Ron Paul...

[Feelings]

I would hope Ron Paul's VP is good, cuz Ron Paul is old as fuck and is liable to keel over and die at any time.

 

[acd]

Vermin Supreme!

I would hope Ron Paul's VP is good, cuz Ron Paul is old as fuck and is liable to keel over and die at any time.

[video=youtube;DFXXAuDK1Ao]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFXXAuDK1Ao[/video]

The libertarian and The "friendly fascist, a tyrant that you can trust."

 

[Feelings]

[video=youtube;DFXXAuDK1Ao]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFXXAuDK1Ao[/video]

The libertarian and The "friendly fascist, a tyrant that you can trust."

Fucking ENTPs and their trolling.

 

[Lerxst]

Say what you want about about the guy, but he's sure as hell a lot more consistent then any other candidate that's run in the last 12 years. Vote for him and at least you know what your getting yourself into.

It's like I've entered some weird alternate universe whenever I read about the reasons people want to vote for Ron Paul. Here's why:

• Creating a single-payer not-for-profit system of universal health care that provides full coverage for all Americans by passage of the United States National Health Care Act.
• The immediate, phased withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq; replacing them with an international security force.
• Guaranteed quality education for all; including free pre-kindergarten and college for all who want it.
• Immediate withdrawal from the World Trade Organization (WTO) and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
• Immediate repeal of the USA PATRIOT Act.
• Fostering a world of international cooperation.
• Abolishing the death penalty.
• Environmental renewal and clean energy.
• Creating a moratorium on Genetically Modified Organism (GMO).
• Implementation of H.R. 676, which integrates traditional medicine with complementary and alternative medicine (CAM).
• Ban offshore drilling.
• Halt all Biochemical Aerial Spraying of Pesticides and other toxins.
• Preventing the privatization of social security.
• Providing full social security benefits at age 65.
• Creating a cabinet-level "Department of Peace"
• Ratifying the ABM Treaty and the Kyoto Protocol.
• Introducing reforms to bring about instant-runoff voting.
• Protecting a woman's "right to choose" while decreasing the number of abortions performed in the U.S.
• Lowering the voting age to 16
• Ending the War on Drugs.
• Legalizing same-sex marriage.
• Strongly promoting workers' rights.
• Ending the H-1B and L-1 visa Programs
• Restoring rural communities and family farms.
• Strengthening gun control.
• Legalizing medicinal marijuana and decriminalizing non-medical possession.

No, that isn't Ron Paul's stance - it comes from the far-left, from a candidate that isn't gullible enough to think that people are inherently good and realizes they still need to be governed. Yet, notice how just about ever major issue Ron Paul wins votes for, this guy also stands for? And he's been taking that same stance since the 70's.

 

[bamf]

I am voting for Vermin.

 

[bickelz]

We need to advance and so far everything I've seen and heard from Ron Paul preaches the exact opposite.

I really don't think that's true. History has shown that the best way for economic advancement is capitalism, which is what Ron Paul is preaching. `

Because people legally own and use guns in my state. If it weren't for prison, many of them would probably use them on others! And who creates those laws?

People don't shoot other people because, believe it or not, it's actually really hard to kill someone in cold blood. If you think that more guns=higher crime, then try killing someone at an NRA meeting. If you can get three rounds fired before you get shot in the face a million times, it would be an incredible feat.

I just don't trust anybody in general, especially when money's involved. (period for emphasis). I have family that's done a lot of work abroad in 3rd world countries. There, if you wave a $20 bill in your hand at the airport, they don't even make you wait in the Customs line. People with even the slightest bit of wealth need to hire body guards and hope their bodyguards don't kidnap them (no, seriously, it happened to a friend who would just be considered "middle-class" in the US!). It's total anarchy since even the government officials are in it for themselves (if you pay them more than the criminals, they might consider looking into a problem).

That's the Ron Paul ideology at work right there, mixed with a dose of human nature. On one side you get the "haves" who control people with the idea of money and on the other side, you get the "have not's" who resort to extreme measures to get money.

Remove money as a driving force and suddenly a lot more people are free to better themselves without resorting to violence.

You're confusing a few things here. Having money is one thing being in a place that is ruled by dictators who purposefully oppress their people with war is far different than being wealthy in a free society. Money just facilitates trade and prices just signal where money should be allocated in the market. If you remove currency, people will just go back to other things such as how many guns they have, number of wives, amount of land...you end up with a similar result but everybody is actually worse off.

• Guaranteed quality education for all; including free pre-kindergarten and college for all who want it.
• Immediate withdrawal from the World Trade Organization (WTO) and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

I just watched an interesting documentary called "Waiting for Superman" by Davis Guggenheim that was about our failing education system. We need better education, but not necessarily a guarantee of college. And free college is actually expensive, believe it or not. Why should anybody else just pay for my education? Free education to everybody would ensure most people go to college yes. The problem with this is that our universities would become far less competitive and with globalization, we need competitive universities to churn out people who are competitive within the global economy.

• Immediate repeal of the USA PATRIOT Act.
• Fostering a world of international cooperation.
• Abolishing the death penalty.

I agree that the PATRIOT Act is a violation of our Bill of Rights but "fostering international cooperation" is very broad. How would you like this to play out so that we can have this cooperation. Agreed with the death penalty.

• Environmental renewal and clean energy.
• Creating a moratorium on Genetically Modified Organism (GMO).
• Implementation of H.R. 676, which integrates traditional medicine with complementary and alternative medicine (CAM).
• Ban offshore drilling.
• Halt all Biochemical Aerial Spraying of Pesticides and other toxins.

I don't know why you would want to stop GMOs. The way I view this is that it is a restriction on scientific research which I don't believe should be restricted under any circumstance except those that harm humans. Again with alternative medicine; without science to back it up, it's not really medicine.

As for the environmental stuff...how are we going to renew the environment? How are we going to invest in clean energy? More Solyndra investments so that our tax dollars can go down the drain? Why would we ban offshore drilling? It would cause job loss and drive up gas prices while increasing our dependence on foreign oil. Halting spraying on pesticides without any scientific evidence of them being bad for the environment is simply put, a load of crap. Why would you ban something that makes our crops safer at the expense of not harming the environment when we weren't harming it in the first place?

• Preventing the privatization of social security.
• Providing full social security benefits at age 65.

The whole social security thing is ridiculous. If you were to invest the money you pay into social security in the stock market, you would get an average return of somewher in the neighborhood of 7%. Social security only pays interest that matches up with inflation, to my knowledge. Social security actually costs people money in the long run, which is what saving is all about.

• Creating a cabinet-level "Department of Peace"
• Ratifying the ABM Treaty and the Kyoto Protocol.
• Introducing reforms to bring about instant-runoff voting.
• Protecting a woman's "right to choose" while decreasing the number of abortions performed in the U.S.

What would the "department of peace" do that the state department doesn't do? I don't know anything about the ABM treaty but I was under the impression that we had already signed the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol costs us 250 billion a year though and would yield little results. Bjorn Lomborg has talked about this and touched on it in the documentary about him called "Cool It". A recent opinion article in the Wall Street Journal talked about the Yale economist William Nordhaus who studied cost-benefit ratios for different policies and concluded that the best thing we can do for society is to allow for 50 years of economic growth without greenhouse gas controls.

I agree with the instant runoff voting but the abortion thing doesn't make sense. You're going to have government not tell women what to do while urging them to not do something?

• Lowering the voting age to 16
• Ending the War on Drugs.
• Legalizing same-sex marriage.
• Strongly promoting workers' rights.

Isn't voting age a constitutional thing? And what would lowering it to 16 do? I agree with ending the war on drugs but same sex marriage is a states rights issue as well as a contractual one.

Promoting workers rights is a common phrase I hear nowadays and I'm not sure exactly what you mean. If it's more union power you're talking about, unions are among the top campaign contributors. Since 1989, The American Federation for Teachers and National Education Association have contributed more than the Bulge Bracket banks by far to campaign finance. If you weren't talking about union power and what I've said is a straw-man argument then call me out on it.

• Ending the H-1B and L-1 visa Programs
• Restoring rural communities and family farms.
• Strengthening gun control.
• Legalizing medicinal marijuana and decriminalizing non-medical possession.

Well first off, legalizing marijuana is redundant considering you mentioned getting rid of the war on drugs already. Idk about visa programs but I'm all for open immigration policies.

I used to be sort-of gun control but the thing is, the Second Amendment is very clear. Not only that, but concealed carry is a great deterrent for crime.

Whew!

 

[magister343]

Ron Paul is old (he'll be 77 by the time he could take office), but also very healthy. He might actually be in better shape than any of his competition. When not too busy with campaigning he runs a couple miles each morning, and then bikes close to 15 miles each evening. He has never smoked, and the only alcohol he'll consume is one glass of red wine per week. He is not on any prescriptions, and has never had any serious medical issues. The most serious medical procedure he has undergone was knee surgery. (He injured his knee running track junior year of high school, which is why he turned down a track scholarship despite beating a future Olympic champion.)

His father lived to 92 years and 9 months, his mother to 93 years and 4 months. I would not be surprised if he lives much longer.

 

[anarkandi]

I just felt like uploading this to brag, after seeing the candidates stances in the US on certain issues..

And if I'd measure them by US terms, they would all be placed in the bottom left, yo, Obama would be our conservative candidate, and Dennis Kuinich our regular Social democrat.

If you want human politics, welcome to Sweden! We have big government, you shouldn't trust it, but it has made things better for the people who live here. It's possible to organize a society together, through taxes.

And Ron Paul has a great foreign policy, and Obama has better internal policy. I'd propably vote Obama, still.

 

[the]

It's almost embarrassing... These are our best and most qualified??

I know what you mean, I used to feel the same way. Then I realized that those arent the people who ever run. The people who are most power hungry and status hungry are the ones who run. Ability and qualifications have nothing to do with it. Ex: Certainly you are more qualified than Sarah Palin, but she is the one who ran (for a little bit anyway), not you.

 

[Lerxst]

I really don't think that's true. History has shown that the best way for economic advancement is capitalism, which is what Ron Paul is preaching....

So taking that entire post into consideration, your entire political stance is one of "Screw my neighbor, I want more!" Which was at the heart of the attitude that got us into the situation we're currently in and the exact same thing the Ron Paul campaign is promising to do; turn back the hands of time 100 years and watch it all happen again.

 

[MindYourHead]

I really don't think that's true. History has shown that the best way for economic advancement is capitalism, which is what Ron Paul is preaching.

So taking that entire post into consideration, your entire political stance is one of "Screw my neighbor, I want more!" Which was at the heart of the attitude that got us into the situation we're currently in and the exact same thing the Ron Paul campaign is promising to do; turn back the hands of time 100 years and watch it all happen again.

I agree with @bickelz .
The more government has gotten involved in things, the more this country has deteriorated, and the more government controls our lives, the less free we are.

To quote Thomas Jefferson.
“I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”
Too bad his prediction isn't holding true.

What Ron Paul is advocating in a nut shell is for government to do its job, and only its job.
To serve, and protect individuals and their property (life, liberty and pursuit of happiness) from coercion.

I think most people these days can't see the forest for the trees.

Yeah, I have a Ron Paul quote as my signature. I have had it for some time now.

 

[Lerxst]

I agree with @bickelz .
The more government has gotten involved in things, the more this country has deteriorated, and the more government controls our lives, the less free we are.

To quote Thomas Jefferson.
“I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”
Too bad his prediction isn't holding true.

What Ron Paul is advocating in a nut shell is for government to do its job, and only its job.
To serve, and protect individuals and their property (life, liberty and pursuit of happiness) from coercion.

I think most people these days can't see the forest for the trees.

Yeah, I have a Ron Paul quote as my signature. I have had it for some time now.

Read what I've already written. We've had Ron Paul politics in this country from around the 1860's - the 1910's. We've also had Robber Barons, Oil Tycoons, Child Labor and highly corrupt officials in office during that same period. One group can't exist without the other. You invite Libertarian politics back into this country and you invite evils that pale in comparison to "big government".

 

[bickelz]

So taking that entire post into consideration, your entire political stance is one of "Screw my neighbor, I want more!" Which was at the heart of the attitude that got us into the situation we're currently in and the exact same thing the Ron Paul campaign is promising to do; turn back the hands of time 100 years and watch it all happen again.

Well, I actually didn't say "screw you, I want more". I've had this argument with a couple people and OWS forum people seem to not be able to grasp this concept either: everybody always do things in their own self-interest. It's a basic human condition and it is what capitalism is founded upon.

I want upward mobility for myself and for everybody else; so yes, I do want more. And that "I want more" is what drives innovation, it's what makes the economy grow.

I was under the impression that Marxian economic arguments have largely been discredited because of the evidence against them as well as the simple human conditions that capitalism caters too. The essential argument that we're talking about here is how well we believe markets work. You think they work terrible, I think they work quite well.

What got us into this mess is a government that incentivizes risk by bailing out financial institutions when the economy goes awry; this is called Crony Capitalism. We've been doing this for years and it hasn't helped start the economy back up. It's just made government bigger and bigger, and government doesn't grow the economy.

 

[bickelz]

Read what I've already written. We've had Ron Paul politics in this country from around the 1860's - the 1910's. We've also had Robber Barons, Oil Tycoons, Child Labor and highly corrupt officials in office during that same period. One group can't exist without the other. You invite Libertarian politics back into this country and you invite evils that pale in comparison to "big government".

Like what evils? The ability to imrpove one's economic condition? What's wrong with making money off of oil?

Corrupt officials only exist because of big government. if you have no officials, they can't be corrupt and favor certain markets over others.

The child labor argument is a total load of crap. There are plenty of studies out there that show child labor is the best thing for many third world places Without children working, many families wouldn't be able to afford food or be able to go to school. It's the equivalent of saying college kids can't work while going to school because it's too stressful. It just doesn't make any sense. And to add to this, there has been documentation of little girls being sold off into prostitution and little boys being used to sell drugs on the street when child labor is abolished in their area. Are they better off on the street?

I honestly believe that people inherently misunderstand "Libertarian Politics". It's about personal liberty and freedom, not oppression. That's great you want to believe in socialism or communism but they won't provide you the same opportunities that capitalism will.

If you're truly into the system you want, then stop using everything you have that has been made/produced because of capitalism...

 

[acd]

Bickelz is hardcore being pro child labor and what not.

 

[bickelz]

Bickelz is hardcore being pro child labor and what not.

Only if it makes them better off. If they're choosing to work because it makes them better off then why prevent them from doing it?

 

[acd]

Only if it makes them better off. If they're choosing to work because it makes them better off then why prevent them from doing it?

You have to be the most ignorant person on this forum. Seriously. Your posts are lol worthy.
Don't pretend that you actually care about third world children, or anyone else for that matter.
Go ahead and post all the skewed data you like. Where are those studies you mentioned, btw?
Who paid for those studies to be conducted? Who conducted them?

So you think it's a choice that 8 yr olds in third world countries are working 12 hour shifts for pennies a day to make you a pair of shoes?
Because the country you live in probably put their country in the position in which entire families starve if children don't slave away?
Hey, at least it prevents them from being sold as prostitutes though. I guess that's better off in the world of Bickelz..

 

[subwayrider]

I remember how everyone thought Obama was going to change the world.

It never comes down to a single person. At this point, it's getting Congress to work together and not play their silly partisan games.

 

[subwayrider]

You have to be the most ignorant person on this forum. Seriously. Your posts are lol worthy.
Don't pretend that you actually care about third world children, or anyone else for that matter.
Go ahead and post all the skewed data you like. Where are those studies you mentioned, btw?
Who paid for those studies to be conducted? Who conducted them?

So you think it's a choice that 8 yr olds in third world countries are working 12 hour shifts for pennies a day to make you a pair of shoes?
Because the country you live in probably put their country in the position in which entire families starve if children don't slave away?
Hey, at least it prevents them from being sold as prostitutes though. I guess that's better off in the world of Bickelz..

Not to be a dick, but that's the abusive fallacy. Let's not have this degenerate into hurling insults at one another. If we do that, it makes us no different from our Congress.

 

[acd]

Not to be a dick, but that's the abusive fallacy. Let's not have this degenerate into hurling insults at one another. If we do that, it makes us no different from our Congress.

He is ignorant.
He tries to use "studies" to justify his social darwinist views... ignoring information of a contrary nature that would discredit him.
I find it offensive and insulting for someone to justify the misery of an entire population of people because it suits their misguided philosophies.

Views like the ones he touts are what is wrong with this planet.
Utterly destructive and unsustainable. No, I don't respect his opinion at all.