[split]Ron Paul plays Yahtzee with Nazis

[cratehorus]

I am pleased to see the RNC has enough standards to throw out the assholes who did that deplorable action.

They only did it because they got caught. I wonder how many more such instances are going on that don't involve news crews?

ALOOOOT more than this..... everything from throwing nooses at black senators to killing congressmans cat's and throwing them on their doorsteps.......and every single time, asshole teabagger's just claim it was obama's undercover secret ninja agents that did it.....even though they ALWAYS fully support whatever they did

Teaparty = KKK
Libertarian = Neo-Nazi

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/20...acist.html

http://www.alternet.org/story/146190/the...resentment

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2012/05/03/...ty-racism/

http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/...g-tea-part

[Darth]

Neo nazi? Feel free to go perform anatomically impossible sex acts on yourself.

[Tiberius]

Libertarian = Neo-Nazi

Hi,

I'm a Libertarian and I'm not a Neo-Nazi. Nice to meet you.

[A Theist]

Libertarian = Neo-Nazi

Hi,

I'm a Libertarian and I'm not a Neo-Nazi. Nice to meet you.

That's far left pompassity for you. Doesn't look like they tolerate being disagreed with very well.

Left=Hostile, detatched, naive, intolerant, tantrum throwing elitist pompouasses.

[cratehorus]

Libertarian = Neo-Nazi

Hi,

I'm a Libertarian and I'm not a Neo-Nazi. Nice to meet you.

Ron Paul is a neo nazi who wants to abolish the civil rights act, the voting rights act, affirmative action, women's suffrage, the minimum wage, child labor laws, and of course all programs like social security, medicare, medicaid, welfare, unemployment insurance, any and all labor safety, or enviromental protection groups like Osha or the FDA...... etc

This is all without mentioning the fact that he's a rabid anti-semite, who tells people letting Iran have nuclear weapons is somehow "non-interventionism" and has 20 something accusations of involvement with white supremacists, from letting them work on his campaign, to accepting donations from the leader of the KKK, and refusing to give it back after numerous jewish organizations demanded..... Obama however gave back campaign donations just because it was from someone who was, sued for not paying his rent, at a luxury condo complex.....

[A Theist]

Hi,

I'm a Libertarian and I'm not a Neo-Nazi. Nice to meet you.

Ron Paul is a neo nazi who wants to abolish the civil rights act, the voting rights act, affirmative action, women's suffrage, the minimum wage, child labor laws, and of course all programs like social security, medicare, medicaid, welfare, unemployment insurance, any and all labor safety, or enviromental protection groups like Osha or the FDA...... etc

This is all without mentioning the fact that he's a rabid anti-semite, who tells people letting Iran have nuclear weapons is somehow "non-interventionism" and has 20 something accusations of involvement with white supremacists, from letting them work on his campaign, to accepting donations from the leader of the KKK, and refusing to give it back after numerous jewish organizations demanded..... Obama however gave back campaign donations just because it was from someone who was, sued for not paying his rent, at a luxury condo complex.....

.....are you saying that whatever Ron Paul may or may not have done justifies a blanket condemnation of all Libertarians as neo-nazis?

[Tiberius]

Ron Paul is a neo nazi

Incorrect.

who wants to abolish the civil rights act

...because he believes it is unconstitutional since it affects the private sector. A number of Supreme Court decisions agree with him in this area. His reasons for opposing the legislation have nothing to do with a disdain for civil rights; he's a libertarian...civil rights are his main focus, hence his opposition to the PATRIOT act, to give just one example.

the voting rights act

...because it contained sections that affected property rights.

affirmative action

Making a decision to hire someone based solely on the colour of their skin is racist, end of story. Two wrongs do not make a right. Affirmative action is disgusting legislation that punishes qualified people because of the colour of their skin.

women's suffrage

[citation needed]

the minimum wage

Abolishing the minimum wage allows for the creation of menial jobs that are simply not worth whatever the minimum wage is set to. They allow for the growth of small business, and they get people into work who would otherwise be sitting at home.

child labor laws

...for jobs which children are perfectly competent at. Most of us had paper rounds, some of us worked sweeping floors. Ron Paul worked for his family as a child, helping out on the farm. He opposes legislation that would restrict or outlaw this.

social security

Which is unconstitutional since everyone is required by law to pay it. People who want it should have it, and it can be provided by private sector institutions just as easily.

medicare, medicaid, welfare, unemployment insurance, any and all labor safety, or enviromental protection groups like Osha or the FDA...

Numerous reasons why each is either currently in a bad state or should not be the responsibility of the government.

This is all without mentioning the fact that he's a rabid anti-semite

[citation needed]

who tells people letting Iran have nuclear weapons is somehow "non-interventionism"

It is. Interventionism is exactly what we are doing now: telling them they can't have such weapons. We are intervening on their business. The last time I checked, we aren't at war with Iran, and there is no reason to impose such sanctions. Bullying other countries because you have nukes is not the right way to go about foreign policy.

and has 20 something accusations of involvement with white supremacists, from letting them work on his campaign, to accepting donations from the leader of the KKK, and refusing to give it back after numerous jewish organizations demanded..... Obama however gave back campaign donations just because it was from someone who was, sued for not paying his rent, at a luxury condo complex.....

Oh wow, so you're telling me this guy doesn't mind what you believe, or how you spend your money, even if what you believe and how you spend your money is completely legal? Yeah...sounds like a real nasty character. Get real.

It's called "fact checking". You should try it some time.

Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_...f_Ron_Paul
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/04/26/ro...ily-farms/

[A Theist]

Ron Paul is a neo nazi

Incorrect.

who wants to abolish the civil rights act

...because he believes it is unconstitutional since it affects the private sector. A number of Supreme Court decisions agree with him in this area. His reasons for opposing the legislation have nothing to do with a disdain for civil rights; he's a libertarian...civil rights are his main focus, hence his opposition to the PATRIOT act, to give just one example.

the voting rights act

...because it contained sections that affected property rights.

affirmative action

Making a decision to hire someone based solely on the colour of their skin is racist, end of story. Two wrongs do not make a right. Affirmative action is disgusting legislation that punishes qualified people because of the colour of their skin.

women's suffrage

[citation needed]

the minimum wage

Abolishing the minimum wage allows for the creation of menial jobs that are simply not worth whatever the minimum wage is set to. They allow for the growth of small business, and they get people into work who would otherwise be sitting at home.

child labor laws

...for jobs which children are perfectly competent at. Most of us had paper rounds, some of us worked sweeping floors. Ron Paul worked for his family as a child, helping out on the farm. He opposes legislation that would restrict or outlaw this.

social security

Which is unconstitutional since everyone is required by law to pay it. People who want it should have it, and it can be provided by private sector institutions just as easily.

medicare, medicaid, welfare, unemployment insurance, any and all labor safety, or enviromental protection groups like Osha or the FDA...

Numerous reasons why each is either currently in a bad state or should not be the responsibility of the government.

This is all without mentioning the fact that he's a rabid anti-semite

[citation needed]

who tells people letting Iran have nuclear weapons is somehow "non-interventionism"

It is. Interventionism is exactly what we are doing now: telling them they can't have such weapons. We are intervening on their business. The last time I checked, we aren't at war with Iran, and there is no reason to impose such sanctions. Bullying other countries because you have nukes is not the right way to go about foreign policy.

and has 20 something accusations of involvement with white supremacists, from letting them work on his campaign, to accepting donations from the leader of the KKK, and refusing to give it back after numerous jewish organizations demanded..... Obama however gave back campaign donations just because it was from someone who was, sued for not paying his rent, at a luxury condo complex.....

Oh wow, so you're telling me this guy doesn't mind what you believe, or how you spend your money, even if what you believe and how you spend your money is completely legal? Yeah...sounds like a real nasty character. Get real.

It's called "fact checking". You should try it some time.

Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_...f_Ron_Paul
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/04/26/ro...ily-farms/

Agreed with everything except for Iran. Iran has already made it's intentions plain that it does not tolerate Israel existing in the Middle East, nor does Iran tolerate the U.S. and the West. I think a nuclear armed Iran is a threat that we should take seriously.

[Tiberius]

Agreed with everything except for Iran. Iran has already made it's intentions plain that it does not tolerate Israel existing in the Middle East, nor does Iran tolerate the U.S. and the West. I think a nuclear armed Iran is a threat that we should take seriously.

I'd agree with you, but the fact remains that all the countries that oppose Iran having nuclear weapons, have nuclear weapons. How do you think it comes across to a country like Iran when other countries start to try and dictate what sorts of weapons it can have (even defensively). Israel isn't innocent in this conflict either.

Besides, any country with the intellectual know-how to create such weapons would understand the suicide move it would ultimately be to use them provocatively. At this point, we're in a stalemate in regards to nuclear weapons, and it wouldn't surprise me if a country never uses one in an act of aggression ever again.

I'm personally in favour of the Ron Paul approach: let other countries do what they want, but maintain diplomatic relationships and try to influence them that way. No good comes of trying to bully someone.

[Anomalocaris]

I think nuclear armed Iran is no threat to the security of any western country at all, nor indeed even the existential security of Israel. Iranian regime may be a theocracy, it is by no means a fundamentalist theocracy. Regime survival is its first and dominant concern. It's second concern is the same as those of any other major country - to maximize its own freedom of action within its sphere of influence, while diminishing the freedom of action of all of its neigbhors.

Israel has made an art out of subtlely exploiting the holocaust by insinuating anything which constrains Isreal's ability to do whatever it wants in its own neighborhood constitutes an existential threat to Israel. This is total bullshit. Isreal already has far more freedom of action without local counterbalance than any other power in all of Euroasia. No superficially larger, stronger, wealthier country on that entire land mass, Not Russia, Not Germany, Not France, Not UK, Not China, Not Japan, has the sort of carte blanche to use force outside of its internationally acknowledged border without credible threat of serious reprecussion like Israel really has.

Israel has used it to act in a way that is fundamentally against American interests.

A nuclear armed Iran does not endanger the survival of Israel, but does constrain Israel's freedom of action. This is a good thing for America.

Ideally, from American point of view, no country in the world should have any freedom of action but to do precisely what benefits the US. We certainly lack the power to implement this through our own power. But we should not give up opportunity to let local or regional power constrain each other, and through balance of power nullify each other and leave the US the defacto hegemon. And we would be idiots to let an already regionally dominant power like Israel acquire further freedom of action by giving it our idiot blessing to knock out what would counterbalance its influence, and this leave the US with even less power to influence its future actions. We should let Iran go nuclear so as to build a true balance of power in the Middleeast that would keep both Israel and Iran in check.