[drunkle]

sandi:

i don’t see how that’s possible. of course, i’m dense and unimaginative, but it seems to me that fixing the system requires breaking it. breaking deficit spending, breaking the fed’s loose monetary policy, breaking the addiction to cheap credit, breaking addiction to the government teat.

growth requires spending. stopping government spending and encourage citizens to save will stop growth. the economy is dependant on growth to drive dividends and share prices. profits. the wealthiest americans, despite elimination of the “death tax” will suffer loss of absolute wealth. compensation of ceo’s will crater as investors come to realize that ceo’s have nothing to do with corporate profits.

btw, i donated to his campaign and support him for president. i’m just saying, these are reasons i think people, the media, corporations are afraid of him. reasons why his presidency may be misconstrued. reasons to be cautious with your own financial situation.

i’ma digress for a second cuz it’s been at the back of my mind and say that the “issues” of abortion and gay marriage as part of the list of “issues” of the presidential campaign are retardly laughable. immigration as well, but to less of a retarded degree. it’s only been some 40 years since blacks and women were allowed to even vote, in the evolution of social attitudes in this country, abortion and gay marriage (aka, religious freedom) are still way off on the horizon of social acceptance. we can’t even get the country to commit to separation of church and state (aka, pledge of alligance) let alone to abortion and gays. to discount paul as your candidate based on an “issue” that no other candidate could possibly affirmatively affect is absurd, particularly in light of the real issues (edit: more pressing issues) at hand.

edit: reduced spending will also cost jobs.

[drunkle]

sandi:

i don’t see how that’s possible. of course, i’m dense and unimaginative, but it seems to me that fixing the system requires breaking it. breaking deficit spending, breaking the fed’s loose monetary policy, breaking the addiction to cheap credit, breaking addiction to the government teat.

growth requires spending. stopping government spending and encourage citizens to save will stop growth. the economy is dependant on growth to drive dividends and share prices. profits. the wealthiest americans, despite elimination of the “death tax” will suffer loss of absolute wealth. compensation of ceo’s will crater as investors come to realize that ceo’s have nothing to do with corporate profits.

btw, i donated to his campaign and support him for president. i’m just saying, these are reasons i think people, the media, corporations are afraid of him. reasons why his presidency may be misconstrued. reasons to be cautious with your own financial situation.

i’ma digress for a second cuz it’s been at the back of my mind and say that the “issues” of abortion and gay marriage as part of the list of “issues” of the presidential campaign are retardly laughable. immigration as well, but to less of a retarded degree. it’s only been some 40 years since blacks and women were allowed to even vote, in the evolution of social attitudes in this country, abortion and gay marriage (aka, religious freedom) are still way off on the horizon of social acceptance. we can’t even get the country to commit to separation of church and state (aka, pledge of alligance) let alone to abortion and gays. to discount paul as your candidate based on an “issue” that no other candidate could possibly affirmatively affect is absurd, particularly in light of the real issues (edit: more pressing issues) at hand.

edit: reduced spending will also cost jobs.

[drunkle]

sandi:

i don’t see how that’s possible. of course, i’m dense and unimaginative, but it seems to me that fixing the system requires breaking it. breaking deficit spending, breaking the fed’s loose monetary policy, breaking the addiction to cheap credit, breaking addiction to the government teat.

growth requires spending. stopping government spending and encourage citizens to save will stop growth. the economy is dependant on growth to drive dividends and share prices. profits. the wealthiest americans, despite elimination of the “death tax” will suffer loss of absolute wealth. compensation of ceo’s will crater as investors come to realize that ceo’s have nothing to do with corporate profits.

btw, i donated to his campaign and support him for president. i’m just saying, these are reasons i think people, the media, corporations are afraid of him. reasons why his presidency may be misconstrued. reasons to be cautious with your own financial situation.

i’ma digress for a second cuz it’s been at the back of my mind and say that the “issues” of abortion and gay marriage as part of the list of “issues” of the presidential campaign are retardly laughable. immigration as well, but to less of a retarded degree. it’s only been some 40 years since blacks and women were allowed to even vote, in the evolution of social attitudes in this country, abortion and gay marriage (aka, religious freedom) are still way off on the horizon of social acceptance. we can’t even get the country to commit to separation of church and state (aka, pledge of alligance) let alone to abortion and gays. to discount paul as your candidate based on an “issue” that no other candidate could possibly affirmatively affect is absurd, particularly in light of the real issues (edit: more pressing issues) at hand.

edit: reduced spending will also cost jobs.

[drunkle]

sandi:

i don’t see how that’s possible. of course, i’m dense and unimaginative, but it seems to me that fixing the system requires breaking it. breaking deficit spending, breaking the fed’s loose monetary policy, breaking the addiction to cheap credit, breaking addiction to the government teat.

growth requires spending. stopping government spending and encourage citizens to save will stop growth. the economy is dependant on growth to drive dividends and share prices. profits. the wealthiest americans, despite elimination of the “death tax” will suffer loss of absolute wealth. compensation of ceo’s will crater as investors come to realize that ceo’s have nothing to do with corporate profits.

btw, i donated to his campaign and support him for president. i’m just saying, these are reasons i think people, the media, corporations are afraid of him. reasons why his presidency may be misconstrued. reasons to be cautious with your own financial situation.

i’ma digress for a second cuz it’s been at the back of my mind and say that the “issues” of abortion and gay marriage as part of the list of “issues” of the presidential campaign are retardly laughable. immigration as well, but to less of a retarded degree. it’s only been some 40 years since blacks and women were allowed to even vote, in the evolution of social attitudes in this country, abortion and gay marriage (aka, religious freedom) are still way off on the horizon of social acceptance. we can’t even get the country to commit to separation of church and state (aka, pledge of alligance) let alone to abortion and gays. to discount paul as your candidate based on an “issue” that no other candidate could possibly affirmatively affect is absurd, particularly in light of the real issues (edit: more pressing issues) at hand.

edit: reduced spending will also cost jobs.

[drunkle]

sandi:

i don’t see how that’s possible. of course, i’m dense and unimaginative, but it seems to me that fixing the system requires breaking it. breaking deficit spending, breaking the fed’s loose monetary policy, breaking the addiction to cheap credit, breaking addiction to the government teat.

growth requires spending. stopping government spending and encourage citizens to save will stop growth. the economy is dependant on growth to drive dividends and share prices. profits. the wealthiest americans, despite elimination of the “death tax” will suffer loss of absolute wealth. compensation of ceo’s will crater as investors come to realize that ceo’s have nothing to do with corporate profits.

btw, i donated to his campaign and support him for president. i’m just saying, these are reasons i think people, the media, corporations are afraid of him. reasons why his presidency may be misconstrued. reasons to be cautious with your own financial situation.

i’ma digress for a second cuz it’s been at the back of my mind and say that the “issues” of abortion and gay marriage as part of the list of “issues” of the presidential campaign are retardly laughable. immigration as well, but to less of a retarded degree. it’s only been some 40 years since blacks and women were allowed to even vote, in the evolution of social attitudes in this country, abortion and gay marriage (aka, religious freedom) are still way off on the horizon of social acceptance. we can’t even get the country to commit to separation of church and state (aka, pledge of alligance) let alone to abortion and gays. to discount paul as your candidate based on an “issue” that no other candidate could possibly affirmatively affect is absurd, particularly in light of the real issues (edit: more pressing issues) at hand.

edit: reduced spending will also cost jobs.

[drunkle]

i’m pretty sure if ron paul wins, the stock market will implode.

if he wins and enacts his policies, oversight or elimination of the fed, elimination of subsidies, “fair” taxes and leveling of the playing field (via elimination of governmental favoritism), he’ll be targeted for termination.

the economy will probably suffer as his policies transition the country away from debt spending and big government. people will blame him for ruining the country and drop him like a used carter.

he’ll lay the foundation for prosperity under his successor who will be venerated like a doddering reagan.

[drunkle]

i’m pretty sure if ron paul wins, the stock market will implode.

if he wins and enacts his policies, oversight or elimination of the fed, elimination of subsidies, “fair” taxes and leveling of the playing field (via elimination of governmental favoritism), he’ll be targeted for termination.

the economy will probably suffer as his policies transition the country away from debt spending and big government. people will blame him for ruining the country and drop him like a used carter.

he’ll lay the foundation for prosperity under his successor who will be venerated like a doddering reagan.

[drunkle]

i’m pretty sure if ron paul wins, the stock market will implode.

if he wins and enacts his policies, oversight or elimination of the fed, elimination of subsidies, “fair” taxes and leveling of the playing field (via elimination of governmental favoritism), he’ll be targeted for termination.

the economy will probably suffer as his policies transition the country away from debt spending and big government. people will blame him for ruining the country and drop him like a used carter.

he’ll lay the foundation for prosperity under his successor who will be venerated like a doddering reagan.

[drunkle]

i’m pretty sure if ron paul wins, the stock market will implode.

if he wins and enacts his policies, oversight or elimination of the fed, elimination of subsidies, “fair” taxes and leveling of the playing field (via elimination of governmental favoritism), he’ll be targeted for termination.

the economy will probably suffer as his policies transition the country away from debt spending and big government. people will blame him for ruining the country and drop him like a used carter.

he’ll lay the foundation for prosperity under his successor who will be venerated like a doddering reagan.

[drunkle]

i’m pretty sure if ron paul wins, the stock market will implode.

if he wins and enacts his policies, oversight or elimination of the fed, elimination of subsidies, “fair” taxes and leveling of the playing field (via elimination of governmental favoritism), he’ll be targeted for termination.

the economy will probably suffer as his policies transition the country away from debt spending and big government. people will blame him for ruining the country and drop him like a used carter.

he’ll lay the foundation for prosperity under his successor who will be venerated like a doddering reagan.

[drunkle]

cereal guy:

i’ve lived in various places in np/nh since the later ninties. off hamilton and madison, off swift and orange and off howard and kansas.

now that i think about it, the birds are less intrusive than they used to be. or i’m desensitized to it. they’re still there, of course, making announcements of lost geezers, wandering axe murders and such.

[drunkle]

cereal guy:

i’ve lived in various places in np/nh since the later ninties. off hamilton and madison, off swift and orange and off howard and kansas.

now that i think about it, the birds are less intrusive than they used to be. or i’m desensitized to it. they’re still there, of course, making announcements of lost geezers, wandering axe murders and such.

[drunkle]

cereal guy:

i’ve lived in various places in np/nh since the later ninties. off hamilton and madison, off swift and orange and off howard and kansas.

now that i think about it, the birds are less intrusive than they used to be. or i’m desensitized to it. they’re still there, of course, making announcements of lost geezers, wandering axe murders and such.

[drunkle]

cereal guy:

i’ve lived in various places in np/nh since the later ninties. off hamilton and madison, off swift and orange and off howard and kansas.

now that i think about it, the birds are less intrusive than they used to be. or i’m desensitized to it. they’re still there, of course, making announcements of lost geezers, wandering axe murders and such.

[drunkle]

cereal guy:

i’ve lived in various places in np/nh since the later ninties. off hamilton and madison, off swift and orange and off howard and kansas.

now that i think about it, the birds are less intrusive than they used to be. or i’m desensitized to it. they’re still there, of course, making announcements of lost geezers, wandering axe murders and such.

[Author]

Posts