Reply With Quote
Ron Paul would be a ing disaster, if his libertarian fantasies ever became reality (even if Pres, he couldn't write the legislation (but he could screw up the Exec branch, like dubya).
Is Ron Paul right?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...nTtP_blog.html
By Alexandra Petri
He’s got a point. (Richard Ellis - GETTY IMAGES) If someone were visiting from outer space and got wind of the Republican primary and caucus results, he might be a tad bewildered by the coverage. “This is clearly a two-man race now,” he'd say, waving a tentacle significantly. “There's only one candidate capable of a respectable showing on two separate occasions when everyone else but Mitt Romney struggled. Both times, he drew strong, passionate support, and landed in the top tier — a feat no one beside the front-runner could pull off. It's a two-man race now.”
We earthlings would try to explain. “Ah,” we’d say, “but — gee, look, uh, this — you’re talking about Ron Paul.”
“Why is the Mainstream Media not giving the man his due?” the alien would say, sounding a bit more like a Paul supporter every second. “Especially when polls indicate that if he ran as a third-party candidate, he'd pull in about 20 percent of the vote and change the game entirely.”
On Wednesday Paul’s campaign suggested that if you discovered that you were running for the Republican nomination and were neither Ron Paul nor Mitt Romney, the only polite thing to do would be to drop out. Paul is, they point out, the last best non-Romney hope, the only candidate whose results in both New Hampshire and Iowa were nothing to sneeze at, unless you sneeze at pretty decent polling results.
“Besides,” the alien says, “ever since Rick Perry showed up at debates and wandered around saying that he’d like to beat up Ben Bernanke, Paul started to sound like a rational choice.”
There's something about Paul, the contrarian libertarian with fans so devoted you worry they might have tattoos of his wrinkled visage in critical areas. Paul has been fighting the good fight for years, voting no on every uncons utional bill that crosses his path, after lovingly tucking a few earmarks into it.
He brings out the youth. He brings out the People Who Leave Irate Online Comments. He brings out the People Who Believe Cannibal Giants Left Their Bones In The Earth. But nobody’s perfect. Rick Perry doesn’t bring out anybody at all. If you’re angry at President Obama, he’s your guy. If you were angry at George W. Bush, he was also your guy. If you’re angry in general, he’s probably your guy — unless you’ve been intrigued by Newt Gingrich’s recent behavior. You wouldn’t expect Occupants of Wall Street to support any of the other possible Republicans. Thanks to this wildly diverse base of support, he has placed respectable seconds in states where anyone besides Mitt Romney faltered.
“Please, drop out,” he says. “I am doing better than any of you, and I am Ron Paul. Clearly, the voter does not want what you are selling.”
It is difficult to argue with that sort of iron-plated logic.
Besides, after all these years of arguing that Ron Paul is going to be stuck forever with about 25 percent of the vote, now’s the time to disprove that old chestnut.
What does the field have to lose?
Rick Perry is slipping below the threshold of debate eligibility. Possibly voters are just trying to be nice to him. “I’d vote for you,” they murmur, “but then you’d have to show up at another debate.” Jon Huntsman has less support than Stephen Colbert, who is actually trying to be a joke candidate. That leaves Rick “Santorum” Santorum and Gingrich, a man who just compared super PACs to praying mantises and whom Rush Limbaugh is urging to tone down his rhetoric.
Why not abandon ship now?
Ron Paul may be the actual best hope. His demographics are the thing that demographers swoon over late at night. Young people! People from across party lines! Conservatives! Moderates! Those hip, smoking youngsters!
Why can't it work?
Well, someone points out, “He's Ron Paul.”
But besides that.
Ron Paul would be a ing disaster, if his libertarian fantasies ever became reality (even if Pres, he couldn't write the legislation (but he could screw up the Exec branch, like dubya).
^you're an idiot. he would go down as one of the greatest leaders in american history since the revolutionary days. he wants to do things such as, you know, restore freedom and liberty back to this country and balance the budget. crazy huh.
And stop spending trillions on an overseas military presence. Another Ron Paul idea people for whatever reason view as crazy
repeat:
"even if Pres, he couldn't write the legislation (but he could screw up the Exec branch, like dubya)"
UCA and MIC and wealthy would NEVER let their Congressional s allow his fantasies up for legislative vote, never mind be passed.
iow
"Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
Macbeth Quote (Act V, Scene V).
LOL
I never thought I'd agree with boutons on anything but agree that Ron Paul would have a hard time implementing his agenda with the existing congress...
hard?
impossible.
Grow up, Ron Paul
In Ron Paul's ideal America, safety regulations imposed on employers by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration would be a thing of the past. Clean air and water regulations imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency would be no more. Taxpayers would save money since Ron Paul would abolish the Department of Education and cut the Food & Drug Administration budget by 40%. Employers would save money by paying workers as little as they wish, since Ron Paul would abolish the Davis-Bacon Act. Corporate giants would be free to monopolize markets, since Ron Paul opposes federal an rust legislation. And employees would no longer be required to pay into Social Security.
So what would this libertarian utopia look like, if Ron Paul were elected and followed through on his campaign promises?
-Families grieving for loved ones lost due to Massey Energy's negligence in the Upper Big Branch coal mine explosion would have to accept that their relatives were casualties of the invisible hand of the unfettered free market. And Massey would've gotten off scot-free for polluting Martin County, Kentucky's drinking water supply with 300 million gallons of coal slurry.
-Millions of college students dependent on Pell grants would be forced to move back home and work minimum-wage jobs, no longer financially able to further their education. Oh wait-- what minimum wage?
-Food recalls would be a regular occurrence when tainted meat and vegetables hit supermarket shelves and cause record outbreaks of e-coli. And risky new drugs will avoid FDA tests and hit the express lane to the pharmacy, endangering the health of millions.
-Too-big-to-fail banks like Wells Fargo, Citi, Chase and Bank of America would be allowed to merge and/or buy out their compe ors, as would oil giants like ExxonMobil, and Chevron, as would cell service providers like AT&T and Verizon.
-The Social Security trust fund would become insolvent, making retirement that much harder for those who paid into it all their lives.
Ron Paul and his right-libertarian ideology does espouse a new kind of freedom, just as rebellious children who fantasize about running away from home dream of a new kind of freedom. But as much as we may have rebelled against our parents as little kids, we eventually matured and realized that the rules and regulations our parents imposed on us were meant so we'd grow up to be responsible, functioning adults in society.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carl-g...tml?view=print
even if ron gets the presidency, he still needs approval from the senate, this is where i see could be the problem just like obama...
It's a shame Paul has stupid views on things like these, because he's right about tons of other stuff.
I'm sure out of all his agenda items he could get a few passed.
"could get a few passed."
The items above are already on the Repug agenda, without Ron Paul.
We could change the Seal of the U. S. from E pluribus unum to "Will work for Food."
If he really wants all this then why the are corporations so against him?
right because Obama has passed so many laws through the houses
are they against him? RP wants to hand them much more unregulated, unchallenged power than they have now.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 01-12-2012 at 09:09 PM.
how dare you use logic in the RP argument?
Ron Paul 2012: Wall Street Won’t Give me Money
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/2797...al-reserve.htm
At the end of 2011, Paul raised over $25 million. No major Wall Street firm*, however, gave him more than $6,000 at the end of the third quarter, according to OpenSecrets.org.
This may be surprising because Wall Street is generally a big spender on the political campaigns of both Democrats and Republicans.
In 2008, Barack Obama received the second most contributions from Goldman Sachs, Democratic rival Hillary Clinton received the third most contributions from JPMorgan Chase and Republican rival John McCain received the most contributions from Merrill Lynch.
In 2012, Romney is the big Wall Street candidate with Goldman Sachs as his top donor. Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich managed to scrape some money from Wall Street.
Paul, contrastingly, cannot seem to get anything from them; his top three contributors are the U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy.
One possible explanation for Wall Street's stinginess towards him is his staunch stance against the Federal Reserve, which lent $7.77 trillion to troubled banks from 2008 to 2009 and kept interest ultra-low to give Wall Street a highly-profitable risk-free carry trade in 2009.
Another possible reason is that Paul was strongly against the $700 billion TARP bailout for Wall Street in 2008.
In the 2012 presidential race, no viable candidate (President Obama included) holds similar views as him on these issues.
Still, Paul, despite no money from Wall Street, likely raised the second most money in 2011 after Romney largely because of his strong grassroots network of devoted supporters.
boom roasted
Wall St estimates, accurately, that RP doesn't have a chance.
Wall St is pouring money into both Barry and Willard Gecko, since one them will be Pres, not RP.
El Che would normally agree with this reasoning, except, Rick Perry got money. Rick ing Perry
try again.
The Youthful Magic of Ron Paul
By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
12 January 12
outh Carolina Republican Senator Jim DeMint, the darling of the Tea Party wing nuts of the GOP, is urging Republican candidates to listen to Ron Paul. "One of the things that's hurt the so-called conservative alternative is saying negative things about Ron Paul," DeMint told conservative radio host Laura Ingraham. "I'd like to see a Republican Party that embraces a lot of the libertarian ideas."
Why the sudden enthusiasm of Republican leaders for Ron Paul? Credit his surprisingly strong showing in New Hampshire, where 47 percent of primary voters between the ages of 18 and 29 voted for him.
No other Republican candidate has come nearly as close to winning over young voters - and the GOP desperately needs young voters. The median age of registered Republicans is rising faster than the median age of America.
The Republican right thinks Paul's views on the economy are responsible for this fire among the young. Yesterday evening, on Larry Kudlow's CNBC program, I squared off with Larry and the Wall Street Journal's Steve Moore. Both are convinced young people are attracted by Paul's strict adherence to the views of Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, and Paul's desire to move America back to the gold standard.
Baloney. The young are flocking to Ron Paul because he wants to slice military spending, bring our troops home, stop government from spying on American citizens, and legalize pot.
So do I, but I somehow doubt Jim DeMint would advise Republican candidates to listen to me, even if I were a Republican candidate for President.
Paul is attractive to younger voters precisely because of positions he takes that are anathema to the vast majority of the Republican base, including almost all Tea Party Republicans.
If other Republican candidates want to cozy up to him, fine. But if they do, they'll have a lot of explaining to do in Bluffton, South Carolina.
On the other hand, if Republicans - or Democrats, for that matter - want to win over much of the nation's young next November, they'd do well to listen carefully to Paul's positions on national defense and civil liberties.
http://www.readersupportednews.org/o...ic-of-ron-paul
Boutons doesn't know what freedom is. he only believe what hos progressive handlers tells him.
Sure, he would have a hard time getting things done unless he can rally the public to put pressure on then. Still, he has the veto power to stop authoritarian encroachment.
Wild Cobra with the mother ing goods
WC was perfectly OK with retroactive immunity for telcos that sucked in warrantless TB of customer data fed to dubya's Exec.
The argument here was "If you have nothing to hide, don't worry"
And of course, UCA knowing essentially everything about their customers, and selling it everywhere, is perfectly OK. Only the govt is guilty "unreasonable search" of private data.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
