ron paul
Dennis Kucinich vs. Ron Paul
Originally posted by Venerable Bede:Libertarian Guilt.
ron paul
Kucinich of course, we vegans got to stick together.
Originally posted by Brain Walrus:i was going to say him, but i thought most "people in the know" hate him now. they need a new slave puppet.
RALPH NADER!!!!
Or we could just wipe our arse with our ballot form…..
;)
Kucinich
Can we write in Bill Clinton? The right wing nut jobs on am radio are still whining and complaining about him and he's been out 7 years!!! so I figured he must've done something really, really right (no pun intended)
I'm seriously thinking about Hillary because that would put Bill back in the Whitehouse and she would just be his mouthpiece…….
Either that or nobody because they're all fake wankers as far as I'm concerned. You've got Mitt Romney, who not only looks like a Thunderbirds puppet, he even has a Thunderbirds puppet name. "Scott, Virgil, Alan, Brains and Mitt"
<img src="http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/wp-content/2007/06/thunderbirds16ns7.jpg" alt=" - " />
Then you've got the baptist fruit loop, Huckaby and having been married into a baptist fruitloop family and lived to tell the tale, he's out….
Obama is about as qualified as my 5 year old, and one step to the right from being a socialist. He could be a good candidate in a few years for those that far to the left, but not at the moment.
Hillary is well…..Hillary. Enough said!
John Edwards is about as appealing as a used car salesman.
Spoiled for choice aren't we??
I'm seriously thinking about Hillary because that would put Bill back in the Whitehouse and she would just be his mouthpiece…….
Either that or nobody because they're all fake wankers as far as I'm concerned. You've got Mitt Romney, who not only looks like a Thunderbirds puppet, he even has a Thunderbirds puppet name. "Scott, Virgil, Alan, Brains and Mitt"
<img src="http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/wp-content/2007/06/thunderbirds16ns7.jpg" alt=" - " />
Then you've got the baptist fruit loop, Huckaby and having been married into a baptist fruitloop family and lived to tell the tale, he's out….
Obama is about as qualified as my 5 year old, and one step to the right from being a socialist. He could be a good candidate in a few years for those that far to the left, but not at the moment.
Hillary is well…..Hillary. Enough said!
John Edwards is about as appealing as a used car salesman.
Spoiled for choice aren't we??
Originally posted by Brain Walrus:Par for the course.
Spoiled for choice aren't we??
I don't know who will get my vote now that Harry Browne is dead :(
May he rest in peace. He tried.
Best thing i saw out of this years crop was Gravel from Alaska, and he bailed early coz nobody wanted to hear an old codger spouting the truth without thought or care of repercussions.He was the first of those going the way of Biden and Dodd. Paul and Kucinich, now there's an independent ticket for ya ;)
Edwards has emerged as the most progressive frontrunner by far. Obama talks the progressive talk but stumbles in the walk. Clinton isn't even running for president. She's running for CEO of USA, Inc.
Ron Paul
What became of the allegations of criminal botnets stumping for Ron Paul? Did it turn out to just be legions of 24/7 online types who were mistaken for bots?
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2007/10/paul_bot
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2007/10/paul_bot
Edwards has emerged as the most progressive frontrunner by far. Obama talks the progressive talk but stumbles in the walk. Clinton isn't even running for president. She's running for CEO of USA, Inc.
my thoughts exactly. while it would be nice to not have a middle-aged or old white male in the oval office, i don't think hilary or obama are right for this year's election. an edwards/obama ticket could be good, though.
besdies hilary being a corporate mouthpiece and consistent war supporter for years, i think we need to get away from this clinton-bush era as fast as fucking possible.
oh yeah, and i'll take the socialist over the libertarian.
Originally posted by They call me Doctor Doom.:It makes complete sense for the spam industry to back Paul. Spammers are increasingly being regulated and Paul wants to eliminate such regulations (not specifically, AFAIK, but in keeping with Libertarian Party priciples).
What became of the allegations of criminal botnets stumping for Ron Paul? Did it turn out to just be legions of 24/7 online types who were mistaken for bots?
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2007/10/paul_bot
Ron Paul, in fact I support him first and foremost, not just against Kucinich. I've been libertarian leaning from the age of 17. As for that bot/spammer bit, it's really not. It's just fanatical people. He wins all those online polls because the average Ron Paul supporter is on at least one ron paul fan site at least once or twice every day. So all of them click on links that one of them finds wherever the poll may be on whatever site and hence he wins.
What blows me away is that the idea of not meddling around in everyone else's country and actually using all that money saved to do things like enable social security to die a dignified death without actually putting seniors out in the cold isn't catching on more. Anyone else think it might be a good idea to actually turn around the reputation of the US around the world, start making friends again? Actually do something about the declining dollar and the out of control Federal Reserve? These aren't crazy ideas. It's just the basic philosophy of take care of your own, and let other people take care of themselves. It is not our place to police the world.
Sorry for rant, but hey, it's primary season and I'm particularly fired up.
What blows me away is that the idea of not meddling around in everyone else's country and actually using all that money saved to do things like enable social security to die a dignified death without actually putting seniors out in the cold isn't catching on more. Anyone else think it might be a good idea to actually turn around the reputation of the US around the world, start making friends again? Actually do something about the declining dollar and the out of control Federal Reserve? These aren't crazy ideas. It's just the basic philosophy of take care of your own, and let other people take care of themselves. It is not our place to police the world.
Sorry for rant, but hey, it's primary season and I'm particularly fired up.
Errr. policing the world???? If Bush was the leader of any other country than the U.S of A he'd be up for war crimes against humanity.
I think a more accurate description would be
bullying the world
I think a more accurate description would be
bullying the world
Ron Paul has so much support at the moment because he's the only chance for a literate Republican in America to participate in a political conversation in '08 because of his stance on Iraq. No other Republican allows for a realistic view on Iraq because they're afraid of alienating the base. It's a little theory I'm working on called "Republican Guilt."
But the truth is, if you dig under the sufrace dust on Ron Paul, you will see his stance on foreign policy among other things, is so insane, no rational human could support the man, lest we go back to the early 1900's. Anyone remember what happened in the next 50 years because of that stance?
Does anyone in America really think citizens of the US could or should live off of only our own resources? Want to talk about an energy crunch - think long and hard about that stance for about 20 seconds.
Don't make the mistake of not liking the status quo by running to the complete opposite side. One extreme does not fix another.
But the truth is, if you dig under the sufrace dust on Ron Paul, you will see his stance on foreign policy among other things, is so insane, no rational human could support the man, lest we go back to the early 1900's. Anyone remember what happened in the next 50 years because of that stance?
Does anyone in America really think citizens of the US could or should live off of only our own resources? Want to talk about an energy crunch - think long and hard about that stance for about 20 seconds.
Don't make the mistake of not liking the status quo by running to the complete opposite side. One extreme does not fix another.
Originally posted by vansmack:It's funny that the Arabic term for "the base" is "Al Qaeda."
No other Republican allows for a realistic view on Iraq because they're afraid of alienating the base
Originally posted by vansmack:Remember, Ron Paul is not about isolationism. Trade with all, treaties with none. Who says we have to rely on our own resources?
Does anyone in America really think citizens of the US could or should live off of only our own resources? Want to talk about an energy crunch - think long and hard about that stance for about 20 seconds.
And yeah, it is more like bullying than policing.
Ron Paul because he reads and is current with what is going on….sucks that Joy told him he has no chance in hell of winning!!!!!!!!!
I imagine the world would become much like Idiocracy under Libertarians…
First off, just because he doesn't use the term isolationism does not mean that he's not an isolationist. The tern non-interventionist is just a modern term for the same doctrine. Unfortunately, Paul relies on 18th century doctrine to defend his isolationsit stance - except the world was vastly different for the US back then when the founding fathers were urging America to focus on building it's democracy rather than getting involved in Europes affairs (And by that, they really meant France). Now that it's the world's model democracy, the rest of the world looks to us and to ignore that responsibility is, without a doubt, isolationism, no matter what term Paul uses.
The world is vastly different today than it was even 8 years ago. The US was not seen as a bully pre-Iraq, at least not to the extent it is viewed today. With great power comes great responsibility, and while the US is viewed as failing on its responsibility and has tarnished its reputation, that pales in comparison to what our reputation would be if we failed to keep our promises to fledgling democracies around the world - democracies we helped build. Democracies would fall around the world, entire races and tribes would be eliminated by genocide, and unstable nations with nuclear weapons (like Pakistan) would be havens for Islamic Jihadists. If it weren't for US troops protecting those nuclear weapons in 2001, there's little doubt that al-qeada would already have them. The world is vastly different today then it was in 1776, and letting your guard down for one instant can kill millions in a second. And I'm not even gooing to get into China and Russia.
His attack on the Bretton Woods instutions is unfounded as well. Yes, reform is needed, but the Bretton Woods institutions have had a much more positive effect on the US economy than it has a negative, especially after WWII in allowing the US to invest in foreign markets and export surplus goods.
The world is vastly different today than it was even 8 years ago. The US was not seen as a bully pre-Iraq, at least not to the extent it is viewed today. With great power comes great responsibility, and while the US is viewed as failing on its responsibility and has tarnished its reputation, that pales in comparison to what our reputation would be if we failed to keep our promises to fledgling democracies around the world - democracies we helped build. Democracies would fall around the world, entire races and tribes would be eliminated by genocide, and unstable nations with nuclear weapons (like Pakistan) would be havens for Islamic Jihadists. If it weren't for US troops protecting those nuclear weapons in 2001, there's little doubt that al-qeada would already have them. The world is vastly different today then it was in 1776, and letting your guard down for one instant can kill millions in a second. And I'm not even gooing to get into China and Russia.
His attack on the Bretton Woods instutions is unfounded as well. Yes, reform is needed, but the Bretton Woods institutions have had a much more positive effect on the US economy than it has a negative, especially after WWII in allowing the US to invest in foreign markets and export surplus goods.