More Ron Bashing

[reverendjeremiah]

From over here in Australia I see Ron Paul as the best of a bad batch. This is a very scary thought. From what I've seen his brand of libertarianism is all about the rights of the state, not the rights of the individual, to the point of advocating that states be allowed to be as oppressive as they damn well please. This is not my brand of libertarianism. I don't see the evil in the federal government laying down the law (over state government) if doing so gives more people more freedom (Though I do see the dangers in giving the federal government all that power, any decision can be changed by the Bachman's or Santorums should they be swept to power, then, rather than having to flee your state, you'll have to flee your country).

For me in terms of priorities social liberalism comes first, fiscal conservatism comes second. Now obviously in a financial crisis the fiscal becomes more important than it previously was, but what was his focus all these years, fiscal or social issues?

To me, social liberalism is all that is needed. Fiscal policies will fall right into place as the free people see fit to apply, as long as social liberalism reigns supreme in the minds of the majority of a nation.

Sadly, we arent anywhere near this. Of course if you compare us to other nations (like Saudi Arabia) we look MASSIVELY social liberal, but compared to otherwestern nations we are on the bottom end.

---

Of course everything is obvious.. NOW!.... 10 YEARS LATER, YOU TOOL !!!

Are you suggesting that none of this was common knowledge before Paul "predicted" it? Are you suggesting that Paul is some kind of prophet? When has America NOT supplied WEAPONS to our enemies through corrupt deals between corporations and government? When has America ever NOT kept troops at the countries they invaded? When has America ever NOT unilaterally supported Israel over all other neighboring mid east states? When has the UN ever NOT complained about Americas unilaterally support of Israel? America has almost always, since the inception of the UN, ignored the wishes of its councils. This was all common knowledge before Ron predicted it, yet you wish me to ignore everything I remember reading, seeing, and learning about the world and Government in the 80's and to instead think that Ron just "predicted" this?

You also have alot of distorted interpretations in your line by line dissection of Paul's speech.

I did no such thing. I shortened his words in my post to save space on the forum, yet I answered every single "prediction" he made in context.

You admit the U.S government supplies weapons to our enemies! (which is true, but not obvious) Yet you think it is utterly impossible for 911 to be an inside job?!! You completely contradict yourself. Why?

corporations going into corrupt deals with politicians to sell weapons to our enemies for profit is NOT the same as the government going into a deal with our enemies to attack us on our own soil. Please note the difference of what I said now, and then scan back on my previous posts with better clarity please.

Why wouldn't 911 be an inside job if our government is corrupt enough to sell weapons to terrorists who use them against our own troops and innocent civilians??? Umm, do you see perhaps ANY direct correlation there??

extrodinary claims require extrodinary evidence. We have ample evidence of American corporations inline with the government to sell weapons to those we consider our enemies. We have little to no proof that 9-11 was an inside job. Please note the difference that I am basing my answers on evidence, and not conspiracy theories.

Now, since you made the claim that 9-11 was an inside job, and have used such a conspiracy theory to try to discredit me, I insist that you present all of the credible evidence that you have to prove that 9-11 was an inside job.

You simply just don't like Ron Paul no matter what he says.

Thats not true either. A few of his predictions were not as obviously based in historical precedence, and they were duly noted by me in the previous list. There are some things that I like about Ron. Sadly they are few and far between all the right wing theocratic nonsense that generally makes up his agenda.

You probably don't like anybody.

That was a personal attack. You have used a conspiracy theory to slander my credability, presented no proof or reference to back up any of your claims, and now you are susing straw man tactics to attack what youthink is my personal character which has nothing to do with this discussion. To be honest I even like you Bgood. Even though we dont agree on things, I can see some qualities in you that I can relate to. There are also many people on this board whom I consider pretty good friends to chat with and only wished they lived close (or vice versa) so that I could introduce them to my family, and my food covered grill, and my cooler filled with ice cold beer.

You are a nihilist and a backward thinker.

Incorrect. I have made plenty of opinion posts on this site about nihilism. Although I do agree with many things in its concept, I do not agree that personal purpose is useless and wrong. I am in actuality an Absurdist. I will not get into that discussion right now as I have ample times discussed it on this forum and this topic is supposed to be about Ron Paul...not if I am a nihilist.

Thx for posting the video clip and your commentary though. I think you just helped support my much stronger argument.

Someone would have to help you, because you hardly presented any proof or references to the claims you have made on this topic.

---

Noam Chomsky (a left libertarian) explains it exactly the way I see it about Ron Paul (a right libertarian)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAt1ySNF6...re=related

He rags Ron for suggesting that the church will take care of people in need.