Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Editors' Picks
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Take whatever shots you want at his policies but the fact that he thinks that war and the military are economic problems isn't really a snicker-worthy view. One of Paul's biggest bases is members of the military. He gets more donations from members of all branches of the US military than all other candidates. And for good reason.
Did he actually serve in combat? I can't find any information about it online. So, if you don't know more than I, I don't see how you can be "pretty fucking sure" about what Ron Paul does or doesn't know about the true cost of war.
Military service members are also overwhelmingly Republican, the Party of War, which kind of negates your reasoning for why Ron Paul has so much military support.
He was a active duty flight surgeon for 2 years and then a member of the Air National Guard for an additional 3 years.
He's not far afield from Lyndon LaRouche, except the Democrats don't turn out in droves, donate millions and vote for LaRouche.
His statements on imperialism are the equivalent of a broken clock telling the correct time twice a day.
Please rationalize tying our economy to oligarchic mine owners in South Africa and Russia. Please.
Can you cite that?
No, he believes a person should have NO PRIVACY in the bedroom, and is looking to recriminalize homosexuality on the state level.
Take all the hatred you had towards George W. Bush, apply it to Obama, and then look at Paul. He's the only candidate standing outside of "business as usual," and isn't owned or controlled by the same corrupt networks operating behind the scenes now.
We've gone from a democratic republic, to a republic, to democracy, to socialism, to fascism, and we are now moving through the next transision, into total tyranny. It's not about D's and R's, black or white, man or woman, gay or straight, it's about individual human beings, with the entitlement of life, liberty, and the pursuit of hapiness. It's about the future of our civilization, and in no sensationalized or dramatic fashion, this is both one of our last shots at a peaceful solution and the most important election in history.
If you're a white heterosexual Christian male.
"Persoanlly, I'd LOVE to see Ron Paul Obama debates, would be SOOOO much better than any of the other candidates."
I would too, honestly.
@20: "I know exactly what Ron Paul thinks about privacy, which is that you should have lots from the feds and absolutely none from the states, if that's what the states want."
Yup. Paul's legislated against privacy for what you do in the bedroom, Paul "cares" about you being arrested for homosexuality, in that he wants you to be.
Even still, he doesn't want federal operations, but he's fine with the operations of corporate militias and mercenaries. Blackwater can operate unconstrained by the Federal government, hooray!
Which would allow states to illegalize homosexuality and "deviant" behavior, removing all right to privacy.
My logic is predicated on Paul's fans' spectacularly shitty understanding of what States Rights mean, the history of States Rights politics, Paul fans' poor understanding of what Paul's proposed legislation means, the subjectivity of Constitutional literalists, and Paul's similarly subjective interpretation of "civil rights".
I presume very little.
Tried finding data on Ron Paul, but records from then are written on clay tablets and not easily searchable.
Again, Paultards have no clue what they're talking about.
How are you not aware of this? Why do you have such a shallow understanding of his proposed legislation? Why do you take "FREEDOMS" and "LIBERTIES" at face value?
Stop claiming that Ron Paul wants privacy and "liberty" if he's working to erode privacy and civil rights. If there's no way that he can sneak this past Congress, there's no way he's going to get anything GOOD done in Congress. This is why people have issues taking Ron Paul fans seriously.
@37: I approve of and appreciate his efforts in fixing this along with other, far more well meaning and progressive members of Congress. I would never get this man near Presidential office, however.
Ron Paul literally does not believe in the separation of Church and State. If you've paid any attention at all to State legislation and State constitutions, you know that this is not far-fetched at all.
So if he can't "sneak" bad legislation past the Congress that means they will not pass good legislation? I think your grasping at straws. The whole point is to stop someone from "sneaking" past bad legislation while passing good legislation.
So I shouldn't trust Obama, but I should trust implicitly someone who makes re-criminalizing homosexuality and legalizing segregation necessary items of legislation?
You can piss your pants about states rights all you want, but you, unlike us paultards, have an option of moving to your ideal government. We do not, because what we want is here, it's just been hijacked. It's time to reevaluate your perceptions on America and the world, then maybe you can see Ron Paul with eyes unclouded by hatred and depravity. Or you can find a God.
Saying this does not make it so. Ron Paul sticks up for corporations and States Rights. That is obvious by all the legislation put forth, no matter how many bills he says "no" to. His intentions are clear.
Yes because Obama has signed the NDAA potentially doing something analogous to what you are talking about by undermining habeas corpus on a federal level. What you are afraid Ron Paul may possibly do, though it is very very unlikely, would be on the much less troubling state level. At least with the latter there is a choice to leave the state. With the former one would have to leave the country. Then taking into account spending and wars along with who has the more sane foreign policy views I would say Ron Paul is the lesser of 2 evils.
Statements coming entirely from Privilege.
I have no privilege and actually privilege would make it harder to leave. Owning a house means it has to be sold whereas renters can pick up and rent another house. States are already determining gay marriage issues so there would be no change there. Also you ignore how much privilege one needs to leave the country. Abortions would never be outlawed in every state so even that is not an issue whereas under the right circumstances the federal government could do just that.
You're not bolstering your case, here.
You are ignoring that what may be done on a state level also may be done on a federal level.
States' Rights is about the erosion of civil rights for everyone in this country, not about actual Liberty and Freedom.
"He is a monstrously fundamental zealot and he is absolutely untrustworthy in any high office"
Your claims are baseless, objective, derogatory, redundant, naive, and close minded. Throughout the entire thread you have built strawman after strawman, using generalizing name calling and slanderous assumptions. You obviously have no clue what planet you're on and are completely out of touch with the real world. Do you not care about Obama continuing all of the military adventures started by Bush? Or how about not closing GITMO? What about the bailout for the "1%" ? what the he'll do you think about anything? All you want to do is fearmonger the consequences of the constitution and liberty? Freedom is given to everyone equally, but collectivism pits groups off against one another to divide and conquer. If you could learn to drop the petty namecalling and close minded bigotry, and maybe discuss the issues and the situation and whom is most capable of addressig those issues, maybe we can get along and actually reason our differences. You pick out a sentence and attack it, but you disregard everything else being written. How does willful ignorance and biased groupthink help you find the truth? You can't just filter life or discussion through what you deem is acceptable. You've lost this argument. Ron Paul is more trustworthy, deserving, capable, principled, genuine, kind, qualified, and beneficial of all the candidates running. I say, lets try something different, this is the 21st century, I'm not racist, sexist, homophobic, meanspirited, or spiteful, and I've met a lot of people just like me, from every race and origin, that are well meaning, honest, lifeloving, truthseekers. We may disagree on some things, but we know how to coexist. We could have anarchy, and it might work, but a truly free democratic republic is proven to work and will help us reach the next level of civilization. Barack, Newt, Mittens, and the rest of the freakshow, are business as usual, Ron Paul is truly the underdog, and he is known in his district as, " the tax payers best friend." I could site articles and videos and books or whatever, but I have my own thoughts and opinions that I have developed on my own, so I speak (or type) from the heart, and I don't trust the United States Government or it's affiliated entities, but I trust the constitution, liberty, and Ron Paul. We have literally been hijacked, and this is the first time a noninsider is a major contender in the race, Ron is not for sale. Obama is the most lobbied president ever, the worst president ever, (and that's tough next to Bush and Carter) the laziest, the most egotistical, deceitful, stonewalled, murderous, treasonous, criminal, and corrupt president ever in the history of the US, But! He's clean, articulate, and good looking. If we see another term of Obama, we may never see another election.
So yeah, when you compare Ron Paul's voting record, personal life, and speeches given to all the other presidents in the past 50 years, he is an exceptional choice as president. And like Obiwan, he may be our only hope. Get with the winning team while you still can, because on the side you're currently standing, is amonsgst the most vicious and vile creatures to have ever come out of a womb. It's time to either watch it all go up, or watch the beginning of a new renaissance period. It really is as epic and important as that. Are you familiar with bohemian grove, Bilderberg, trilateral commission, the CFR, the league of nations, the influence of nonprofit groups, (Ford Foundation, Carnegie endowment for international peace, rockefeller foundation, etc.) Fabian society, or even George HW Bush's speech on September 11, 1991 about a New World Order. How about Obama's family connections to the CIA, hence his romantic fascination with them, and how he was basically groomed for the office by Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and others. Really, he should be the on you're worried about getting into office, just look what he's done in 3 years! You never answered my question though, who do you support or what is your solution, other than that, fix your damn brain.
The "negative bias" comes because we don't like the positions he espouses. His economic policies are insane (the gold standard only makes sense to people who refuse to do the math) and his plans for the Federal government would essentially return the US to the days of the Articles of Confederation. Since he's got a history of blatant racism that he refuses to own or repudiate, it's pretty clear that he wants to do this to roll back some or all of the protections the federal government has put in place to protect people's civil rights over the last century-plus. Yes, he's a man of his principles, but he shows no remorse about lying about them should he feel it convenient to do so.
You aren't serious, are you? Have you listened to his speeches on the floor, or the interviews and debates? His economic policies are insane to someone who only knows fractional reserve banking and a conterfeipt fiat currency issued through a private company. There is no proof, other than the newsletters that he is racist, in fact there's proof he wasn't a racist in the 70's in texas while practicing medicine, which is known to be transitioning through integration, and racism was prevalent. But those are character attacks. What I ask you is, are you supporting the continuation of all the decisions made by Bush, "staying the course"? I mean, honestly, what are the differences between Obama and Bush, other than skintone? Ron has stood up for the individuals, civil liberties, the constitution, sound money, free markets, and a peace oriented approach to foreign policy. If people would just grow up and listen, like #52, we would all be better off. Take off your team jerseys and start caring about the people, not your scores and dogma. This is all about the future for our kids and softening the blow of the approaching storm. Oh, and when the federal government is, "granting rights"(which is of itself unconstitutional and is not liberty, rights are given by your creator, not a government) they are returning rights to you, that they took away to begin with, like a prisoner hanging hid shackles loosened. The antipauls just sound juvenile and uneducated as far as I've seen, and the supporters know there stuff, regardless of your biased liberal bigoted viewpoint.