RE: More Ron Bashing
January 27, 2012 at 4:48 pm
(This post was last modified: January 27, 2012 at 4:52 pm by reverendjeremiah.)
(January 27, 2012 at 4:38 pm)paintpooper Wrote: You tell me why the Dept of Education is sooooo great?
I can agree that creationism is nutball. Thats about it.
Never said it was "sooooo great" (did I get all of the "ooo's" right? LOL)
It is obvious that there are TONS of problems with the system right now that need immediate attention, the dept of education is not one of them. Yet he makes that his priority if he gets elected.
How about stopping K street from fucking up our representative system by guarenteeing jobs to retiring politicians to become insiders to influence the government for business?
How about actually regulating the banks, instead of continuing to allow them to regulate themselves?
How about the BILLIONS of mispent and abused funds that go to the millitary industrial complex? How about stopping "no-bid" contracts?
I can think of MANY thinks that have put our country and our economy in grave continual danger, and the dept of education is VERY far down on that list.
(January 27, 2012 at 4:46 pm)paintpooper Wrote:(January 27, 2012 at 4:40 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote:(January 27, 2012 at 3:45 pm)paintpooper Wrote: Oh wow ONE LADY says he proof read it, one secretary... yeah way to believe everything you hear. One witness is enough for 100% conclusive proof eh?
right, because when it comes to this newsletter, we should take the opinion of a Paul fan as opposed to, you know, someone who actually works for the newsletter pointing out the system that the newsletter uses.
thats how all the best facts are found out.
Hearsay is the worst type of evidence their is. People can lie. Still old ass newsletter, still irrelevant.
Government can't dictate morality. People are the only dictators of morality because we are morality and we are the people. Morality is a constantly changing fluid aspect of society, it must happen naturally because government can't fix it, the people must.
Wait, are you suggesting that information from a former member of Paul's staff is equal to "hearsay?"
Im interested in learning what you would consider a good source of information in a situation like this?
Facts, it is Pauls letter, he is supposed to give it his approval before it circulates. He has publicly spoke of opposing the civil rights act and supports businesses freedom to hire based on race.
Are ANY of these facts allowable in your court room?
If not, which system of fact finding should we use?
