| Music Man 08.10.2007 03:11 |
Opinions? link link link |
| Mr.Jingles 08.10.2007 07:18 |
Dr. No can be quite unpredictable. I just have doubts on whether he is a Libertarian trying to disguise himself as a Republican, or the other way around. link |
| magicalfreddiemercury 08.10.2007 11:35 |
With Ron Paul in office, I'm afraid even less would be accomplished than normal. His views on many issues - like the IRS, for example - are not supported by any majority. IMO, he'd spend his time fighting with congress and leaving us stuck in limbo. For that reason, I think a vote for Ron Paul is a wasted vote. Not that I'd vote for an anti-choice candidate anyway, but that's not the point. |
| Music Man 08.10.2007 17:22 |
I see your point, MFM, but there are several reasons why that logic is erroneous. If Ron Paul gets elected, perhaps he would initially spend much of his time arguing with Congress. However, it would indicate a change in the way the American people are thinking, and eventually, Congressional elections will follow suit. Eventually, it would lead us back to where we belong - aligned with the Constitution of the United States of America: aligned with freedom and peace, and the protection of our rights. The neo-conservative Republicans won't do it. The Democrats certainly won't do it. Why is it that he's the only candidate who upholds the true American values set in the Constitution? Of course, personally, the abortion issue is a non-issue to me, so I may have a different stake in the matter. To me, both sides are equally justified, and it all comes down to only one point: where life begins...which is impossible to determine, so all debate on the topic is completely moot. Of course, if I had to choose, I would definitely be in the pro-choice camp, because when there is no clear stance on which alternative best protects freedom, it shouldn't be up to the Federal government to decide. As to Mr. Jingles, I think that Ron Paul is the most predictable candidate out there. His views are clear, and set in classically liberal ideas. It is obvious in every sense of the matter that he is a Libertarian running as a true Republican - for peace, for liberty, for small government. The fascist (I get to be TQ for a day), Christian fundamentalist Republican Party we all know and hate - they are a relatively new phenomenon that (hopefully) Ron Paul will be able to steer America away from. What is so annoying about Libertarianism? What is so extreme? Last I checked, our country was founded upon it, and it is prevalent in just about everyone's values, Democrat or Republican. I typed a lot, so forgive me if it got a little incoherent. Edit: Also, Ron Paul would not need Congressional approval to effectively eliminate the IRS or the Fed, as both fall under his executive authority. |
| Mr.Jingles 08.10.2007 20:15 |
I don't think there's anything wrong with Ron Paul being a Libertarian, I think that the problem is the not many people know where does he exactly stand politically speaking and at times it seems like even he doesn't know. Although I think I need to inform myself more about Ron Paul. So far what I've seen, seems a bit confusing. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 08.10.2007 21:46 |
<font color=666600><b>Music Man wrote: I see your point, MFM, but there are several reasons why that logic is erroneous. If Ron Paul gets elected, perhaps he would initially spend much of his time arguing with Congress. However, it would indicate a change in the way the American people are thinking, and eventually, Congressional elections will follow suit.What you say sounds logical, but I wonder... if he spent much of his time arguing with Congress, would the change in the way the American people are thinking change yet again? We are an impatient lot - just look at Congress' approval right now. Though I understand there are many reasons they are so unpopular, the main reason is that a majority of the American people voted them in with the unrealistic expectation that they'd immediately reverse bush's Iraq blunder. They did not accomplish that, and so frustration and disapproval have mounted. Unless RP accomplished several major advancements within weeks of taking office, I doubt people would continue to support him. That in turn could mean backpedaling to what we know despite how much we dislike it. Although... now I'm going to contradict myself... more and more people from both parties are switching to independent. It would be interesting to see how much leeway they'd give a guy like this... or if they're even ready for him in the first place. Hmmm. Not sure what you've done with this thread, Music Man, but I find my position wavering. That's totally unfamiliar territory to me. |
| Music Man 09.10.2007 12:11 |
Mr.Jingles wrote: I don't think there's anything wrong with Ron Paul being a Libertarian, I think that the problem is the not many people know where does he exactly stand politically speaking and at times it seems like even he doesn't know. Although I think I need to inform myself more about Ron Paul. So far what I've seen, seems a bit confusing.I might be able to help you out a little, or clarify/explain Libertarian philosophy to you, if you tell me which parts you are confused about. I've watched a lot of the debates and such, and he seems to be one of the most consistent politicians on that stage (including the Democrats). Then again, it could be because I am more familiar with the philosophy, but I would be glad to explain anything sketchy. |
| Music Man 09.10.2007 12:26 |
magicalfreddiemercury wrote: What you say sounds logical, but I wonder... if he spent much of his time arguing with Congress, would the change in the way the American people are thinking change yet again? We are an impatient lot - just look at Congress' approval right now. Though I understand there are many reasons they are so unpopular, the main reason is that a majority of the American people voted them in with the unrealistic expectation that they'd immediately reverse bush's Iraq blunder. They did not accomplish that, and so frustration and disapproval have mounted. Unless RP accomplished several major advancements within weeks of taking office, I doubt people would continue to support him. That in turn could mean backpedaling to what we know despite how much we dislike it. Although... now I'm going to contradict myself... more and more people from both parties are switching to independent. It would be interesting to see how much leeway they'd give a guy like this... or if they're even ready for him in the first place. Hmmm. Not sure what you've done with this thread, Music Man, but I find my position wavering. That's totally unfamiliar territory to me.I tend to agree that America is impatient, and not always logical in their decision process. We're also a slow-moving bunch, and we like to know that something is going to work before we do it. But the thing that sets Ron Paul apart from the other candidates is that he uses historical precedent and other evidence to make his points. If you missed it, he and Giuliani got into a scuffle one debate when Ron Paul insisted that the attacks were the result of blowback from our occupancy in the Middle East. Giuliani took exception to this, despite the overwhelming evidence for it. In return, Paul "gave Giuliani a reading assignment," which included foreign policy books as well as the 9/11 commission report that explicitly states Paul's assertion. Along with that, all of his other "radical ideas" have historical precedent, even within this nation's history (although perhaps one of our resident history buffs could review his claims, far better than I could). Anyway, within weeks of taking office, he would eliminate the IRS - in the first week he has said. He would abolish income taxes. For that alone I'd give him my vote, despite that other Republicans (maybe Democrats?) are also considering this path. I think there is currently a shift in political thought in America toward Libertarian thought, especially in young people, where he is getting much support. It would not surprise me if this political philosophy would prevail in the 21st century, in America. |
| Micrówave 10.10.2007 11:56 |
Ron Jeremy 2008 I mean, lets stop screwing around and get it done. |