Reasons to vote for Ron Paul

[soundforbjt]

Reasons to vote for Ron Paul : To silence the Paul-Bots.

 

[momeNt]

I didn't know we were looking for one another.

"Living breathing document" is a code word used by Statists, activists and community organizers. Suddenly a Libertarian as President gains some legitimacy, especially being that Mr. Paul and I at least agree on the fundamentals, and he believes in the rule of law.

For instance, Ron Paul in the Oval Office means handfuls of czars would be getting pink slips, sent packing back toward the crony corporate world from whence they came.

I found you! Mwwwwaaah

 

[Anarchist420]

First off, the luxury of being able to write what we are now is because an interventionist policy by France, set by a king. The whole foundation of your libertopianism is shaky at best, if only because of that.

Second, how would Ron Paul have dealt with Hitler?

First of all, hitler never could've come to power if Wilson hadn't been President. Wilson and Lincoln were pretty much the most authoritarian and statist Presidents, even more than FDR. Wilson was the anti-libertarian (the Anti-Ron Paul) President, if you will.

2nd of all, Dr. Paul would've opened the borders to the refugees. FDR made sure that Hitler would kill all of them. Churchill did the same (as FDR).

3rd of all, hitler and stalin would've killed each other trying to conquer Eastern Europe. Chamberlain's goal was for that to happen, but Churchill fucked it all up. Germany had no intentions of screwing with Britain until after Churchill bombed German civilians as soon as Germany started attacking poland. And Europe was in a fascistic mood at the time anyway. If we voted for FDR 4 times, then why would the majority of Europe have wanted liberty?

Churchill was the ultimate instigator of WWII, not Hitler, not Stalin, and not even FDR.

That said, Hitlers are a moot point when one country is libertarian, because libertarian countries would let the refugees in and America could've crushed the nazis if they even tried to invade us (although they weren't even considering it, because hitler and stalin would've killed each other if Churchill had let them).

 

[IceBergSLiM]

I got wrapped up in the "lets be different and pick somebody non status-quo" when I voted for Jesse Ventura while I was going to the UofMN. At the time I was paying ~$9,000/yr in tuition and R&B. Now that cost is more than $23,000/yr because of him and his follow-up clowns. Public education DOES have a place in this society, especially at a higher level and fools like him have been undercutting that. Let's not even get started on the other idiocy that he started, including slashing MNDOT budgets that underfunded infrastructure, including bridge and highway inspections.

Presidents can do enough damage on their own, as we've seen more recently.

Every president in history has done something that damaged the country. How is that a logical reason to continue moving this country in the wrong direction by voting for status quo puppet politicians.

 

[airdata]

*20+ year static voting record.
*20+ years of talking about things that matter

These are the things people call him crazy about. Because, really... politicians are lying, scheming scumbags. right? They stick to political party talking points.

Ron Paul talks about things that matter. Ron Paul was talking about all of the problems we're facing today 20 years ago and of course nobody listened. We care more about if a president is getting a blow job than if the central banking system is actively looting peoples retirements and completely bankrupting our entire country.

That stuff just isn't important as talking about the standard stuff like abortion and other social things that don't matter in the grand scheme of things.

 

[LegendKiller]

*20+ year static voting record.
*20+ years of talking about things that matter

These are the things people call him crazy about. Because, really... politicians are lying, scheming scumbags. right? They stick to political party talking points.

Ron Paul talks about things that matter. Ron Paul was talking about all of the problems we're facing today 20 years ago and of course nobody listened. We care more about if a president is getting a blow job than if the central banking system is actively looting peoples retirements and completely bankrupting our entire country.

That stuff just isn't important as talking about the standard stuff like abortion and other social things that don't matter in the grand scheme of things.

You can talk about 100 things that "mattered", have 10 of them become true with time, but have not seen how it would occur or how to even prevent it other than to just say "throw the baby out with the bathwater because the Constitution says so".

 

[LegendKiller]

First of all, hitler never could've come to power if Wilson hadn't been President. Wilson and Lincoln were pretty much the most authoritarian and statist Presidents, even more than FDR. Wilson was the anti-libertarian (the Anti-Ron Paul) President, if you will.

2nd of all, Dr. Paul would've opened the borders to the refugees. FDR made sure that Hitler would kill all of them. Churchill did the same (as FDR).

3rd of all, hitler and stalin would've killed each other trying to conquer Eastern Europe. Chamberlain's goal was for that to happen, but Churchill fucked it all up. Germany had no intentions of screwing with Britain until after Churchill bombed German civilians as soon as Germany started attacking poland. And Europe was in a fascistic mood at the time anyway. If we voted for FDR 4 times, then why would the majority of Europe have wanted liberty?

Churchill was the ultimate instigator of WWII, not Hitler, not Stalin, and not even FDR.

That said, Hitlers are a moot point when one country is libertarian, because libertarian countries would let the refugees in and America could've crushed the nazis if they even tried to invade us (although they weren't even considering it, because hitler and stalin would've killed each other if Churchill had let them).

The Entante was already winning before we joined, any victory might have been less lopsided, but it would have occurred. The 1918 offensive, while close to winning, was already withered. The entire economy of Europe was dead, as such, the Entante would have forced Germany to reach nearly the same terms, including the occupation of the Saar and Ruhr. The reparations would have occurred because the Entante needed to rebuild.

Who knows what Paul would have done then. Times were different.

Most accounts disagree with your assertion of Hitler and Stalin and Britain. I can't find anywhere that mentions Britain bombing German civilians first. However, Sea Lion was prepared beginning in 1939, during the time where Hitler was at peace with Stalin (which was always known to be subterfuge, but was signed BEFORE Sea Lion's ultimate drafting). At no time did Hitler NOT think about eventually invading Britain AND Russia. Nonetheless, the fact remains that NEITHER Britain or Russia would have survived without FDR's intervention through L&L and other war material production and support, even Stalin recognized that Russia would have fallen without US support. Further, Churchill was known to say that the U-Boat issue would have resulted in the eventual crushing of the UK, especially considering the lack of L&L destroyers and other warships.

To say that Hitler was anything but the ultimate instigator with Lebensraum and other delusions of grandeur is epically intellectually bankrupt. No wonder why you went to a 3rd tier school and ultimately came out lacking any consideration for logic or history.

By the time Hitler took over the UK, Russia and the oil fields to the south, it would have been too late to counter them. Combined with Japan they would have easily surrounded the US and eventually won.

 

[Anarchist420]

The Entante was already winning before we joined, any victory might have been less lopsided, but it would have occurred. The 1918 offensive, while close to winning, was already withered. The entire economy of Europe was dead, as such, the Entante would have forced Germany to reach nearly the same terms, including the occupation of the Saar and Ruhr. The reparations would have occurred because the Entante needed to rebuild.

Who knows what Paul would have done then. Times were different.

Most accounts disagree with your assertion of Hitler and Stalin and Britain. I can't find anywhere that mentions Britain bombing German civilians first. However, Sea Lion was prepared beginning in 1939, during the time where Hitler was at peace with Stalin (which was always known to be subterfuge, but was signed BEFORE Sea Lion's ultimate drafting). At no time did Hitler NOT think about eventually invading Britain AND Russia. Nonetheless, the fact remains that NEITHER Britain or Russia would have survived without FDR's intervention through L&L and other war material production and support, even Stalin recognized that Russia would have fallen without US support. Further, Churchill was known to say that the U-Boat issue would have resulted in the eventual crushing of the UK, especially considering the lack of L&L destroyers and other warships.

To say that Hitler was anything but the ultimate instigator with Lebensraum and other delusions of grandeur is epically intellectually bankrupt. No wonder why you went to a 3rd tier school and ultimately came out lacking any consideration for logic or history.

By the time Hitler took over the UK, Russia and the oil fields to the south, it would have been too late to counter them. Combined with Japan they would have easily surrounded the US and eventually won.

Well, my source is Patrick J Buchanan's "Churchill, Hilter, and an Unnecessary War", and I'm not exactly a fanboy of him even though he's better than most.

I guess Patrick J buchanan could be wrong, but I still don't think US intervention was necessary to save Americans or refugees. Churchill waged total war on Britain in WWI, and the Treaty of Versailles was certainly unfair to the Germans. To me, what he says makes sense though (that Britain was going to attack Germany if they attacked Poland) and that Britain was the aggressor.

I had thought Chamberlain said shortly before he died that his goal was to steer hitler and Russia into conquering Eastern Europe, colluding, and bleeding each other to death.

Keep in mind that although he was an evil monster, Hitler did everything he could to avoid war with America (he ordered his uboats to unconditionally refrain from attacking American ships) and that FDR had to find a backdoor into europe's affairs.

I still think that even if he had beat stalin, the Nazi military would've been too drained to attack other countries.

 

[Yreka]

I like Ron Paul, but some things about him really put me off.
(Gold standard and his position on the killing of the "US Citizen" recently for example)

I can't remember who said it, but it really summed up RP for me.

"He's like a delicious Ice-Cream Sundae with with a tablespoon of dogshit in it"

 

[benzylic]

Keep in mind that although he was an evil monster, Hitler did everything he could to avoid war with America (he ordered his uboats to unconditionally refrain from attacking American ships) and that FDR had to find a backdoor into europe's affairs.

Germany declared war on America first, right after Pearl Harbor i think.

 

[Anarchist420]

Germany declared war on America first, right after Pearl Harbor i think.

That was because of the treaty they had with Japan. FDR started American involvement.

 

[LegendKiller]

Well, my source is Patrick J Buchanan's "Churchill, Hilter, and an Unnecessary War", and I'm not exactly a fanboy of him even though he's better than most.

I guess Patrick J buchanan could be wrong, but I still don't think US intervention was necessary to save Americans or refugees. Churchill waged total war on Britain in WWI, and the Treaty of Versailles was certainly unfair to the Germans. To me, what he says makes sense though (that Britain was going to attack Germany if they attacked Poland) and that Britain was the aggressor.

I had thought Chamberlain said shortly before he died that his goal was to steer hitler and Russia into conquering Eastern Europe, colluding, and bleeding each other to death.

Keep in mind that although he was an evil monster, Hitler did everything he could to avoid war with America (he ordered his uboats to unconditionally refrain from attacking American ships) and that FDR had to find a backdoor into europe's affairs.

I still think that even if he had beat stalin, the Nazi military would've been too drained to attack other countries.

You're relying on one book, I am relying on dozens I have read.

US intervention was necessary to protect US interests and allies as well as the long-term outlook. This is something that Paul doesn't get, power begets power, wealth begets wealth, in the end, aggregation of both occurs when "evil" people take it upon themselves to take it from the less wealthy or less powerful. I'd love to think that the world is an egalitarian utopia, it isn't. And the US is not an island.

Hitler absolutely did not do everything he could do to avoid war with the US, two US ships were attacked and one sunk over a month before the declaration, while they may have been guarding a convoy heading into the US, they were US ships.

I absolutely disagree. The east German army was in good shape until the sieges, had Stalin not had US armaments and the time they bought him to move manufacturing inland, he would have been sunk. The remaining Wehrmacht was in great shape and could have easily handled the UK, including Sea Lion if Germany had the time and opportunity to re-arm for a longer sea/air campaign to support an invasion. Even a mere 1-year extension of the war without invasion and/or strategic bombing would have resulted in Germany greatly expanding their technology. Had the US not been involved early and with 24-hour strategic bombing, Germany's economic heartland would certainly have pumped out far more material.

We might not have been directly involved until we entered and began sending troops, but the L&L made a *MASSIVE* difference and was anything but non-interventionist.