The fifth option is far more likely: Accurately measuring and recording the circumference wasn't that important to them, so they either didn't measure it well, or else they rounded it off. The diameter probably wasn't exactly 10 cubits, either. And all the animals in the world didn't take exactly one day to come to life either, but Indiana would be quite happy to legislate that they did.
And he [Hiram] made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one rim to the other it was round all about
And where does it say it was circular? Good question!
Media distortion is killing this country, but calling its victims "retards," when there are really quite advanced techniques being applied by smart people, is going to keep them in their box.
I thought I was out of that box. I was wrong. No one is. That's why it's my option c), I start by assuming people are victims, and give them what they need to fix it. But none is so blind as those that just won't look, and I have a personal problem with insulting people, it's a character flaw, I live with it. So if their ego stands in the way of their intellect, I flame.
he is consistently Libertarian. As far as I can tell, he's an honest-to-god anarcho-capitalist. That, of course, overlaps "libertarianism" quite a bit.
After I read your reply, I checked the actual Congressional roll call. Yup. I got information from a bad source. Paul absolutely voted no on the authorization resolution. Maybe he voted yes for something else leading up to it I see we're back to option a). Good, that I can cure!
Now, about option c), here's a simple rule for living your life: Check that your information is correct, instead of assuming it is correct. A evolutionary-necessary defect of the human mind is that it assumes that the first 'fact' it learned is better than any contradicting information gleaned at a later time on the same subject.
You are either very stupid or extremely disingenuous if you cannot or will not differentiate between "a forum designed explicitly [to] get racist comments" and a forum which happens to receive the usual percentage of racist comments. Go ahead and demonstrate that this applies to the infamous Ron Paul newletter anymore than it does to slashdot.
Can't wait to see if you're incredibly stupid and/or disingenuous.
3) Marijuana : My question is this: Do you believe I belong in jail? If so, why? If not, what are you going to do to protect me from being arrested?
Ron Paul campaign: I oppose federal laws outlawing marijuana and I oppose federal interference with state medical marijuana laws. Did he just not answer the guy's direct question? (i.e. "what are you going to do to protect me from being arrested?") "Do you believe I belong in jail?" / "I oppose federal laws outlawing marijuana" That answers that.
"what are you going to do to protect me from being arrested?" / "oppose federal interference with state medical marijuana laws." And that answers that.
What more do you want? Pages and pages of detailed bureaucratic procedures? No he doesn't think it should be a crime, and he intends to let the states deal with it on their own.
Legalization of drugs is in a similar situation. If pot is legal in California and Utah, what happens when you drive through Nevada and are caught with a Nevada state felony possession? Right now, the federal government is arresting and killing people under the interstate commerce clause for growing pot in their backyard and smoking it there.
So, really, you're afraid of a rational problem arising from discontinuing an irrational policy? Get off it!
Ron Paul doesn't care enough to think about these answers himself and lets his minions do the job Hey, he cared enough to get his minions in on it, none of the others bothered.
The sole purpose of smoking pot, for the vast majority of those who do, is to get stoned. The sole purpose of drinking beer, for the vast majority of those who do, is to get drunk.
Do you know why we got away from the gold standard? Because it was one of the major causes of the Great Depression. Another explanation comes from the Austrian School of economics. Austrian theorists who wrote about the Depression include Hayek and Murray Rothbard, who wrote "America's Great Depression" in 1963. In their view, the key cause of the Depression was the expansion of the money supply in the 1920s that led to an unsustainable credit-driven boom. In their view, the Federal Reserve, which was created in 1913, shoulders much of the blame.
We were attacked due to our interventionist foreign policy in the Middle East.
Why was Spain attacked by middle eastern terrorists? Or the UK, for that matter?. Because Spain and the UK were involved in your interventionist foreign policy.
Also, Spain has been at war with islam for nearly a millennium. Go crack open a history book and a newspaper or two, sheesh!
Maintain a forum designed to explicitly get racist comments is no better. So, since there are racist comments in every thread on slashdot, Rob Malda is racist? Or, since when he didn't want to be spending his time in politics, Ron Paul agreed to keep the newsletter in circulation under new management, he can't run a country?
You have such a tenuous grasp of logic as to be totally insubstantial, if you think that way.
I assumed differently, namely that he meant that if Paul is for strong national security (answer #1), he would likely, if President, find that he would have to avoid answering, or give misleading answers, to some questions (contradicting answer #2). He could be frank: "I'm sorry, I can't answer that question for reasons of national security." You are too used to the classical evasive political ethos. Have some faith that someone, someday, will be both honest AND elected. Just because we've never seen it happen doesn't make it impossible, in the absolute.
In Republican debate #2, you implied Citation please? I saw that debate, and never heard Ron Paul say anything remotely close to that You can make anyone imply anything, with enough imagination.
But of course, we are all supposed to believe that he is not just another politician, and he is somehow fantastic and different. He's the target of smear attacks like any politician, that's for sure.
a fire sale of all of the federal government's powers is not the way to do it. All that will result in is shifting power from the government to a small number of corporations. Or from federal to state government, no?
I believe the parent comment was referring to the fact that a racist newsletter was published under Ron Paul's name for almost twenty years (78-95) that were filled with hardcore racist views. Had sporadic unpopular views on racially charged subjects, peppered over decades of publication. When putting all of these together at once, and ignoring the fact that they were written by many anonymous contributors, they can be used to make a tolerant, open minded person appear racist.
If anyone points out he didn't write those comments, you can claim that as a practicing doctor, his involvement in a political newsletter is representative of his involvement in the country as president.
To me the answer to question 2 very much conflicts with the answer to question 1. How?
1) Ron Paul campaign: America should stop subsidizing the defenses of the rest of the world and worry more about its own national security interests, including its interests in a viable space program. As president, I will also work to remove barriers to private space flight.
2) Ron Paul campaign: The American people should expect clear and direct answers to their questions. Not only have I always strived to clearly state my position on issues, but my voting record backs up my commitment to the free-market, limited government philosophy I espouse on the campaign trail.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought I was out of that box. I was wrong. No one is. That's why it's my option c), I start by assuming people are victims, and give them what they need to fix it.
But none is so blind as those that just won't look, and I have a personal problem with insulting people, it's a character flaw, I live with it. So if their ego stands in the way of their intellect, I flame.
Since we're on the subject of how much the media screws with us, here's something fascinating.
That, of course, overlaps "libertarianism" quite a bit.
So let's get you some factual information then: He was against the Iraq war as far back as 1988 (nineteen eighty eight). And has been, consistently, ever since.
Now, about option c), here's a simple rule for living your life: Check that your information is correct, instead of assuming it is correct. A evolutionary-necessary defect of the human mind is that it assumes that the first 'fact' it learned is better than any contradicting information gleaned at a later time on the same subject.
Can't wait to see if you're incredibly stupid and/or disingenuous.
Ron Paul campaign:
I oppose federal laws outlawing marijuana and I oppose federal interference with state medical marijuana laws. Did he just not answer the guy's direct question? (i.e. "what are you going to do to protect me from being arrested?") "Do you believe I belong in jail?" / "I oppose federal laws outlawing marijuana"
That answers that.
"what are you going to do to protect me from being arrested?" / "oppose federal interference with state medical marijuana laws."
And that answers that.
What more do you want? Pages and pages of detailed bureaucratic procedures?
No he doesn't think it should be a crime, and he intends to let the states deal with it on their own.
So, really, you're afraid of a rational problem arising from discontinuing an irrational policy? Get off it!
I wish I had minions...
What's not analogous, exactly? Is it binary?
Why was Spain attacked by middle eastern terrorists? Or the UK, for that matter?. Because Spain and the UK were involved in your interventionist foreign policy.
Also, Spain has been at war with islam for nearly a millennium. Go crack open a history book and a newspaper or two, sheesh!
Or, since when he didn't want to be spending his time in politics, Ron Paul agreed to keep the newsletter in circulation under new management, he can't run a country?
You have such a tenuous grasp of logic as to be totally insubstantial, if you think that way.
Moderation +3
40% Informative
Someone's moderating drunk, that's the only explanation I can think of.
You are too used to the classical evasive political ethos. Have some faith that someone, someday, will be both honest AND elected. Just because we've never seen it happen doesn't make it impossible, in the absolute.
If anyone points out he didn't write those comments, you can claim that as a practicing doctor, his involvement in a political newsletter is representative of his involvement in the country as president.
1) Ron Paul campaign:
America should stop subsidizing the defenses of the rest of the world and worry more about its own national security interests, including its interests in a viable space program. As president, I will also work to remove barriers to private space flight.
2) Ron Paul campaign:
The American people should expect clear and direct answers to their questions. Not only have I always strived to clearly state my position on issues, but my voting record backs up my commitment to the free-market, limited government philosophy I espouse on the campaign trail.