The ineffectiveness of Ron Paul

Discussion in 'Elections & Campaigns' started by Jason Bourne, Mar 3, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Big George

    Big George Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ever been on a University campus?
     
  2. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    yes, we know, it's different this time.
     
  3. AbsoluteVoluntarist

    AbsoluteVoluntarist New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    5,364
    Likes Received:
    102
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So if it happens a sufficiently long time ago and there are "extenuating circumstances" that means it can't happen here? What if there are "extenuating circumstances" again, like a worldwide, perpetual "war" on an undefined enemy for undefined reasons?

    We can play this game all day. I understand you're a state-worshiper for who knows what reason, but if you don't want to attempt to back you position, why say anything. There is no reason to continue to respond to you until you say something substantive.
     
  4. Big George

    Big George Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Actually, you're an ignorant smart-arse who knows absolutely nothing about me.


    So... Do you have something substantive to say, or are you going to continue to wallow in your drivel?
     
  5. Roelath

    Roelath Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    4,099
    Likes Received:
    255
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Aren't you the exact same person who attacks the Person and the not the message? Now you're asking him to say "something substantive"? Haha you're too funny! Attacks people and once attacked asks for people to actually debate.
     
  6. Dr. Righteous

    Dr. Righteous Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    10,545
    Likes Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Geez... :nerd:

    He said young people voted for Obama, and that they'll vote for anyone who will legalize drugs.

    Obama did not legalize drugs, therefore his argument that young people vote for anyone who will legalize drugs is a complete fabrication.

    You people are AMAZING. :disbelief:
     
  7. Dr. Righteous

    Dr. Righteous Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    10,545
    Likes Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Many times. I see no evidence that young people are any more foolish than old people, in regards to their political decisions.
    What point are you trying to make?
     
  8. Dr. Righteous

    Dr. Righteous Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    10,545
    Likes Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    No surprise that your response completely lacked substance or any rebuttal to what he said.
    You're not fooling anyone. Everybody knows that your entire debate style revolves around personal attacks and zero facts.
     
  9. Big George

    Big George Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That could ONLY be because you're one of the ignorant young people, who thinks you already know everything.


    So... Are you going to show me where SiliconMagician said Obama legalized drugs, or would you rather just admit that you were lying? It's one or the other.
     
  10. Dan40

    Dan40 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Messages:
    11,560
    Likes Received:
    274
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Because I don't support a 77 year old loser that wasted 3 decades in Congress doing nothing, I have no idea of what is going on in the world?

    UnHuh,,,,,Sure, Gotcha.

    Only mindless Paulobots know the "truth" All, slightly less than 10% of you know all, the 90+% know nothing. I'll agree that the 90+% are NOT very smart, since they did elect obama. But they ARE smart enough to have NOT elected Paul in 88 or 08 or 12. Even Texans were smart enough to not make him a Senator.

    So again, come Nov 7 when there is no Paul anymore, are you going to pitch a tent, trespassing and occupying someone's private property, rejecting their freedom? And for an encore you can take a crap on a cop car and rape a coed.
     
  11. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes I have. At the least I find his philosophies quite interesting, yet very idealistic. However, when I read his works, I always remember the statement by James Madison in Federalist No. 51:

    This statement speaks to me more than Rothbard's opposition to the state speaks to me. When I read Man, Economy, and State, with Power and Market, I saw a lot of aspects that I agreed with, but most that from my perspective are over the top. Therefore, I understand some of the reasons why an anarcho-capitalist is opposed to the state, yet respectfully disagree with their sentiments.
     
  12. Big George

    Big George Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It would indeed be wonderful to live in a perfect world. Unfortunately, we don't. And as much as we all don't want to admit it, that is EXACTLY why we actually NEED government. The debate is in how MUCH government we need.
     
  13. Krypt

    Krypt New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And that is the platform that Paul expresses....the less the better. This notion he wants to abolish government all together is absurd.
     
  14. Big George

    Big George Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Did I say he wants to abolish all government?
     
  15. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Such a notion is a baseless talking point. From my perspective, less government is not always better government. Unfortunately, such a notion is as much of a logical fallacy as the false claim that Paul intends to abolish government altogether.
     
  16. hoytmonger

    hoytmonger New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,246
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Government, too, is made of men which explains Rothbard's animosity towards the state. Government, also, is a monopoly which has no real checks and balances so the lack of competition leads to authoritarianism.

    Also... the Federalist Papers were a bunch of lip service to convince New York to ratify the Constitution. They had no other purpose. Alexander Hamilton was a boldfaced liar in the statements he wrote... he didn't believe in a limited government.
     
  17. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have no problem with your opinion on Alexander Hamilton because I understand your opposition to central banks. However, James Madison, despite working with a man that was his polar opposite was in fact an anti-federalist. He later became an opponent of the first central bank, and a strong advocate of state's rights and limited government.
     
  18. hoytmonger

    hoytmonger New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,246
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As a Virginian I am quite fond of the Virginian founders, Madison, Mason, Jefferson and Henry to name the more popular. Hamilton, and Madison from what I've read, supported a more centralized government from the start. After ratification Hamilton worked to make the US federal government more centralized while Madison supported the rule of law.
     
  19. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    instead you have spent decades supporting a bunch of collectivists and corporatists that have done much, .......to hurt us.
     
  20. Big George

    Big George Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ...and Ron Paul is one of them.
     
  21. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am sorry, but you are seriously equating Ron Paul to a collectivist or a corporatist? You obviously need to go back to political science 101.
     
  22. Big George

    Big George Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ron Paul has been able to spend these decades in Congress, doing virtually nothing, because he is OWNED by corporations - just like all the other Congressmen. To say otherwise is to claim that his c*rap doesn't stink.
     
  23. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It does not stink, it is odorless, if one is to equate his ideology to feces. Tell me, which corporations own Ron Paul? Koch Industries? Goldman Sachs?
     
  24. Big George

    Big George Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm pretty sure you'd know about the taste, smell and texture of Ron Paul's poop. And for obvious reasons.
     
  25. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ironically, I do, yet I use it against supporters of Ron Paul. However, I do not make statements that according to Newt Gingrich would be pious baloney. I would rather be neck deep in Paul's fecal matter than your illegitimate meat. At least understanding the former is worthwhile.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page