The Libertarian Thread

AllThingsComic said:
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.
Click to expand...

Your reputation precedes you.
 
I'm known for many things, ignorance is not one of them. It's not ignorance to hear what Dr. Paul has to say, and disagree with it. It's not ignorance to find the supporters of Dr. Paul brash and abrasive. It's not ignorance to think that calling him Dr. Paul is stupid. It's quite the opposite. A lot of you need to look up the definition of ignorance and learn what it really means, because disagreeing with you and the holy views of Ron Paul is not ignorance.

Also, it's real dumb to be all like "What? DEBATE mE!!!11" when there's nothing to debate.
 
My ignorance reference was not based on your views, but on your preconceived notion that all Ron Paul supporters are idiots and maniacle. You judge me without even knowing me personally, and that my friend is ignorant.
 
Darthphere said:
I'm known for many things, ignorance is not one of them. It's not ignorance to hear what Dr. Paul has to say, and disagree with it. It's not ignorance to find the supporters of Dr. Paul brash and abrasive. It's not ignorance to think that calling him Dr. Paul is stupid. It's quite the opposite. A lot of you need to look up the definition of ignorance and learn what it really means, because disagreeing with you and the holy views of Ron Paul is not ignorance.

Also, it's real dumb to be all like "What? DEBATE mE!!!11" when there's nothing to debate.
Click to expand...


Really, nothing to debate? I gave several valid points as to why I agree with some of Pauls ideals, and you basically just said, case in point. What's your case? Where do you disagree, shed some light and tell me something I might not be aware of. Your only argument can't be that Paul supporters are idiots for no reason.
 
Lobster Charlie said:
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.
Click to expand...

My point is that he's like every other politician in this country. He's a hypocrite with his own interests in sight, and he campaigns under catchy slogans such as "new era" and "revolution" when nothing he says is really any different from what all the other politicians are spewing. The only difference between Paul and everyone else is his love for the Constitution... except the problem is, I don't see how a candidate can campaign under the Constitution and outright call for a law which violates one of the more important amendments of that document.

Also, he's not pushing for an amendment... he's never mentioned repealing the fourteenth amendment, because it establishes the idea of equal protection... he's simply calling for illegal immigration reform which would send illegal children to countries which they were never born in...

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.
Click to expand...

But you cannot be a strict constructionist, and then blatantly oppose one of the most important amendments in the Constitution. It simply doesn't work that way. If you're a constructionist, you aren't allowed to have an opinion on the Constitution. You are suppose to abide by every written word and make decisions in the best interest of what has already been established in that document.

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.
Click to expand...

No, I never said that. I don't know where you got that ridiculous idea from. All I'm saying is, it's difficult to be a strict constructionist when you go around opposing things which have been established in the document you so adamantly support... he isn't a strict constructionist, he's an activist constructionist...
 
AllThingsComic said:
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!
Click to expand...

Well, if that's the case, then calling any politician's ideas ridiculous is a blatant insult to America. I don't see how Ron Paul is the embodiment of America when he acts like every other politician out there on the campaign trail... he campaigns under a few catchy slogans, picks an issue he really supports, does grassroots campaigning, and writes a book about how politics in this country needs to be revolutionized... he's not all that different from the rest...
 
jmanspice said:
Well, if that's the case, then calling any politician's ideas ridiculous is a blatant insult to America. I don't see how Ron Paul is the embodiment of America when he acts like every other politician out there on the campaign trail... he campaigns under a few catchy slogans, picks an issue he really supports, does grassroots campaigning, and writes a book about how politics in this country needs to be revolutionized... he's not all that different from the rest...
Click to expand...

My point exactly.....
 
I don't here any other "politician" calling for smaller gov't, getting rid of the federal reserve and IRS, bringing troops home from all over the world, restoring the dollar and basically keeping us from policing the world and restoring America back to the great nation it was.
 
AllThingsComic said:
I don't here any other "politician" calling for smaller gov't, getting rid of the federal reserve and IRS, bringing troops home from all over the world, restoring the dollar and basically keeping us from policing the world and restoring America back to the great nation it was.
Click to expand...

We became that great nation after intervening in WW2...
 
AllThingsComic said:
I don't here any other "politician" calling for smaller gov't, getting rid of the federal reserve and IRS, bringing troops home from all over the world, restoring the dollar and basically keeping us from policing the world and restoring America back to the great nation it was.
Click to expand...

That's the beauty of politics: Every politician calls for different things. They have to if they want to draw a distinction between their campaign and somebody else's. Dennis Kucinich wanted to create a Department of Peace; Mike Gravel wanted to get rid of all nuclear weapons; John Edwards wanted to fix poverty; Hillary Clinton wants universal health care; John McCain thinks the surge is working... they all campaign on a platform which makes them different from everybody else.

What makes Paul like every other politician has nothing to do with the issues he's running on. It has everything to do with how he's running his campaign, who he's trying to support, and how he plans to "win." He mirrors every other politician in those ways.
 
jmanspice said:
My point is that he's like every other politician in this country. He's a hypocrite with his own interests in sight, and he campaigns under catchy slogans such as "new era" and "revolution" when nothing he says is really any different from what all the other politicians are spewing. The only difference between Paul and everyone else is his love for the Constitution... except the problem is, I don't see how a candidate can campaign under the Constitution and outright call for a law which violates one of the more important amendments of that document.
Click to expand...

Nothing Ron Paul says is any different than the other politicians? Are the other politicians calling for a complete and total withdrawal from not only the Middle East, but every base our troops are stationed in all over the world?

Is every other politician saying we should return to the gold standard? That we should abolish the Federal Reserve and the income tax? That we should decrease the size of the federal government, instead of allowing it to grow an grow? You're telling me that all the other politicians would like to see the Department of Education abolished, and that the states should be given more say in the what laws are passed?

If what you are saying is true, that "nothing he says is really any different from what all the other politicians are spewing," then why is Ron Paul considered to be such a wacko by his detractors? If all the other politicians are in agreement with he's saying, then his ideas would be enacted already. We both know that's far from true.

But you cannot be a strict constructionist, and then blatantly oppose one of the most important amendments in the Constitution. It simply doesn't work that way. If you're a constructionist, you aren't allowed to have an opinion on the Constitution. You are suppose to abide by every written word and make decisions in the best interest of what has already been established in that document.
Click to expand...

Again, being a strict constitutionalist means you follow the constitution, and not act outside of it. He simply suggests amending the 14th amendment, due to illegals having anchor babies in order to leech welfare benefits. If he somehow circumvented the law because he didn't agree with the 14th amendment, then I'd see your point a bit more clearly.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/130/rethinking-birthright-citizenship/

If you have an examples of Ron Paul blatantly opposing the constitution by passing legislation, I'm interesting in seeing that.

His disagreeing with an aspect of the document is not much different than a patriot who can acknowledge the faults of their own country.

No, I never said that. I don't know where you got that ridiculous idea from. All I'm saying is, it's difficult to be a strict constructionist when you go around opposing things which have been established in the document you so adamantly support... he isn't a strict constructionist, he's an activist constructionist...
Click to expand...

I never said that you said it, I asked if you were suggesting it. What laws are Ron Paul supporting that refute the 14th amendment?
 
I agree with you on that, now my question to you is, what would you do or how should they do things differently. Besides the fact they already think that Paul is a kook for his beliefs, I think if he tried a different campaigning method, he'd definitely become the joke amongst his peers.
 
AllThingsComic said:
I agree with you on that, now my question to you is, what would you do or how should they do things differently. Besides the fact they already think that Paul is a kook for his beliefs, I think if he tried a different campaigning method, he'd definitely become the joke amongst his peers.
Click to expand...

He already is a joke among his peers....
 
Lobster Charlie said:
Nothing Ron Paul says is any different than the other politicians? Are the other politicians calling for a complete and total withdrawal from not only the Middle East, but every base our troops are stationed in all over the world?

Is every other politician saying we should return to the gold standard? That we should abolish the Federal Reserve and the income tax? That we should decrease the size of the federal government, instead of allowing it to grow an grow? You're telling me that all the other politicians would like to see the Department of Education abolished, and that the states should be given more say in the what laws are passed?
Click to expand...

Again, it's not what he's campaigning on, it's how he's campaigning. That's how he's like every other politician in the country. Every politician has a set of ideas which separates him or her from the rest of the pack; but he runs his campaign like every other politician who ran for President. He's campaigning for "revolution" and a "new era." Obama is campaigning on "change" and "hope." Clinton is campaigning on "experience." I don't see how his strategy is any different.

If what you are saying is true, that "nothing he says is really any different from what all the other politicians are spewing," then why is Ron Paul considered to be such a wacko by his detractors? If all the other politicians are in agreement with he's saying, then his ideas would be enacted already. We both know that's far from true.
Click to expand...

Ron Paul is considered a wacko because of his ideas. Mike Gravel was considered a wacko when he got on stage and accused Clinton and Obama of plotting to nuke the Middle East. Ron Paul is a wacko for calling for the elimination of the Federal Reserve, the income tax, the reversion back to the gold standard... you know, crazy things which would send our country back several decades if he were to actually get rid of them... he's a crazy because he doesn't propose any solutions to the power vacuum which will be left in those institutions' absence...

Again, being a strict constitutionalist means you follow the constitution, and not act outside of it. He simply suggests amending the 14th amendment, due to illegals having anchor babies in order to leech welfare benefits. If he somehow circumvented the law because he didn't agree with the 14th amendment, then I'd see your point a bit more clearly.
Click to expand...

His job as a strict CONSTRUCTIONIST (there's no such word as "constitutionalist") is to protect the constitution, not to propose amendments which would eliminate one of the most important clauses in that document. I personally feel that this country was founded as a place where anyone could achieve life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness... and if a child is born here, they deserve access to the same benefits as every other person born on American soil... I hope he also supports an amendment to the constitution which makes every American born on foreign soil a United States citizen...

If you have an examples of Ron Paul blatantly opposing the constitution by passing legislation, I'm interesting in seeing that.

His disagreeing with an aspect of the document is not much different than a patriot who can acknowledge the faults of their own country.

I never said that you said it, I asked if you were suggesting it. What laws are Ron Paul supporting that refute the 14th amendment?
Click to expand...

Again, I never said there was a law he supported or called for. You are putting words in my mouth and making accusations. But I've been to a Paul rally where he spoke on this subject... where he said that children born to illegal immigrants should be considered illegal citizens... which I adamantly oppose because those children are U.S. citizens under the 14th Amendment...

His job as a strict constructionist is not to oppose the Constitution, but to protect it and make decisions based on what has already been defined in it.
 
AllThingsComic said:
I agree with you on that, now my question to you is, what would you do or how should they do things differently. Besides the fact they already think that Paul is a kook for his beliefs, I think if he tried a different campaigning method, he'd definitely become the joke amongst his peers.
Click to expand...

I don't know what he'd do differently. There's nothing wrong with being like every other politician, but there is something wrong when your supporters think you're hot **** and fail to notice just how similar you are to everyone else. His ideas are laughable and impractical at this point; his campaign strategy is the same as everyone else's; and he also seems to forget that any law he supports has to be approved by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court. He's a crazy pants who picks and chooses which parts of the Constitution he wants to support, and he's just entirely impractical. The Ron Paul Revolution is a revolution of impracticality and bull ****.

And as BlackLantern said... he's already a joke amongst his peers...
 
If Ron was any type of legitimate threat, the powers that be would either figure out a way to discredit him or eliminate him all together....
 
You have still yet to give me a reason for this supposed insanity? Maybe by getting rid of most of the dead weight in our gov't, it would force people to get off thier asses and run their own lives. Getting rid of the good for nothing departments would force states to run themselves and listen to their constituents, that's what Paul is about, less big gov't trying to run the entire country and more of a state country uniting as one nation. I just for the life of me cannot see howpeople can consider this wack-a-doo? This country is a democracy, it should be we the people cast our votes, our delegates, senators mayors and governors are a mere mouth piece for the people. It is not like that anymore, they make the rules and WE have to abide by them. This is not what this country was founded upon.
 
I don't think he's insane.....I just don't consider him impactful....and in the general American public eye it seems that way as well.
 
BlackLantern said:
If Ron was any type of legitimate threat, the powers that be would either figure out a way to discredit him or eliminate him all together....
Click to expand...

Discredit- already been done, that's why millions of people think he's a nut, because this was the general consensus and people just went along without even doing a little investigating themselves. I am NOT referring to anyone on here, obviously anyone in this thread has a degree of knowledge as to what they are talking about, i'm referring to the millions that just hear, hey this guys a whackjob, i'm not even gonna pay him any mind.

Eliminate- Paul had to fight tooth and nail to enter most debates, some fights he lost. Then when he did get in he was granted hardly anytime, and the time he was permitted, the other candiates tried to make a fool of him, highly unsuccefully I might add. Look what happened in Nevada a couple of weeks ago, he was actually on his way to winning the state and the RNC declared a do-over, really?
 
AllThingsComic said:
Discredit- already been done, that's why millions of people think he's a nut, because this was the general consensus and people just went along without even doing a little investigating themselves. I am NOT referring to anyone on here, obviously anyone in this thread has a degree of knowledge as to what they are talking about, i'm referring to the millions that just hear, hey this guys a whackjob, i'm not even gonna pay him any mind.

Eliminate- Paul had to fight tooth and nail to enter most debates, some fights he lost. Then when he did get in he was granted hardly anytime, and the time he was permitted, the other candiates tried to make a fool of him, highly unsuccefully I might add. Look what happened in Nevada a couple of weeks ago, he was actually on his way to winning the state and the RNC declared a do-over, really?
Click to expand...

Maybe the RNC is trying to give him a hint...?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cookiva
Tired of the same old guys? Come to our awesome 3rd Party!!!
2 3
Replies
57
Views
13K
bell110
bell110
Jennifer Walters
Comics The New, Improved, and Better Storm thread.
Replies
22
Views
12K
Specter313
Specter313
danielisthor
So how are you voting?
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
The Senator
The Senator
Star
  • Poll Poll
Drunk Hyping
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
NewYorkSpider
NewYorkSpider
Shadow-Guardian
The Official Watchmen Screencaps Thread
Replies
4
Views
5K
GoblinWhirlwind
GoblinWhirlwind

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 3,464 (members: 29, guests: 3,435)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,301
Messages
22,082,537
Members
45,883
Latest member
Smotonri

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"