• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Why did no one back Ron Paul?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

GobBluth

Senior member
Sep 18, 2012
703
45
91
Getting out of the ME is a great idea, my issue with it is that it goes to the point of being isolationist.
Being isolationist in an increasing global world will only hurt America in the long run.
Well there certainly is a line that has to be drawn.

I'm not saying that we should isolate ourselves. We will still have a UN/NATO presence and provide oversight to world agencies. But deploying our troops, with our resources, and spending our money on their infrastructure has to stop. That is where Ron Paul had it right.
 

nextJin

Golden Member
Apr 16, 2009
1,848
0
0
Because Ron Paul wants to basically stick his head in the sand when it come to some of these countries.
Yes because we need to go get them thar terrorists! We should invade the entire fucking middle east to prevent them from taking us over!

Quick question, how do you win a war on terror by winning the hearts and minds of the people whose families are killed by you? How do you win a war against a tactic? What are the measurements of victory? Are you willing to go over there and kill them to protect the McDonalds down the street?

Paul talked about washing our hands of the bullshit and if anyone fucked with us on our soil get a declaration of war, go fuck them up and come home. He talked about blowback which apparently dumb asses like you think was something made up by people who blame America for 9/11.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,164
0
0
That about sums up freedom and liberty.
Yeah, it's unfortunate that libertarians, who supposedly worship freedom and liberty as their core tenants, have no idea what those concepts even mean. Psst: the state is not the only thing that can take away a person's liberty. Libertarians may claim to understand this, but their so-called doctrine suggests otherwise.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
Yeah, it's unfortunate that libertarians, who supposedly worship freedom and liberty as their core tenants, have no idea what those concepts even mean. Psst: the state is not the only thing that can take away a person's liberty. Libertarians may claim to understand this, but their so-called doctrine suggests otherwise.
Care to give examples where they would start taking away a persons liberty?
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,050
6
81
Care to give examples where they would start taking away a persons liberty?
Well, common sense in the real world shows, if you have a problem as a average man with a corporate dominated industry, you have no legal recourse (unless you are rich enough to afford fancy lawyers) Letting the "free market" run amok is the fast track to serfdom.

"personal liberty" is the most ironically stupid thing to come from so called libertarians mouths.

It's like they are so hyped up on cheerleading the corporate PR/Birch society message their brains fell out.
 
Last edited:

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,164
0
0
Care to give examples where they would start taking away a persons liberty?
I didn't say that libertarians would take away a person's liberty. I said that libertarians incorrectly assume that only the state can take away a person's liberty.

Simple example. A corporation dumps toxic waste. That restricts your freedom of movement and use of lands, and if it makes you sick, it further restricts your mobility and choices. Yet if the government tells the corporation that they can't dump the toxic waste or will be subject to fines and penalties, the libertarians screams that the corporation's liberty is being taken away. That is because libertarian ideology is premised on the false assumption that only the state can impair liberty.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
Well, common sense in the real world shows, if you have a problem as a average man with a corporate dominated industry, you have no legal recourse (unless you are rich enough to afford fancy lawyers) Letting the "free market" run amok is the fast track to serfdom.

"personal liberty" is the most ironically stupid thing to come from so called libertarians mouths.
Uh, the 'average man' can always seek violence when the "systems" of justice are being used against him. It would be perfectly fine within the non-aggression most believe in as well. It doesn't even have to be justified to us, it has to be justified to themselves and that is all that truly matters. The issue though is that these "industries" gain their control because something seeks to control those industries.

Honestly everything is fucked and no system is right or wrong, they are all based on perspective and seeing as perspective is reality we're doomed to constantly be confused.


woolfe, your example is poor because you're viewing "positive rights" there is no such thing as a "positive right" those are fallacies created by wanabe slave owners.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
Yes because we need to go get them thar terrorists! We should invade the entire fucking middle east to prevent them from taking us over!

Quick question, how do you win a war on terror by winning the hearts and minds of the people whose families are killed by you? How do you win a war against a tactic? What are the measurements of victory? Are you willing to go over there and kill them to protect the McDonalds down the street?

Paul talked about washing our hands of the bullshit and if anyone fucked with us on our soil get a declaration of war, go fuck them up and come home. He talked about blowback which apparently dumb asses like you think was something made up by people who blame America for 9/11.
While I agree that we should get the hell out of a lot of those countries, as it sits there are no US embassies in Iran so there is no pulling out to do there. You and every other Ron Paul asshat can have your little circle jerk but the whole "As long as it isn't on US soil" is bullshit and is what let Hitler and Germany become what it did.
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,303
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
The fact he couldn't win/carry the congressional district he has represented for the past 16 years speaks volumes as to the amount of support he had for winning the RNC Presidential nomination.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,050
6
81
Uh, the 'average man' can always seek violence when the "systems" of justice are being used against him.
And when the capitalists overreach this always happens, violence and redistribution of wealth. But I reject the Leninist notion that violent revolution is the path to socialism.

Maybe not even voting or working within the system works either.

But violent revolution? We always get screwed.

Heres how it works, capitalist screw up, people starve, and riot. A reformist group arises in the chaos and sooner or later compromise with the leaders of industry and capital who own most land/wealth anyhow in the name of ending chaos. Reformers get their bellys scratched and the capitalists are in control again.

The problem with the endless revolution is that we have not socially caught up to our science. This will take personal change and a lot of old discrimination be weeded out in a world society. I think the internet is speeding this aspect up. I hope. Because endless war and pitting one against one another is very dangerous in times where our technology has things like nuke missiles. We are damn lucky to still be on this planet imo still. But at the same time it is encouraging.

After a few million years of social evolution on this planet since we were apes I do have hope for the species. But then I can be labeled an idealist if you wish. It to me is a matter of seeing the old glass half full or not by default. Pessimism really never got me anywhere in the long run irl.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
And when the capitalists overreach this always happens, violence and redistribution of wealth. But I reject the Leninist notion that violent revolution is the path to socialism.

Maybe not even voting or working within the system works either.

But violent revolution? We always get screwed.

Heres how it works, capitalist screw up, people starve, and riot. A reformist group arises in the chaos and sooner or later compromise with the leaders of industry and capital who own most land/wealth anyhow in the name of ending chaos. Reformers get their bellys scratched and the capitalists are in control again.

The problem with the endless revolution is that we have not socially caught up to our science. This will take personal change and a lot of old discrimination be weeded out in a world society. I think the internet is speeding this aspect up. I hope. Because endless war and pitting one against one another is very dangerous in times where our technology has things like nuke missiles. We are damn lucky to still be on this planet imo still. But at the same time it is encouraging.

After a few million years of social evolution on this planet since we were apes I do have hope for the species. But then I can be labeled an idealist if you wish. It to me is a matter of seeing the old glass half full or not by default. Pessimism really never got me anywhere in the long run irl.
We could always try communism. What could go wrong?

Oh ya…..
 

DCal430

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2011
6,020
9
81
If elections were won by campaigns and debates this man would have won in a landslide. His campaigns were pure gold. His agenda was to keep the government out of individual lives, end affirmative action (thank god), and voted against the Patriot act! Just to name a few.

Now, yes he wanted to cut departments like Education, Social Security, the CIA, etc. But when you read deeper. He doesn't want to eliminate those services, but the cabinets and departments that govern them because they are out of control.

Just looking for everyone's 2 cents. Please don't flame me, I'm merely trying to educate myself on why America wouldn't side with this guy.

Why no love for Paul?
This is just a bunch of nonsense.

Ron Paul would have allowed for:

The return of school prayer
The overturning of Roe V Wade
The return of segreation
The elimination of jury trials

In Ron Pauls mind if states wanted to do these things they should have a right to, he pushed for the eliminations of the people protection of these things.
 

nextJin

Golden Member
Apr 16, 2009
1,848
0
0
While I agree that we should get the hell out of a lot of those countries, as it sits there are no US embassies in Iran so there is no pulling out to do there. You and every other Ron Paul asshat can have your little circle jerk but the whole "As long as it isn't on US soil" is bullshit and is what let Hitler and Germany become what it did.
LOL no rebuttals other than omg Hitler!

Tell me which middle Eastern country will be the next Hitler? Also please enlighten us on how exactly Hitler came to power?

The Iran comment (or what ever it was you were trying to point out) is whole heartedly irrelevant and why you even mentioned them in this context is baffling.

Did the US shoot a Iranian civilian airliner out of the sky? See? Completely sidetracked but still relevant to the discussion and on point while being true.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
Steeplerot, I'm not asking for an organized violent revolution. I'm not even suggesting one be undertook by those that feel wronged. I'm simply stating the option is there and it is always there. Not to mention why does one need to be organized or have a group behind him in order to have his own revolution? I believe I'm my own revolution unto myself and if I felt required to act I would do so without organizing others to my cause. If my death is the result, oh well at least I lived true to myself.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,709
3,168
126
I love Ron Paul, but unfortunately [mostly] honest politicians don't get elected.
you really can`t be serious....
what you meant to say was unfortunately politicians whose ideas are antiquated cannot get elected....
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
LOL no rebuttals other than omg Hitler!

Tell me which middle Eastern country will be the next Hitler? Also please enlighten us on how exactly Hitler came to power?

The Iran comment (or what ever it was you were trying to point out) is whole heartedly irrelevant and why you even mentioned them in this context is baffling.

Did the US shoot a Iranian civilian airliner out of the sky? See? Completely sidetracked but still relevant to the discussion and on point while being true.
Do you really think Saddam would have stopped at Kuwait if the US and other nations hadn't intervened?
 

wirednuts

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2007
7,121
2
0
Don't get me wrong, having a different perspective was a good thing, bu his domestic and foreign policy were pure lunacy and simply wouldn't work in the modern world.

But then again when your competition is Bachmann, Gingrich, and Perry it is easy to appear like a genius.
this is it. ron paul has some great ideas, and i applaud him for destroying candidates just by telling the truth. i definitely dont agree with all of his ideas, especially the foreign policies, but i do appreciate him for being 100% real no bullshit.
 

wirednuts

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2007
7,121
2
0
This is just a bunch of nonsense.

Ron Paul would have allowed for:

The return of school prayer
The overturning of Roe V Wade
The return of segreation
The elimination of jury trials

In Ron Pauls mind if states wanted to do these things they should have a right to, he pushed for the eliminations of the people protection of these things.
yeah i dont think people hear everything he says. they just hear "weed will be legal" and they love him.
 

DucatiMonster696

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2009
4,269
1
71
Our current government demonstrably proves that large government is a boon for those who support large government on both sides of the table.

Large corporations love it because their money can buy more influence and power. They can leverage political parties to always support their interests and bail them out when the need arises.

Unions, and other special interests with leftists ideals love it as well because the expansion of government runs parallel to their views in which government powers expand and individual freedoms are removed for the "Greater Good".

Be it Ron Paul, Gary Johnson or anyone else advocating a reduction in the size, scope and powers of government, these individuals will always run into resistance from those who benefit from manipulating the current system or those who wish to expand it to smother everyone else with their "good intentions" and eventual pathway to hell.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,050
6
81
Steeplerot, I'm not asking for an organized violent revolution. I'm not even suggesting one be undertook by those that feel wronged. I'm simply stating the option is there and it is always there. Not to mention why does one need to be organized or have a group behind him in order to have his own revolution? I believe I'm my own revolution unto myself and if I felt required to act I would do so without organizing others to my cause. If my death is the result, oh well at least I lived true to myself.
Human interaction is political in itself, and asserting yourself in a society doubly so. Thus if you are revolutionary it must start at each individual.

Lest we get fooled again by power.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwnZYY-CDXo
^good stuff
 
Last edited:

wirednuts

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2007
7,121
2
0

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,050
6
81
We could always try communism. What could go wrong?

Oh ya…..
If you speak of state-capitalist top down socialism-for-the-elite government. Yeah, hows that working out for America? We all see how it worked out for the Russians.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY