General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI say make Ron Paul a frontrunner. Lets disect his rhetoric.
He is allowed to spout no true scotsman pie in the sky. Always saying, like the REAL COMMUNISTS, that as soon as opposition is vanquished, a romantic utopian era will commence.
When you get into the nuts and bolts, PEOPLE WILL DIE. As has been seen. The Libertarian party has gained the keys to the Rethug washroom and has scrawled all their trashtalk upon the toilet stalls.
I have been debating libertarians for years. I do not fear their sway. I know their soft spots. Bring it on.
And please, enough with the Ron Paul troll accusations.
Should we not dispatch with the Paul poo in rational fashion, the Libertarian party may be given the keys to the Rethug klown kar for reals.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)no matter what. I think he doesn't stand a chance except in Iowa and NH. The southern block really doesn't relate to him even though he's from Texas.
I say watch South Carolina to see what's really happening with the GOP field.
Meanwhile
SEPTEMBER: Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin gives an interview on Fox News in which she announces that "it's not too late" for her to enter the race for the 2012 GOP nomination. "Who knows what might happen in the future?" she chirps to an incredulous Gretchen Carlson. Despite the fact that the nomination has already been awarded to Romney, contributions pour in to Palin's campaign headquarters. Palin uses the contributions to purchase a yacht, which she christens the "One Nation" and uses on an extended "campaign tour" of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
WingDinger
(3,690 posts)fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)they know how to destroy but cannot build anything long lasting or representative the majority. Very anti-democratic and their end game is for wealth to control all.
getdown
(525 posts)their bumpersticker non-logic? I've met their youth brigade pamphletting and they seem all Stepford-y. Can't have a conversation. Just slogans
reACTIONary
(5,771 posts)...they get caught up with an ideology or a religion. Mostly, they just outgrow it. IMO the thing that helps is to offer some respectful criticism of their ideological assumptions. Maybe even just "Well, I don't agree with that, it would really hurt a lot of people." It won't do any immediate good. But someday, when they are ready to move on, they may remember.
getdown
(525 posts)PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)Then they can declare that his defeat is because he's just too pure and good for our corrupt system. We don't *deserve* Ron Paul, in much the way we don't *deserve* a puppy!
WingDinger
(3,690 posts)PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)The whole 'end the war on drugs' shit he preaches is just that - shit that he is blowing out his ass. He has no plans, no power to 'end' it as POTUS. But sounds cool, maaaan.
And then there is his UN/NWO bullshit is just that. Bullshit. The UN has no way to affectthe 2nd Amendment or any portion of the US Constitution. He is a paranoid, xenophobic crazy-man. aPaulogists are like cult members.
Sure, he opposes military intervention in foreign wars, but not out of a sense of decency or pacifism; he would also withdraw from the UN (including humanitarian and peacekeeping operations, foreign aid would disappear, and if you think "unstable" regions are bad now, imagine what they would be like with the double-edged sword of multinational (read: US) corporate interests moving unchecked throughout the developing world AND an absence of monitored unilateral military involvement in those regions. Paul's position isn't one of altruism; it's one of isolationism. Not that I'm an advocate of First World military involvement in foreign problems, but look at what isolationism has netted in the past.
I don't know much about economics, but a return to the gold standard appears to me to be a likely trigger for severe deflation. Furthermore, while operating in gold might have worked 200 years ago, in a truly global economy, it doesn't.
He would remove social spending for almost everything, assuming the states would pick up the bill. First of all, where does he think the states will get the money for this? From the federal government, of course! So what's changed?
He claims to want to lower tuition, but what he wants to do is actually remove government control of tuition, and (wait for it) let the private sector deal with it. Do you actually believe that will result in lower education costs? Really?
None of us have time to cover point for point why Paul's selective and obsolete vision of a libertarian utopia won't work.
Let's just say it is the perpetual motion machine of political dogma; if it worked it would be really impressive and everyone would be happy, but it doesn't.
And, they have a paranoid nutter at the helm. Better luck next time.
WingDinger
(3,690 posts)It is all about keep your hands off my stack o cash. Couched in catchphrases.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)do over and over again, yet they still attract a good amount of voters. I think if there is ever a true 3rd party threat in this country,it won't come from the left, it will come from the libertarians. It doesn't matter if you can logically show that they're nuts, it never does.
WingDinger
(3,690 posts)There will be a zombie GOP. POSSESSED by the Libertarians. They talk about it endlessly. The Libert. KNOW that our system discourages third parties. So, they just eminent domain the rethugs.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)There are a few things that the Libertarians agree with us on. Taking those victories and getting legislation passed while we can would be good.
Puregonzo1188
(1,948 posts)bailout, and the drug war and making Obama defend those positions? Is that what you really want? Because that's how this is going play off. Yes, he's a racist, a homophobe, and a misogynist and his polices are insane (he wants to privatize the FAA), but he's fairly good at evading this issues or at least not having them stick to him.
I would cringe at this spectacle.
WingDinger
(3,690 posts)over bailout will translate to action from us, on too big to fail, justice against bank fraudsters, and reform of gov agencies. All good outcomes. Splitting the rethugs on these matters, is good.
He is NOT fairly good at evading. He giggles. That doesnt cut it. Then, he charicatures the issue. then, he throws out all babies with their drowning pools, hoping we will climb in. He does not front well, for anything but late night party sessions, discussing matters in hyperbolic terms. He is the pied piper of dope smoking rethugs.
Not that theres anything wrong with meds.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)public tour of the white house while Obama is somewhere in DC.
The American people are not clamoring for an end to the "drug war", and the bailout is easy to defend.
Its not going to "play" at all.
Hopefully Ron is first or second in Iowa, with Romney third. Then Romney wins NH, Ron will fade there. SC will go to Gingrich or maybe (please GOD!!) Santorum.
But past there Paul is toast. I just hope he survives long enough to gum up the works for the GOP.
JohnnyRingo
(18,641 posts)I don't want the country motto become "If you don't work, you don't eat".
People who support this kind of non-governance are usually young people with decent income and a sense of self assuredness that they can be even greater independently of anyone else. They want a dog eat dog world while their teeth are still nice and sharp.
SixthSense
(829 posts)if a traditional GOP candidate wins, millions will die in the wars they start - guaranteed. Listen to the likes of Santorum, he's virtually promised to deliberately start a war with Iran no matter what - and Iran, unlike Iraq, will be no small feat to conquer. It's as if he wants to restart the Cold War, and it would - it would force Russia and China to support Iran for their own self-preservation.
If the libertarians take over, some people will die from neglect, but not anywhere near the body count a conservative would produce. And the problems caused by them are easier to mitigate (e.g. we could set up SS/Medicare/Medicaid equivalents on the state level and leave the federal government out of it).
Perhaps the most dangerous part of getting a conservative is that when we do go to war under them (and they leave no other possibility on the table) almost all the Democrats will be conned and intimidated into supporting another insane war, just as with Iraq.
I fear a conservative far more than a libertarian. We could survive Ron Paul, especially since Congress would limit his ability to act. We could not survive a conservative who now has the unlimited power to start wars (thanks to Obama for the destruction of the War Powers Act over Libya) and assassinate political opponents (thanks to Obama signing NDAA).
While a libertarian would eschew those powers, a conservative would use them (frothing at the mouth all the while, probably), and that is what really scares me. It makes me want to look up backup plans like fleeing to Canada.
WingDinger
(3,690 posts)VIOLENCE, where you start the history clock, when the dominant culture says to. Thus, you can attack many while protecting your so called core principles.
NNN0LHI
(67,190 posts)If some reporter, doesn't even have to be a good reporter, got him into a locked room where he couldn't just giggle and run away from, where he actually had to answer the questions, that is all it would take to show exactly how much of a wackadoodle he is.
Don