and then she stumbled, literally and figuratively, on the steps of the Great Hall of the People. If Thatcher's extreme right-wing policies are too much for you, you have to look back to Clement Attlee, the unsung Labour prime minister who put things back together again after WWII.

Of course, Attlee went to the same school as I did.

For me it was Ronald Reagan.

It was Kennedy for me, but I was 7 years old, Catholic and my parents were from Massachusetts, so I might have been brainwashed.

It was Kennedy for me, but I was 7 years old, Catholic and my parents were from Massachusetts, so I might have been brainwashed.

I've always wondered whether Kennedy was all he was made out to be. His reputation took a giant leap forward when he was assassinated. But "(fill in name of candidate), you're no Jack Kennedy".

I've always wondered whether Kennedy was all he was made out to be. His reputation took a giant leap forward when he was assassinated. But "(fill in name of candidate), you're no Jack Kennedy".

In my mind JFK had a lot of problems but if I had to say what made him great it was this...

http://www.john-f-ke...eralreserve.htm

May have also got him killed if you note the dates ...Or perhaps his plan to pull out of Vietnam?

Many also say that what JFK was planning with silver notes was no big deal & did not get him killed.

Yet it could also have been the initial steps to restore sound US money

The comparison also explains why I like Ron Paul as our next president...Sadly the comparison would likely continue

if Ron Paul were elected & is why I often said he would need more security than the Pope.

With the exception of JFK's attempt at sound money I would need to go back to before 1913 to find a President I liked

because none after that (except JFK) ever tried to over turn the privately held Federal Reserve & their power

to wreak havoc on our monetary policy

Remember our Constitution plainly states in Article 1 Section 8 that....

The Congress shall have Power To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin

NOT some privately held bank who loans it to us for profit. Yet they create it out of thin air in our name.

The Congress shall have Power To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

Which explains a bit about "unfunded" so called wars

Uh oh, yet another tin foil hat conspiracy theory taken as truth!

wiki

The reason for the move was that the President had just signed legislation repealing the Silver Purchase Act. With this repeal, the Treasury Secretary could no longer control the issue of Silver Certificates on his own authority. However, the issuance of certificates could be controlled under the President's authority. Hence, for administrative convenience, President Kennedy issued Executive Order 11110.

Ironically, the purpose of the order and the legislation was to decrease the circulation of Silver Certificates, with Federal Reserve Notes taking their place.

Uh oh, yet another tin foil hat conspiracy theory taken as truth!

Note I did say........Yet it could also have been the initial steps to restore sound US money

But thanks for your usual contribution....Hey aren't you going to work the Israel focus into this one?

...

But thanks for your usual contribution....Hey aren't you going to work the Israel focus into this one?

Are you baiting me, homie?

Uh oh, yet another tin foil hat conspiracy theory taken as truth!

Are you baiting me, homie?

No josefff you already set your bait....I was just pointing out how dumb it was

Is homie part of the new avatar theme?

It was Kennedy for me, but I was 7 years old, Catholic and my parents were from Massachusetts, so I might have been brainwashed.

I've always wondered whether Kennedy was all he was made out to be. His reputation took a giant leap forward when he was assassinated. But "(fill in name of candidate), you're no Jack Kennedy".

Despite it's growing economic and military greatness, America was a country with a whole lot of untied loose ends concerning its past when Kennedy came to power. He, and a few others, most specifically his brother Bobby sought to address many of these issues. I think for some entrenched power brokers it was too much too fast, hence he met his demise and his brother subsequently.

Removed some off-topic conspiracy theories.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.