This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

Welcome to Our Community

Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.

The Ron Paul appreciation thread!

Discussion in 'Bar' started by AD Chaos, Dec 4, 2011.

  1. AD Chaos

    AD Chaos MGTOW

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,603
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I would not like Ron Paul if he was unintelligent, inconsistent, and above all, hypocrite, as some religious people happen to be (not ALL of them, of course; he's proof of that).
    I trust him when he has said his duties to his country and it's people come first, before his personal spiritual belief. He has a LONG track record, to back his honesty and consistency.

    By any measure a person with integrity in charge is always going to be WAY better than a corrupt one.
     
  2. egan.

    egan. daylightdies.com

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,441
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    NorCal
    This is one thing that really gets me and it certainly isn't specific to RP. People love to talk about the Constitution but always seem to omit article III which gives the Supreme Court the definitive say on how the Constitution is legally interpreted.

    That is how the document "lives in breathes" -- through the court and far less frequently through amendments.

    When people talk about Paul or anyone else "restoring our Constitutional principles" they simply don't understand how the system actual works. What Paul (or anyone) could do is to govern in keeping with his views of the document however actual Constitutional law is constantly being evaluated and defined by the courts.
     
  3. colonel kurtz

    colonel kurtz Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3,990
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    what i love most about all the ron paul support is that there's all these people with their panties all wet over him, but when it comes down to it, almost none of the policies he wants to implement would ever happen. either congress would stone-wall him, like they've done to obama since day one, or his own party and advisors would spend their time undermining and reigning him in, being in constant fear that his fairly radical libertarian ideals would alienate the centrist crowd that makes up the majority of voters.

    now don't get me wrong - if there's one republican who i had to personally hand-pick to stick in the oval office, he'd be first on my list...but let's get real here - dude isn't gonna win the presidency, the media's gonna ignore his message, and nobody's gonna do dick about it other than cry on the internet and maybe hold the occasional(and ineffectual) campus rally!
     
  4. JeffTD

    JeffTD Senhor Testiculo

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    12,582
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    How can you be staunchly pro-life/author something like the Sanctity of Life act and actually be a libertarian? How can you want the government to stay out of people's personal lives but spout off about a war on Christmas and not be a proponent of equal marriage rights ('states rights' is still a cop-out and he uses it in an unintended manner when he speaks about them)? How can you claim to be such a rigid constitutionalist and supporter of our founding fathers while ignoring things like Article III and the 14th Amendment and being completely ignorant of something like the Treaty of Tripoli?

    In my opinion, these (among others) make him inconsistent and a hypocrite. His belief in fairy tales and articles like the War on Religion make him unintelligent, if at least willfully ignorant.

    I don't doubt that his duties to his country and its people come first, but I also don't doubt that his spiritual convictions greatly inform his sense of duty, which I don't agree with to begin with.
     
  5. roy22341

    roy22341 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Messages:
    778
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Lafayette, LA
    I don't agree with a lot of what Ron Paul says/believes. However, given my other options......
     
  6. Aaron Smith

    Aaron Smith Envisage Audio

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,946
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Hey Jeff, do you have any concerns about our national debt burden or the medium to long term consequences of our current rate of debt accrual? If not, why? Personally I don't think the USD reserve currency status will last even another decade, and guys like Romney and Obama are simply leading us ever-closer to that cliff. I think Ron's deep and genuine concern for our nation's fiscal health should be reason enough to vote for him.
     
  7. Aaron Smith

    Aaron Smith Envisage Audio

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,946
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Do you remotely agree that we should fully audit the Federal Reserve?

    Do you remotely agree that we should at least remove taxation on the purchase and sale of gold and silver bullion (that is to say, legalize constitutional money), or allow for competing market-generated currencies to rise to prominence and eventually circulate in direct competition to Federal Reserve notes?

    Do you remotely agree that Austrian economics, which diagnosed and predicted the housing bubble and subsequent bursting, many years before it occurred, is more accurate than Keynesian theory?

    Do you remotely agree that the war on drugs has been, and will continue to be a complete failure?

    Do you remotely agree that giving away billions in foreign aid makes no sense, especially when given to conflicting sides of the same ongoing conflict?

    Do you remotely agree that the proliferation of student loans is the primary driving force behind the rapidly increasing cost of college education?

    Do you remotely agree that the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens, when the government deems someone a threat, is an immensely serious problem?

    Also, you clearly find it quite easy to criticize Ron Paul, as though you consider your intelligence, education, wisdom, and economic insight to be far superior to his, and it seems easy for you to actually claim that he is literally crazy, but I want to try something different. Let's assume that Ron actually became the President, and let's assume that he was able to enact all or at least many of the biggest changes that he talks about and campaigns on. Can you describe for me how you believe the United States would actually look, if he started changing things? Our money system? The economy? Health care? The absence of the TSA? The cost and quality of education? Drug use? Gun violence? I want a detailed picture, from your mind, of what a Ron Paul United States would look like if he had the power to enact the changes he believes in within a single presidential term. I want to see just how "batshit crazy" you actually believe the United States would get in this scenario. If his policies and ideas are completely wacko, I want you to describe for me the real-world consequences of his batshit crazy ideas, entirely unbeknownst to him upon implementing them.

    Now, walk me through your imagination again, and assume he's the President, but rather than assuming he actually gets everything he wants (which is of course, impossible), let's assume that things unfold for him realistically, in terms of congressional cooperation, etc. How would the United States look in four years, and how would it have changed along the way? Again, I want details. Be thorough.
     
  8. SocialNumb

    SocialNumb Damn Christians!

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    8,020
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Boyton, WPB, FL
    Easy. (Though you didn't ask me)

    Day one, sworn in. Me crying on my expensive couch. (bad for the fabric) Yelling at the top of my lungs "Damn Christians!"

    Day two, still crying. Going insane, pooping on whatever Bible I can find.

    Day three, still crying. There's bad weather. Suddenly all schools become churches. Fires break out world wide.

    Day four, still crying. Complete economic collapse. The President calls for world wide religious conversion under the threat of nuclear weapons.

    Day five, I'm smiling. The sun is back up. The president was assassinated.

    Then I woke up, he never had a chance. Phewww.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  9. colonel kurtz

    colonel kurtz Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3,990
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    i'm sure the guys at the top of the fed, along with the entire military-industrial establishment would be pretty pissed, and he'd end up in the ground next to JFK pretty quickly. ron paul(and the rest of us, really) can sit and :fu: at these institutions all we want - but when it comes down to it, they have the $$$...which means they have all the true power and influence...which is something that is only ever relinquished through bloodshed
     
  10. amarshism

    amarshism Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Messages:
    2,705
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Brisbane CBD
    What about the $$$ institution rps attached to? It's a very big one and it has the means to change the world for the worse far more than any of the other evil money grabbing organizations.
     
  11. JeffTD

    JeffTD Senhor Testiculo

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    12,582
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I do, but I don't agree with RP on how we should cut the debt and how we should progress afterwards.


    1. Yes; you've found another. Congratulations.
    2. No. Gold and silver are commodities and should be taxed just like any other similarly traded product (stocks).
    3. No.
    4. Yes, RP can't realistically solve this, though. No President can.
    5. This falls under foreign policy.
    6. Partially, but its more to do with the fact that a masters is the new bachelors which is a direct result of the failed economic policies of the last 20-30 years, as well as to do with state spending priorities being ass-backwards.
    7. Yes; how is this an RP specific issue? Have you even looked into why Gitmo wasn't closed, or do you just immediately blame it on Candidate Obama being a lying sack of shit?

    8. First of all, I don't have to think I'm more intelligent, educated, wise, or have better economic insights than ANYONE to say that their ideas are stupid. Second of all, no, not unless you'll do the same for Obama, and without resorting to doomsday scenarios libertarians/Austrian's have been shouting about for years. You can't say with certainty that the issues you've brought up will turn out well, but you're going to anyways. Besides; none of my criticisms have been of RP's dreamland-USA (aside from his economic policies, which have to be imagined in dreamland-USA to be plausible); they've been of RP as a presidential candidate.

    9. Again, no. I find it absolutely ridiculous that you ask me to be thorough when you've been nothing of the sort throughout this thread and have even admitted to willfully skipping things that you didn't feel like arguing about (which is actually my biggest Ron Paul supporter complaint, as we've discussed before).

    Honestly, if he were to be elected president, I think he'd find out quickly (like Candidate Obama, like Candidate anyone else) that he can't affect the change he thought he could given the rest of the system, and people would immediately turn on him as a sell-out and flip-flopper like they do with every President when they can't affect the dream-like change they run on.
     
  12. AD Chaos

    AD Chaos MGTOW

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,603
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Jeff, how do you go from ''I'll be voting for him in the primary'' to calling Ron Paul ''batshit crazy''. Doesn't add up.

    Like I said before it would be easier to take your criticism more seriously if you were critical of just some specific issue -or even a number of them-, like for instance the uncertainty of how the help for those in TRUE need would come about, which I find valid. He genuinely cares about people over money and believes there are ways to go about things rather than have government run every aspect of your life, so I wouldn't be too concerned about it. But I get where you're coming from there.

    However, when you go on to resort to many other things including making rather unfounded assumptions, using incendiary, demeaning epithets- ie horseshit/bullshit, spiel etc (which, by the way, don't automatically add validity to your points), calling him names and such, that tells me there might be some other reason why you so insist on debating almost his every principle and idea.

    I'm sure lots of people would potentially be inconvenienced by a Ron Paul president; those with family income and jobs from military industries, bureaucrats, politicians, bankers, Wall Street brokers, people who have had handouts and aids from the government, and a very long etc. But, unless you are set for life -economically speaking-, the destruction of your country's economy and the bursting of a dollar bubble would eventually affect everyone in there, including you.
    Going the route of redistributing 'wealth' (which is a distortion of the term, obviously) under a very corrupt government, has the potential to eventually become the redistribution of misery and exploitation of the working class, and the over-concentration of all capital for a ruling elite (domestic or foreign). If that is not Communism, I don't really know what is.

    To colonel kurtz- Unlike Obama, Ron Paul has already demonstrated he can turn the minds of people around and gather support from all over the political spectrum (at least voters-wise), so if Congress would be stupid enough to give him the same shit as they do to Obama, I assure you they all already know it'd be their asses out the door, in two years' time. Rep or Dem. Every politician knows it, and it's why the political part of the so called 'Establishment' fears him so.
     
  13. JeffTD

    JeffTD Senhor Testiculo

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    12,582
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I don't get what you have a problem understanding; I've clearly stated the issues I have with his platform. He was the best Republican candidate, because he's not really a Republican. If he had the same chances now as he did back when I posted that, I probably still would vote for him if CA GOP primaries actually followed state law and allowed independents to vote in them (found that out recently when I requested my absentee ballot, pretty pissed off about it).

    What I find most hilarious about your retort is that you accuse me of making unfounded assumptions and not being critical of specific issues (which is, to use an epithet, horseshit) while not making any yourself.

    Why do you keep making statements about the government running every aspect of your life? Is anyone actually a proponent of this, at all? In what way have I, anyone in this thread, or anyone in the presidential race voiced support for this kind of government?

    You legitimately do not understand the US political system if you think we'd oust congress for not going along with a hypothetical President Paul.
     
  14. egan.

    egan. daylightdies.com

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,441
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    NorCal
    How can you possibly make this assertion? RP is at best pulling 30% of republicans. Obama took 28 states including many that hadn't voted democrat in decades. However you feel about his leadership, the momentum, power and voter turnout (the highest since the 60's) of the 2008 campaign is completely undeniable. I can only assume you weren't here.
    The second part of your statement displays some bizzarre misunderstanding of how politics works.
     
  15. JeffTD

    JeffTD Senhor Testiculo

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    12,582
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    He's not a US citizen and never has been, AFAIK, which is ultimately the most entertaining part of his argument.
     
  16. Aaron Smith

    Aaron Smith Envisage Audio

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,946
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    How should we cut the debt and progress afterwards? I want to hear your ideas.

    I'm honestly incredibly surprised at how much trust you place in fiat! I'm also surprised that you don't attribute any monetary qualities at all to gold or silver—central banks still hold it in mass tonnage, and in many countries gold and silver are still culturally and functionally regarded as being money. If someone wants to store their wealth in precious metals for a season, why should the precious metal holder be penalized via taxation for holding an asset that didn't actually change at all? It's a hunk of metal with no liabilities attached whatsoever. Why don't we slap capital gains taxes on houses? What about rare sports cards, cars, or old guitars? Sure, you can chalk up the short term price fluctuations in precious metal prices to supply and demand (and sometimes surreptitious market intervention via agents acting on behalf of central banks, which there is mounting evidence of), but over the longer term, they "gain" value as the real value of fiat money is diluted. They are not the same as stocks, nor do they even resemble stocks, at all. When the Fed announces that they're targeting a 2% inflation rate per year (using cooked statistics, as I've explained before, meaning it's actually more like 8-10% annually), yet continue to hold down interest rates for dollar-savers beneath 0.25%, where is someone supposed to "hide" from that inflation?

    Are you actually a full-blown Keynesian now? Bailouts, government stimulus spending and the like, all considered to be good and necessary things? You must have had a great econ professor :lol:

    I haven't looked into Gitmo lately, but that wasn't what I was even talking about, I was referring to The National Defense Authorization Act (S 1867) which denies terror suspects (including US citizens) the right to trial, and permits authorities to detain them indefinitely. I'm not concerned about the government abusing this power in the very short run, but the longer term implications are quite frightening. All the government has to do to hold you forever and deny you a trial is claim that you are a terrorist, and they can presumably define "terrorist" to mean anything they want—does this bother you? My original point was that Ron Paul is the only candidate who cares and speaks up about this.

    Perhaps self-attributed intelligence wasn't fair for me to say, but surely you have to believe you have better economic insights in order to say that Ron's ideas are stupid. If not, then on what basis would you be calling his ideas stupid?

    Sure, I'll do the same for Obama, but I do literally believe that the US dollar is nearly doomed, if not already past the point of no return, so if you consider that an unreasonable doomsday scenario, then I would have to be dishonest with you when describing our not-so-distant future under, or at least in consequence of Obama's control. I strongly sense that your refusal to paint for me an RP Presidency is simply because you don't want to say something that could make you look stupid.

    Haha! To be honest I don't even know what I've skipped, and I don't care to reread the whole thread. If someone wants to tell me what I've skipped, or if they've got a burning question that I've been evading, I'll answer the questions for no other reason than for you to stop accusing me of cherry-picking my responses, or whatever I've apparently been doing.

    This, to me, is probably the worst attitude someone can have…that no matter who the President is, that no meaningful change can occur, the system is too far beyond fixing, and in the mean time let's all just argue about who has the worst ideas in theory, and vote for one of two establishment-blessed candidates!

    Honestly, you may be right that no change will occur right now, because right now Americans are still sitting pretty for the most part…stocked grocery stores, lots of cool/cheap technology around, disposable income, etc. I suppose as long as our economy holds together in some resemblance of what we enjoy today, then the majority of Americans will continue to choose their politicians by listening to their TV sets, the content of which is heavily influenced by the establishment. However, the establishment is not going to address our debt, and our debt will ultimately be our undoing. In my mind it's either, make tough decisions quickly to being winding down our debt (or at the very least, ceasing to accrue more debt), or we face a full-on currency collapse a little further down the road. We'll find out who's right soon enough, but my money (literally) is betting on the currency collapse.
     
  17. colonel kurtz

    colonel kurtz Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3,990
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    don't need to when you have property taxes, which fluctuate each year depending on the assessed value of your property...which is often times higher than the actual amount paid or owed on the loan
     
  18. outbreak525

    outbreak525 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Messages:
    575
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    If there's nothing influential that a President could ACTUALLY do to change our FUCKED up society then why the fuck are we even HAVING this debate?
     
  19. colonel kurtz

    colonel kurtz Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3,990
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    to keep our eye off the real prize, which is a congress that bends to the wills and whims of corporate lobbyists/campaign donors, and a supreme court that is all too willing to allow the rights of the individual to be slowly eroded away

    seriously, turn on any TV/cable news station, and what do they talk about all fucking day long? president this, president that...maybe throw in some trayvon martin shit for a second, back to presidential coverage, a little bit of "OMG NO SHE DIDNT!" celebrity crap, more presidential shit...it's all a big fucking show that's been carefully crafted to make the average joe schmo feel like he's an integral part of the process by standing in a box and touching a screen once every 4 years
     
  20. outbreak525

    outbreak525 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Messages:
    575
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    So now, who do we want as our president? A "Joe-Shmoe" regular guy who's not trying to do anything out of the ordinary in this government (Mitt, Rick)
    Or the guy that is actually looking out for our well being, the only guy in it for real reform, Ron Paul?

    Yeah maybe Ron Paul won't be able to really change anything but at least he'll be the one that informs the American people (the less intelligent, more society based average American who isn't even aware of the corruption they're living in, and don't get me started on google) that there is something bad going on. And guess what the people with the money the people with the power FEAR Ron Paul's message because they know that a stupid populous is more easily controllable.

    Fuck, people suck.
     

Share This Page