Ron Paul is a whack job

Here's the thing... Ron Paul is an Idealist. He has a lot of very good ideas. But quite frankly, many of them will never happen. You can't just wake up one morning and withdraw from the UN. Keep in mind anything he has in mind has to be passed by the Senate and House. But I can assure you, that he won't be elected president. If anything he might risk fucking up the election worse than Ralph Nadar.

 
Let me guess, you listen to Sean Hannity and absorb every thing he says word for word? BAHAHAH. FUCK YOU. Thank god you cant vote. Your words dont mean a god damn thing man, you are fucking like 16 years old. You dont know shit.

Ron Paul is the most intelligent, patriotic politician you will ever see in your lifetime. Show some respect.
 
i agree with you about how terrorism is exaggerated, the point of terrorism is to install fear into the hearts and minds of people, and the U.C. government uses that fear to gain what it wants, more power and control over it's citizens. i think that the current administration is no less a terrorist organization than al qaeda, if anything, it's worse.
 
Finally someone on NS that is totally consumed by the lies of a government.

This is the first sign of a death of democracy:the separation of population and government. This system was designed for the people by the people to the people. Now its more like control over people by the elite.

 
That the majority of the country voted for... If you want to run, go for it, but being an internet activist won't help.

This is not a dictatorship. If it is, you can blame the dems for not standing up and having enough balls to follow through with shutting down the administration.

This whole OMG BIG BROTHER bit is getting stale when a lot is to blame on general apathy by everyone involved...
 
HE is a nut job.

Hey, conceptkid, im not going to vote republican, but i find it quite insulting and revolting how you mistreat and belittle a fellow american. Republicans are not limited to those who swallow everything that hannity or oreilly say; the vast majority of this nation exhibits a certain mindlessness in terms of their opinions which are spoon fed by all the talking heads on TV, liberal as well as conservative.

You are as bad as any republican moron for not respecting everyone, which i believe is one of your main criticisms of the government.

Supposedly, politics would be about doing what is right for the country, not mindlessly attacking anyone and everyone who disagrees with you as some sort of mental retard. But i guess you bought into that aspect of the current government too.

Not to say there aren't people who deserve extreme bashing for their opinions, but let's stay civil, it looks like a pot and a kettle here.
 
it's true that some of his views bother me, but he's still the best republican candidate out there. i want to know what exactly his foreign policy is. is he willing to talk with possible hostile countries like obama or would he rather shut them out until they act less hostile like hillary (fucking stupid idea, they won't change just because we ignore them)
 
I think what bugs me most about that guy, above all other things, is that he's not running with his true party. The guy is a Libertarian by all modern definitions, and using the Republican platform to gain popularity and media causes me to question the guys true values. If he'll ditch his ideals in order to win the popularity contest instead of being true to his views, why would I want to elect him to lead our country with the same pretense?
 
He has said it a million times if you just listen to him in the debates because this question always comes up, he is an old-school republican. There is a difference. He is a 10 term congressman, so Im pretty damn sure he knows what party he should be in.

Plus running outside of the two party system is destined for failure because of the system in place now, you cant deny it. Thats just how it is. Its not going to be changed anytime soon unfortunately.
 
Well that's kind of his point, he is running as a true republican, as a contrast against neo-cons.
 
Unfortunately, the Republicans today are not "old school", and so his party views do no align. He's voted and been libertarian before, I see no reason why he should try and distance himself from that view if his policies pretty much ARE that view. It feels like he's trying to both suck votes away from the Republicans because they are the weaker party this election, or trying to deceive the public, who will really only give two shits about the election and vote dem or rep no matter the candidate. Either way, it looks dirty and underhanded, and thats not something I would want my candidate to do.
 
neo-cons being the rest of the republicans as a new way of conservative, or as in they're all like ann coulter according to the late great FuckThePolice?
 
I don't mean that in the blood sucking vampire evil politician neo-con way, I just mean it as the new wave of conservative republicans. Ron Paul is not part of that wave as he has older, more traditional republican views.
 
Yeah, but the fact remains, his ideas are still closer to what Libertarians stand for than Republicans, then and now. Parties change names, as do ideas. Democrats and Republicans are bound to change policies, like they have in the past, and new parties can always spring up. Hell, I'd much rather see RP have the guts to firmly stand on a libertarian platform and try and get a third party going, he could get a lot of support for that. I'd respect him more. But instead he's jumping on a sinking ship and trying to convince everyone that the boat isnt listing because it was fine 10 minutes ago.
 
new parties can spring up but rarely do new ideals spring up. and neoconservatisim is a from of facisim. that should be pretty obvious. Ron Paul is a paleocon. like Barry Goldwater and Reagen.
 
See, there it is, "neo-conservatism" and fascism used in the same place to describe republicans that have NONE of the same characteristics as fascists, and certainly none of the track record for oppression.

If you're goign to argue that they have some of the same policies, it's simply unfair because everyone assumes republicans are the same as the evil of facism if you make the connection, even if they were to focus on industry in a good way (they'd be like fascists though...).

Goodness, go to Italy and ask if the republicans of America is like the fascists.
 
did you say that "neo-cons" are a form of fascism? yes, yes you did... Your argument must then stem from some sort of similarity, which is unfair to all republicans because they have none of the track record fascism has and should be exempt from the negative connotation, just like liberalism isn't a form of communism.
 
NEOCONS! not all repubs are neocons, if you dont see how neoconservatisim relates to facisim you got some reading to do
 
I can see where you are coming from, but I have to defend Paul on this. If he did stick to his ideals and ran for the Libertarian party, in all reality there is no way in hell he would have any chance to win the Presidency, which is only slightly worse than his long shot now. (Odds are at 7-1, if you were curious.)

Anyway, there is not a SINGLE politician in Washington DC who is completely blameless and always, 100% of the time sticks to their ideals. Ron Paul seems pretty damn close to me, but you can't blame him for running Republican. If he didn't, he would be basically a non-factor and we would be stuck with only good ol' Giuliani, McCain, Brownback, and the whole gang. Instead we now have a radical new candidate who is stirring things up and creating a chance for real change. I would rather have being somewhat misaligned in party choice than being a complete non-factor.
 
I see, so Neo-cons are republicans that the public dislikes, oh hey, I get it now!

As for the point brought up by ^, I understand that, he would have a very slim chance of getting the popularity he has now if he ran true colors. But why should I respect a politician that goes with the majority rather than his/her personal and true beliefs? A libertarian should be proud to declare himself/herself that, not afraid and ashamed to do so. Some could be blame the terrible two party system we've got going in America, but I, like many voters, am still going to doubt those that play a side rather than their true beliefs in order to get elected. Its despicable and unworthy of someone I would ever vote for.
 
Fine, dont vote for him if its that big of a freaking deal to you. Problem solved.

You are getting way to hung up on political technicalities. Just because you think he should be Libertarian doesnt mean a god damn thing to Paul. Hes been in the game long enough to know where the fuck he stands at this point. Quit disrespecting his decisions.
 
Dude, we didn't even have a fucking terror rating before 9|11. Al Qaeda has said it over and over, there will be another event as big if not bigger than 9|11 and we need to bring our A-game if we intend to stop it. I understand it's evasive, I understand we sacrafice liberty for security, but the fact of the matter is we need a defense and any organization to do so will be just like the last.
 
I dunno about you, but honesty and the balls to stand up for what you believe in are big fucking qualities of a good president. RP is exhibiting neither in my opinion based on his decisions. Quit disrespecting my decisions.
 
^exactly.

and all those intelligence agencies do is fight amongst each other! the US has 16 intelligence agencies! how efficient can that be? its like paying 16 guys to do the same job- and thats how it works cause none of them really want to share with each other- cause the more glory their agency gets the more money they get from congress.

have 1. save a ton of money. have no confusion about who knows what.
 
Leaving the UN seems like kind of a terrible idea. Yeah they're bureaucratic and often completely useless but you sort of have to be a member or subscribe to isolationism.
 
Rowen I can see through your bullshit so easy. your defending the motherfuckers who lied us into war, who wrote pnac , who helped design the patriot act, etc and your attacking Ron Paul for not running as a libertarian when i clearly told you he is a traditonal conservative/paleocon. you liberals are so fucking arrogant. go vote for obama or hilary and i gurantee we will be dealing with the same shit we have with bush but with more taxes.
 
And you wackos are fucking psychotic and unrealistic. I really fail to see how I am defending the Iraq war, the patriot act and pnac just by pointing out some of this candidates flaws. You know, that sounds an awful lot like a scare tactic... wow, some things dont ever change with republicans, do they? The Republican party doesnt have "traditional" views anymore in its current state, and in my humble opinion, neither do the dems. And thanks for arrogantly assuming I'm going to vote for Hilary or Obama. I have criticisms for every candidate, and I never am completely happy with any candidate, and I certainly have not decided which one, if any, I'd support as president. Chill the fuck out and try conversing with people instead of shouting.
 
ok yes we need defense nobody is arguing against a defense budget or even a defense department. do you know how propoganda works? how do you think the pentagon/white house judges the "terror level" it has been high for 6 years and even higer at some points and how many people have died? it is a fear tactic and thats all. if terrorisim was actually a threat we would have been attacked again and please do not bring up that bullshit attack on the army base that involved some drunk mexicans or any of the other bullshit the mainstream media spews out, its bullshit. its a fear tactic that helps the military industrial complex, just the the bird flu scare made the company who made the vaccine an assload of money. Rumsfield was on the bod for them. hmmm what a conincedence.
 
by pointing out false flaws you are not defending anything i didint say that. i named a few necons and you defended them claiming that a neocon is any repub the public dislikes which is absurd.
 
You're fucking dumb. First, it's not "Ciada", it's Qaeda. And I'm brainwashed? Yeah, I guess seeing perfectly clear of what terrorists are capable of doing (9|11) means that it was just a one time thing. Why WOULDN'T they attack us again, OBVIOUSLY they hate us and would do anything in their power to harm our country. All I have to say is your a fucking moron and this is the last time I respond to any of your dumb ass, ignorant, goverment-conspiracy-fed bull shit posts.
 
It's not a fucking fear tactic, why the fuck would it be? Every month Al Qaeda is sending us videos of them saying how they plan to fucking hit us again. When something worse happends in this country I'm going to rub it in your face.
 
yea and for you people saying we need defense, agreeded that would be great. But if you mean defense in the guise of offensively attacking countries that have done shit nothing to us then you need to take a serious look around the world and educate yourself instead of spewing shit out your ass. seriously you people are fucking wacktastic
 
Bendito you lack the ability to rationalize jack shit. Don't come in my thread, and think you're doing anything good by calling me a cocksucking wackjob. When you get the ability to make a coherent, mature argument on your political views, I might actually take one of your posts seriously. Until then, fuck off.
 
yes it is fear tactics, in a way helping the terrorists. if it goes up we are in fear and thats what they want. we have been operating in yellow for how long? and nothing has happend exept we feal scared something WILL happen. and in turn we are throwing away our fredoms for a little security over nothing. the terrorists have the easyist jobs in the world right now cause they can just sit back as we live in fear driven by the terror scale or w/e its called and throwing our fredom out the window.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top