Penn Jillette supports Ron Paul

Penn Jillette supports Ron Paul

FAIR USE NOTICE: This post may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this post is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/... If you wish to use copyrighted material from this post for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Penn
• Jillette
• Ron
• Paul
• president
• republican
• romney
• blimp
• huckabee

[speedygreenie]

"He's not unelectable if we all vote for him!" Well said.

[cowboyweightlifter]

@Tsnore Have you heard of genetics?

[jneil2007]

The newsletters really don't affect anything. I mean the country elected Obama even though he had all that bad company. Not so much Jeremiah Wright but the extreme Marxist guy that did something really bad. But the only people who really beleive the newsletters are true are the ones who wouldn't vote for Paul anyways. Limbaugh and Levin fanatics are all over it. Tons of black people support him even though he said he wouldn't vote for the 64 civil rights act bc it stripped PROPERTY RIGHTS.

[robuzy]

The way i see it, the other guys are the Rebels, and ron paul is just honest. the only reason he would be unelectable is if voters are ignorant to truth

[Tsnore]

Oh.

[Tsnore]

How did Jillette get so large since he doesn't drink beer?

[Mekelsior]

@ianharwood Well.. I tend to look more on the overall picture, the theory states that humans evolved from some ancestral fish back in the days, and even further towards the primordeal soup. I take the soup as speculation, and the rest as just a story in an attempt to explain both origin and how we have the variety that is here. Yet all discussion of origin requires faith. Evolution, has some truth in it but most of it is a house of cards, a theory built on another theory etc.

[Mekelsior]

@sehakoziel Now if you do not want to offer empirical evidence for your theory, then that is fine with me. It is your admitance to defeat and I hope you will take that to heart and consider the theory again, if it can`t provide empirical evidence, why do you believe in it? Perhaps you need to readjust your paradigm and the way you view evidence. In any case, you have offered no empirical evidence or a convincing argument but ad hominens and that my friend is not impressive. :)

[Mekelsior]

@sehakoziel We have not mapped all of the Genome in every single species out there, and there is more than enough evidence to say that a species can loose a trait that it had in the past or in a previous population. It is however far fetched that it is evolution that does it, as evolution is progressive otherwise it would be retarded to say evolution did anything. And again, I offer a different explaination to your theory, which is pretty tautalogical anyway.

[Mekelsior]

@sehakoziel Well, opinions differ, get used to it. I do know what evolution teach, more so than you perhaps.. the only thing you can`t accept is that I don`t believe it, and therefore you call me ignorant and other ad hominens. It is a very common trait when speaking to fundamentalist, regardless of what faith they profess. I do not say this to spite you, but to say that one in need of knowledge may be yourself. I have studied this very well and there simply is no empiri for evo.