GP1

The questions are stupid. For example, I have no idea what my race has to do with liberty and freedom. I have no idea what being proud of being an American has to do with liberty and freedom....there are lots of people who are proud Americans who are trying to limit my freedoms. It's a childish survey. The survey is also written for the British. HAHAHA The questions are a constant. That makes them good for comparison. What does it matter that it is British. What are you talking about? Freedom and religion and American pride? It is a political survey! It is juxtapositioning those stances with your world view. Just answer the questions and show Zipsnation how libertarian you really are. Stop being such a baby. I'll exercise my freedom and just say, no thanks. I've never been one to give into pressure. The survey is silly.

The questions are stupid. For example, I have no idea what my race has to do with liberty and freedom. I have no idea what being proud of being an American has to do with liberty and freedom....there are lots of people who are proud Americans who are trying to limit my freedoms. It's a childish survey. The survey is also written for the British.

Don't have time for the test, but I would bet not.

Paul will win his election in Kentucky. It's not like he is running in California or Oregon. Obama was elected after having past associations with some of the biggest Marxists in the country. I'd love to know what he said to those people behind closed doors. Obama is not in the mainstream of American thought. Paul may seem strange on the surface, but if people really looked into his views, he would be mainstream. We know communism does not work because we have seen it fail in our lifetime. We are getting away from freedom in this country and we need more freedom if we are go generate the types of ideas necessary to move the country forward. People in government are not smart enough to advance an idea to move society forward. Government creates one idea. Liberty creates many ideas, good and bad, and we can then pick the best ideas. Liberty will work if they try. A problem Libertarians have in general is not that they we right (we are), it is our society can not handle adult conversations. Libertarians want to have adult conversations about real problems facing America today. Maddow, Hannity, Limbaugh, Olberman, etc want to have high school debate club. I'm not interested in high school debate club. Speaking of adult conversations, the biggest voting block in the US is Baby Boomers. Baby Boomers are the worst generation this country has ever created as they are a bunch of lazy, self-centered children. The US is going to be destroyed by supporting these bums when they start sucking at the breast of Social Security. The math simply does not work. The answer is to make people work longer before getting SS, but that will never happen because Baby Boomers want free money so they can go ride their bikes rather than contribute to society. In reality, Boomers don't care if the US is destroyed by them being on SS, they just want their money so they can go play. When Paul gets into the Senate, many in the Tea Party will be surprised to see he will vote, at times, with Democrats. Paul will vote with Republicans to cut taxes and government, but he will also vote with Democrats to bring the troops home from that waste of time in the Middle East. The last time I checked, mainstream meant voting in the middle. I don't know if Paul is in the middle or not, but he sure is different. We need "different" in politics right now.

It depends on where you are running. Paul will not lose because of what he said. People are not concerned about what happened over 40 years ago now. Nancy Pelosi wins election after election and her views are not mainstream.

They should know. Between working at Hooters during the lunch rush and The Doll House from 7-1, those girls make a ton of money. There were 6 customers and 7 girls working at 12:30 to 1:45 pm on April 12th. I left a decent tip, but if they have to split that, it ain't goin' too far. . You were there in the off season for Myrtle Beach. Most golfers are done by then and its too early for the tourists, school is still in session. Between working at Hooters and stripping, some of those girls, if they are really "talented" can easily make in excess of $1,000 per day during the summer months and golf season. That is typically a five month period. Throw in some prostitution every now and then and they are really raking it in.

Soth Caolina is a tough place for the ladies. All the rich men are off hiking the Appalachian Trail. Governor Sanford is anything but rich. That freeloading sack of crap didn't have a pot to piss in when he married his now ex-wife. His ex-wife is the daughter of the Skill Tool family and is rich beyond belief. Her family can be traced back to the original settlers of South Carolina. In fact, she has a beautiful home on Sullivans Island. I drove by it last week. She is part of the Sullivan family tree. The trips out of country on a state plane is actually a crime regardless of your views. The attorney general not throwing the book at him is a dereliction of duty, but why should we expect anything more out of our politician these days....

This will not happen at UofA. The investment alone in athletics alone in the past 10 years would stop it. You don't build a new football stadium and then let it sit empty. One thing they could say and it is true, if the Athletic Department loses money, they should cut their budget somehow until it is within reason to the income.

There is no actual Tea Party. Actually, I belong to the Libertarian Party so I can say that freely. Maturity is not being a servant of the government. Maturity is not allowing another to tell you how to live your life. Anyone who wants more government is actually fearful of maturing. People who are in government are actually the most stupid people in our society. Why should we look at what they do as mature? They are children like Rachel Maddow and Sean Hannity.

They are red herrings designed to distract from real issues like an ever expanding government, national debt, high unemployment and a never ending war. The DOW was down 376 today and unemployment is up and Europe is five years ahead of us into bankruptcy, but Maddow wants to discuss the civil rights movement. Give me a break. I realize how much Baby Boomers like to relive their youth because it somehow further inflates their already overblown sense of themselves, but Maddow is not focusing on the issues that face America today. The next time Maddow asks Paul about his opinion of anything that went on in the 1960s, Paul should say, "I respectfully submit that is a stupid question and we need to focus on more important issues that face America today." Rachel Maddow is a childish little girl who can't grow out of her glory days in high school debate club. There is a promo MSNBC runs with her saying she wants her show to be "fair" and she says it with a straight face. That's like saying Sean Hannity want to be fair. The only promo more crazy on MSNBC is the one of Olberman saying he "illuminates" issues on his show. Olberman illuminates political issues like I make a room more fragrant when I blast a fart after a two day bender. Maddow's show, Hardball and Olberman are no different than the clowns on the other liberal network filled with neo-conservatives, FOX News. As far as gun ownership, I'll just say this. Freedoms are lost at the end of a pen. Freedoms are won back at the end of a gun. Never give up your gun. No matter how much you try to twist, push and pull, the so called red herring argument is going to be Rand's undoing. You can't mess with the civil rights laws. Once it gets out that he wants to repeal social security, the dept of education, the IRS, etc... the election is lost. I can't turn you arguing his policy points. Tea Baggers are the hard right of American Politics. Everytime I talk to one of you, guns or something racist comes out. Your fringe party is unelectable. America has matured. This is not your father's Paul-itician. I'm sure daddy's eyes went a-rollin' when he watched THAT interview. Do you guys really thing Paul is going to lose an election in Kentucky? If so, you believe Maddow is fair and Olberman is illuminating.

They are red herrings designed to distract from real issues like an ever expanding government, national debt, high unemployment and a never ending war. The DOW was down 376 today and unemployment is up and Europe is five years ahead of us into bankruptcy, but Maddow wants to discuss the civil rights movement. Give me a break. I realize how much Baby Boomers like to relive their youth because it somehow further inflates their already overblown sense of themselves, but Maddow is not focusing on the issues that face America today. The next time Maddow asks Paul about his opinion of anything that went on in the 1960s, Paul should say, "I respectfully submit that is a stupid question and we need to focus on more important issues that face America today." Rachel Maddow is a childish little girl who can't grow out of her glory days in high school debate club. There is a promo MSNBC runs with her saying she wants her show to be "fair" and she says it with a straight face. That's like saying Sean Hannity want to be fair. The only promo more crazy on MSNBC is the one of Olberman saying he "illuminates" issues on his show. Olberman illuminates political issues like I make a room more fragrant when I blast a fart after a two day bender. Maddow's show, Hardball and Olberman are no different than the clowns on the other liberal network filled with neo-conservatives, FOX News. As far as gun ownership, I'll just say this. Freedoms are lost at the end of a pen. Freedoms are won back at the end of a gun. Never give up your gun.

Maybe everyone should keep their eyes open for Delonte and Gloria taking romantic drives on Arlington Road at 4:00AM next year......

Maddow is an intellectual lightweight with a PhD using an extreme case that would never come up in today's society to try to make the guy look bad. The entire interview can be seen on the internet. The point Paul made throughout the interview is that people should not discriminate. He is right. If someone wants to have a whites or blacks only business, then so be it. Let people be free to shame the owners of these business until they are out of business. The unemployment rate shot up today and people like Maddow are worried about things that are not relevant in 2010. Maddow should be asking questions like..."How do we bring down the debt? How do we bring down unemployment? How do we bring our troops home from a never ending war in the midddle east?" These are questions that matter in 2010. The question Paul brings up is important for society today. What is the line between private and public? A leftist like Maddow thinks she is smarter than everyone and should be able to make laws governing our lives and businesses. She is actually a very dangerous person and people who are like her are dangerous to our freedoms. Paul needs to focus on freedom, employment and smaller government. Maddow and her ilk will be in the minority debating silly issues from the past. Paul will win going away.

It won't be so.....

Actually, I'm at complete peace with everything. Over the past 20 years, I have come to understand what is wrong with the mac and UofA. It isn't as much anger as it is frustration. The mac and UofA remain on a constant building process that leads to nowhere.

What does it matter? It's the posted topic......

A-freaking-men! Who in the Hell wants to go to a game and watch a fat, slow fullback who in all probability will have to get a real job after college plunge into the line for two yard gains? Same goes for the TE. Those positions are secondary. The QB is the most important player on the field. His WRs are the second. We have a QB with NFL potential. Let's use his talent.

Isn't that what the Zips are doing this season? It is the dream come true about to become a nightmare. UofA plays an even more difficult schedule than UB does. We play a I-AA team, they play a I-AA team. We play IU and KY on the road, they play two BCS teams on the road. We play Syracuse at home, they play UCONN at home (both Big East teams). We will go 1-3 with our ooc and they will go 1-3. I can't believe some of you who think UofA should schedule up would also complain about the schedule we play and actually think UB is better scheduling than us. Can you make sense of this picture for me? You seem to find meaning and order where I dare not look. The Zips play Syracuse, GW, at Kentucky and at Indiana. UB plays UCONN, SB, at BC, at Pitt. Throw out the I-AA teams. Kentucky is better than any team UB is playing. Indiana is on par with Pitt, UCONN and BC (believe me, the bottom of the Big Ten is just as good as the middle of the ACC). Syracuse...we'll see. The point is everyone seems to think UB has come upon a great scheduling strategy. They are scheduling regional ooc games....so are we. The last time I checked, KY and IN both touch Ohio.

1. Why would you want your brand on TV getting its ass kicked by the competition? The last thing we want is the Zips on TV getting a beat down. This is like watching Kyle Petty race a car. You know he isn't going to win and you know he is a bad driver. Nobody goes to watch Kyle Petty. 2. They may fill the coffers, but when Joe Akron sees they are 1-3, they aren't going to fill any seats at The Big Dialer. 3. Give the players what they want? Why? They are the same guys who got the last coach fired. Why would we listen to them? Why would we have an AD? Just let the players run the program. 1. defeatist 2. they aren't going to get filled losing to Marshall 3. I don't even know where to begin with that. Support the team? 1. Realist 2. Who is the defeatist now? I'd much rather watch the Zips play Marshall than Syracuse. Syracuse is just a school everyone has forgotten about in a part of the country we could easily give back to Canada an not miss a step. There will only be between 15-20 K at the Syracuse game. Scheduling Marshall would pack the place with the Marshall crowd. 3. You support the team by putting them in a position to be successful. Your scheduling guarantees failure.

Again, you are thinking in the extreme. Morgan State is I-AA. One Morgan State is fine. Two probably not. Three, no way. One PSU is fine, two probably not, three, no thanks. Is it exciting for me to watch UofA take a beat down three of four ooc games against BCS teams? No. In fact, it is a comlete waste of time. Would I be more excited against Colorado State or New Mexico State or MTSU or Marshall? Hell yes! I want to watch the Zips play good competition against teams they have a realistic shot at beating and the other team has a realistic shot at beating the Zips. That's good competition. They are guaranteed to beat Morgan State. They are guaranteed to lose to PSU. They could beat a non-BCS team. I'll take the excitement of the unknown in a game matching two well equal teams rather than a certain loss or certain win. My Bad. Botom line for me is: Good Competition begets better competition, a stronger/better team, more wins against teams that actually mean something, puts UA on the map, begets national TV exposure where we don't embarrass ourselves, but instead leave an indelible "ZIPS are the real deal" mark on the psyche of NCAA football. GO ZIPS!! Then why is the mac getting worse after a few years of success? The mac gets more TV exposure than ever and it gets worse. The problem is you have to win more than one game against BCS teams for people to take note. In the mean time, we just continue to lose game after game ooc. It makes not sense whatsoever.

Isn't that what the Zips are doing this season? It is the dream come true about to become a nightmare. UofA plays an even more difficult schedule than UB does. We play a I-AA team, they play a I-AA team. We play IU and KY on the road, they play two BCS teams on the road. We play Syracuse at home, they play UCONN at home (both Big East teams). We will go 1-3 with our ooc and they will go 1-3. I can't believe some of you who think UofA should schedule up would also complain about the schedule we play and actually think UB is better scheduling than us.

Why, people watched the Browns in droves (3 times as many as we need to fill the stadium)? The Browns over the last decade could hardly be called "entertaining football". Unless everyone in the upper deck of Cleveland Browns Stadium is showing up dressed as an empty orange chair, many have stopped attending Browns games and I don't blame them. There is no entertainment in watching them. My as well work in your yard or go for a walk on a nice day with the family. If the Browns were somewhat entertaining, more would go to games. The mac just needs to be more entertaining and I'm convinced people will go to games.

1. Why would you want your brand on TV getting its ass kicked by the competition? The last thing we want is the Zips on TV getting a beat down. This is like watching Kyle Petty race a car. You know he isn't going to win and you know he is a bad driver. Nobody goes to watch Kyle Petty. 2. They may fill the coffers, but when Joe Akron sees they are 1-3, they aren't going to fill any seats at The Big Dialer. 3. Give the players what they want? Why? They are the same guys who got the last coach fired. Why would we listen to them? Why would we have an AD? Just let the players run the program.

Again, you are thinking in the extreme. Morgan State is I-AA. One Morgan State is fine. Two probably not. Three, no way. One PSU is fine, two probably not, three, no thanks. Is it exciting for me to watch UofA take a beat down three of four ooc games against BCS teams? No. In fact, it is a comlete waste of time. Would I be more excited against Colorado State or New Mexico State or MTSU or Marshall? Hell yes! I want to watch the Zips play good competition against teams they have a realistic shot at beating and the other team has a realistic shot at beating the Zips. That's good competition. They are guaranteed to beat Morgan State. They are guaranteed to lose to PSU. They could beat a non-BCS team. I'll take the excitement of the unknown in a game matching two well equal teams rather than a certain loss or certain win.

It is an opportunity, but I would be interested to see how big of one. You have to be a pretty big football fan to go to an NFL game because of the cost. Maybe that person would need to get their "football fix" somewhere. UofA might be that place for some if we can play an entertaining brand of football. Make the football entertaining and it won't matter if there is an NFL strike or not because people will come to the games for the entertainment value of good football. We need good football, not clowns, fireworks, etc.