The Libertarian Thread

[BlackLantern]

Interesting, considering, that in a number in contests, Paul beat heavily covered candidates by a lot. Yet still, those who got less of the vote than he did got more coverage. What does that tell you?

that a good number of Washington DC insiders, reporters, and various people involved in politics knew that Paul had no shot....I live in the northeast an, up until recently, had never heard of the guy.

 

[The Senator]

I especially hate the notion of them adding little catchphrases like "Revolution" and "New Era" when it comes to Ron Paul. Yeah, go live through a real Revolution and see how awesome it is. Ron Paul wouldn't know the first thing about revolution if it came and bit him in his Doctorate.

It's hard to imagine a 'new era' as one which sends us back several decades, to a time where certain federal rights didn't exist and several executive branch agencies weren't more than a thought in someone's head... I thought a 'new era' was about moving forward, not backwards...

 

[BlackLantern]

I don't hate him, I just consider him insignificant in the larger scheme of things. To me, he is no different than Ralph Nader....he'll try running for President every year, get some followers but thats about it.

 

[Dark Vigilante]

By posting a joke link?

And it's not whether I like him or not, it's that I don't care about him, at all. It has a lot more to do with his supporters and their irrational worship of his ideas and thoughts.

Again, there is a disconnect between Ron Paul's ideas and those of the Founding Fathers. If the Founders were alive today they would be arming themselves to the teeth to fight the government we have today.

So please, tell me. Would you call the ideas of the Founding Father's as "irrational ideas and thoughts"?

 

[Dark Vigilante]

that a good number of Washington DC insiders, reporters, and various people involved in politics knew that Paul had no shot....I live in the northeast an, up until recently, had never heard of the guy.

The knew he had no shot. But he beat candidates that were once frontrunners, like Gulianni and Thompson. And he earned more money in one quarter than the current presumptive nominee, McCain. So why, no coverage? Can you not see the bias?

 

[BlackLantern]

the Founding Fathers, well some of them, owned slaves.....so that means I should be picking cotton somewhere???

 

[Mr Sparkle]

I just realized that Gill Scott Heron was right.
since it's a book " the revolution " will likely NOT be televised.

 

[The Senator]

The knew he had no shot. But he beat candidates that were once frontrunners, like Gulianni and Thompson. And he earned more money in one quarter than the current presumptive nominee, McCain. So why, no coverage? Can you not see the bias?

That's bull ****. Every time he had one of his "money bombs," he was featured on MSNBC and CNN almost the entire day. Every time he criticized McCain, Romney and the others, he became a talking point on shows like "Hardball" and "Countdown." Hell, when he bought that ridiculous blimp, the bimbos on MSNBC spent the entire afternoon talking about "going outside and hoping to catch a glimpse" of it.

Ron Paul has gotten considerable media coverage. You know who should be complaining about a lack of media coverage? Duncan Hunter. He didn't get any coverage, yet he tied Rudy Giuliani in the delegate count.

 

[BlackLantern]

The knew he had no shot. But he beat candidates that were once frontrunners, like Gulianni and Thompson. And he earned more money in one quarter than the current presumptive nominee, McCain. So why, no coverage? Can you not see the bias?

I don't think its bias....I think its about allocation of resources. Why bother sending personnel to cover someone who isn't going to matter in the race? Yes and all this money he raised?? He did raise a lot, money donated in order to help him become President....so do those people get a refund?? He was on the ballot, state after state primary after primary, apparently people chose not to vote for him for whatever reason.

 

[Dark Vigilante]

the Founding Fathers, well some of them, owned slaves.....so that means I should be picking cotton somewhere???

Again, this is an erroneous argument. Because they owned slaves does not make their ideas for an American state null. The fact is that they created this country, and it is thanks to their efforts and their ideas that this country is even a country.

So are you saying that because of slavery, you entirley refute every idea the Founding Fathers ever had?

 

[The Senator]

the Founding Fathers, well some of them, owned slaves.....so that means I should be picking cotton somewhere???

Well, since Ron Paul likes to pick which parts of the Constitution he wants to support, there's probably a chance that he could have wanted you to pick cotton and plow the fields if he became President...

 

[Dark Vigilante]

That's bull ****. Every time he had one of his "money bombs," he was featured on MSNBC and CNN almost the entire day. Every time he criticized McCain, Romney and the others, he became a talking point on shows like "Hardball" and "Countdown." Hell, when he bought that ridiculous blimp, the bimbos on MSNBC spent the entire afternoon talking about "going outside and hoping to catch a glimpse" of it.

Ron Paul has gotten considerable media coverage. You know who should be complaining about a lack of media coverage? Duncan Hunter. He didn't get any coverage, yet he tied Rudy Giuliani in the delegate count.

Uh huh. But when it actually came to the elections, which are really the only things that mattered, did he get any coverage? No. It quietly asserted the idea he was a loser.

 

[Dark Vigilante]

Well, since Ron Paul likes to pick which parts of the Constitution he wants to support, there's probably a chance that he could have wanted you to pick cotton and plow the fields if he became President...

Back this up. What do you mean?

 

[BlackLantern]

So are you saying that because of slavery, you entirley refute every idea the Founding Fathers ever had?

No, but I won't blindly follow someone who champions their ideals to the letter. I highly doubt the Founding Fathers foresaw the impact of the internet, 24 hr news channels, lobbyists, etc. I think we can look to the past for guidance and counsel, but shouldn't rely on it to point the way forward. I think true change is not going to come from who is the President...but from society itself. Look at the people in this country who bought about change...Martin Luther King, Susan B. Anthony, Albert Einstein....none of those people were President....if Ron wants to truly change things, maybe it doesnt involve the Oval Office...

 

[The Senator]

Uh huh. But when it actually came to the elections, which are really the only things that mattered, did he get any coverage? No. It quietly asserted the idea he was a loser.

Actually, during the Nevada GOP caucuses, the pundits covering the election results discussed Ron Paul's close second place finish, and whether it would give him a boost in subsequent states.

 

[The Senator]

Back this up. What do you mean?

He doesn't support the fourteenth amendment, which states that everyone born in the United States is a naturalized citizen of the United States. He believes that the children of illegal aliens should be declared illegal citizens and sent back to their parents' mother country, even though that would be a direct violation of that amendment. Therefore, he picks and chooses which amendments he wants to support. What's to say he wouldn't support the thirteenth amendment, if he doesn't support the others? How can he be a strict constructionist if he blatantly opposes an amendment to the Constitution?

 

[Lobster Charlie]

Eh, his platform says enough for me to see where he's coming from. I'm not crazy about the whole "anchor baby" thing myself.

 

[The Senator]

Eh, his platform says enough for me to see where he's coming from. I'm not crazy about the whole "anchor baby" thing myself.

But it's in the Constitution... how can he claim to be a proponent of the Constitution when he supports laws which refute certain amendments?

 

[Lobster Charlie]

The Constitution is constantly being amended. He doesn't support disobeying the Constitution, so on that particular issue, he'd most likely push for an amendment.

His whole "strict constitutionalist" stance is basically pointing out the fact that lately our government has been acting *oustide of our constitution* without amending it first.

 

[The Senator]

The Constitution is constantly being amended. He doesn't support disobeying the Constitution, so on that particular issue, he'd most likely push for an amendment.

His whole "strict constitutionalist" stance is basically pointing out the fact that lately our government has been acting *oustide of our constitution* without amending it first.

So... he picks and chooses which amendments he wants to support, like I originally said...

 

[Lobster Charlie]

Your point being what, exactly? If one is a strict constitutionalist, that means they follow the constitution--whether they agree with every single letter of the document or not. When there's a disagreement, or an adjustment that they feel needs to be made, they push for an amendment.

Since the Constitution has been amended so many times in the past, there have obviously been plenty of people in power that have picked and chosen what amendments they want to support---and so the document is amended.

All Ron Paul is saying is that we should follow the rules we've set out for ourselves. Are you suggesting that he has somehow disobeyed the 14th amendment, and has personally seen to the removal of illegal babies from his district in Texas? If so, that's the first I've heard of such a thing.

 

[Darthphere]

Again, there is a disconnect between Ron Paul's ideas and those of the Founding Fathers. If the Founders were alive today they would be arming themselves to the teeth to fight the government we have today.

So please, tell me. Would you call the ideas of the Founding Father's as "irrational ideas and thoughts"?

Yes, considering that we have advanced almost 250 years since our founding fathers our America is very different from their America.

 

[AllThingsComic]

Here is the end all be all post! We all know elections are just a mockery that allows Americans the illusion that this is still a democracy, it ain't, just ask Al Gore. Ron Paul was blackballed, railroaded, horn swaggled whatever you wanna call it. To call his ideals ridiculous is to call America ridiculous. Freedom to live our own lives without the gov't holding our hands along the way is ridiculous, really? The gov't working for it's people instead of the other way around, that's not ideal? You keep the majority of your compensation for wages traded for services without the gov't anally raping you, that's an outrageous idea? Since when is taking care of home and minding our own damn business not something EVERY American should want? Have we still learned nothing from the empires that fell before us? When you spread yourself to thin, you're bound to fall, and we are on our way down! Everything Dr. Paul has predicted is coming to fruition!

 

[Darthphere]

Here is the end all be all post! We all know elections are just a mockery that allows Americans the illusion that this is still a democracy, it ain't, just ask Al Gore. Ron Paul was blackballed, railroaded, horn swaggled whatever you wanna call it. To call his ideals ridiculous is to call America ridiculous. Freedom to live our own lives without the gov't holding our hands along the way is ridiculous, really? The gov't working for it's people instead of the other way around, that's not ideal? You keep the majority of your compensation for wages traded for services without the gov't anally raping you, that's an outrageous idea? Since when is taking care of home and minding our own damn business not something EVERY American should want? Have we still learned nothing from the empires that fell before us? When you spread yourself to thin, you're bound to fall, and we are on our way down! Everything Dr. Paul has predicted is coming to fruition!

Case in point regarding Paul supporters.

 

[AllThingsComic]

Case in point regarding Paul supporters.

Case in point what???? Dispute me, debate me, don't just say something stupid without reason. I think you can be a little more intelligent than that.

What is it exactly that i've written that you disagree with? I am not an idiot, crazed Ron Paul nut, I just happen to agree with the ideals he has.