Ron Paul to retire from congress.

[ShackledNation]

Abortion?

No. Governor Johnson is pro-choice.

Governor Johnson is what we would call a states right proponent. He doesn't feel that the federal government has a right to ban things such as Marijuana, Gay Marriage, Abortion, Death Penalty, etc. However, if a state wants to ban something then that's well within their right. (Excluding things guaranteed by the Constitution, of course.)

I could be wrong about that being his philosophy, but that's what I've taken away from hearing him speak.

That's where him and I diverge. I don't think that a state (take New York) has any more of a right to take away my civil liberties than the Federal Government.

Well, according to our Constitution, they do. I would agree that states shouldn't take away rights, however. I thought you were talking about abortion, which is why I asked. My position on that issue is similar to Ron Paul's.

 

[uscitizen]

Paul is gonna retire before they cut congressional retirement benefits.

 

[Modbert]

Well, according to our Constitution, they do. I would agree that states shouldn't take away rights, however. I thought you were talking about abortion, which is why I asked. My position on that issue is similar to Ron Paul's.

I don't blame Governor Johnson for his position. I hold no-ill will towards him for it since he's very honest and transparent about it. I just think about applying that philosophy today and in the past. And it just doesn't sit well with me.

 

[Modbert]

Paul is gonna retire before they cut congressional retirement benefits.

I remember when Boehner said that our healthcare under their plan was going to be as good as Congress's. I laughed because I knew that there was no way that was happening.

 

[Kuros]

Abortion?

No. Governor Johnson is pro-choice.

Governor Johnson is what we would call a states right proponent. He doesn't feel that the federal government has a right to ban things such as Marijuana, Gay Marriage, Abortion, Death Penalty, etc. However, if a state wants to ban something then that's well within their right. (Excluding things guaranteed by the Constitution, of course.)

I could be wrong about that being his philosophy, but that's what I've taken away from hearing him speak.

That's where him and I diverge. I don't think that a state (take New York) has any more of a right to take away my civil liberties than the Federal Government.

You mean, if you were gay, you'd be afraid that the state (let's take New York) would take away your Federal right to gay marriage?

But you'd have it completely backwards. DOMA is Federal legislation, and New York just passed a gay marriage law. If you don't like NY, take Mass. Massachusetts' Supreme Court protected gay marriage under an equal protection analysis. The US Supreme Court hasn't.

So ask yourself: which protects your civil liberties more effectively?

(a) one Federal legislature and Supreme Court

or (b) fifty state legislatures and fifty state supreme courts, which may exceed but not go below the Constitutional floor (b/c of the 14th amendment) set by one US Supreme Court.

 

[Avorysuds]

Personally, I'm not surprised by this. It's all-in. Go big or go home. The guy is 75 years old, and he isn't going to live forever. If he loses this cycle, he would be 81 in 2016.

Americans have gotten more tolerant of their political candidates over the years, but I wouldn't see them voting for someone who is 81.

I think the candidate that the GOP should throw their weight behind in the future is Gary Johnson. He's clearly the smartest of the bunch and certainly the most reasonable.

If it wasn't for the fact that he and I disagree on a major point, I'd probably throw my support behind him in 2012 and the future.

I wouldn't say he is the smartest of the bunch, I like him a healthy amount but he stands very little chance and I like Ron Paul more who stands a much better chance, still small but much better... If the media pushed Gary and he were the guy to beat I would probably support him.

Lets just say I’m not shocked you support the guy who is an anti Obama candidate by policy but has zero chance atm… If Gary won the nomination I’d bet you would turn on him, that’s my opinion.

 

[Modbert]

I wouldn't say he is the smartest of the bunch, I like him a healthy amount but he stands very little chance and I like Ron Paul more who stands a much better chance, still small but much better... If the media pushed Gary and he were the guy to beat I would probably support him.

Lets just say I’m not shocked you support the guy who is an anti Obama candidate by policy but has zero chance atm… If Gary won the nomination I’d bet you would turn on him, that’s my opinion.

Did you not bother to read?

A.) I already have stated that I wouldn't support Governor Johnson in the general election because of our disagreement in philosophy. However, I have praised him many times on USMB over the past year for his common sense on many issues.

B.) You support Ron Paul more than Gary Johnson because as you said, he has a better shot at winning. I don't base my support of candidates based on that.

C.) I don't have to support the guy in order to say nice things about him.

 

[Modbert]

You mean, if you were gay, you'd be afraid that the state (let's take New York) would take away your Federal right to gay marriage?

But you'd have it completely backwards. DOMA is Federal legislation, and New York just passed a gay marriage law. If you don't like NY, take Mass. Massachusetts' Supreme Court protected gay marriage under an equal protection analysis. The US Supreme Court hasn't.

So ask yourself: which protects your civil liberties more effectively?

(a) one Federal legislature and Supreme Court

or (b) fifty state legislatures and fifty state supreme courts, which may exceed but not go below the Constitutional floor (b/c of the 14th amendment) set by one US Supreme Court.

Not quite. What I'm saying is that on the issue of gambling for example, I don't believe that a state like New York has the right to ban it. Just like I don't believe the Federal Government does. That's all I'm saying really.

Another example, up until very recently, Florida had a ban on Gay Adoption. Eventually, it was overturned by one of the courts down there. However, I'm of the opinion that they didn't have a right to ban it in the first place.

 

[Avorysuds]

I wouldn't say he is the smartest of the bunch, I like him a healthy amount but he stands very little chance and I like Ron Paul more who stands a much better chance, still small but much better... If the media pushed Gary and he were the guy to beat I would probably support him.

Lets just say I’m not shocked you support the guy who is an anti Obama candidate by policy but has zero chance atm… If Gary won the nomination I’d bet you would turn on him, that’s my opinion.

Did you not bother to read?

A.) I already have stated that I wouldn't support Governor Johnson in the general election because of our disagreement in philosophy. However, I have praised him many times on USMB over the past year for his common sense on many issues.

B.) You support Ron Paul more than Gary Johnson because as you said, he has a better shot at winning. I don't base my support of candidates based on that.

C.) I don't have to support the guy in order to say nice things about him.

Did YOU even bother to read?

A) I said I'm not shocked you support someone that stands no chance who on almost any issue is opposed to you. I only mentioned if he won the nom you would turn on him, meaning you would attack him because you never really liked him. You use Gary as a way to attack others, "he's the smartest of the bunch" crap

B) I said I liked Ron Paul more and then I added he has a better chance... Not that I base my support off who has the better chance. I even said I'd support Gary IF he won the nomination, not if I felt me might have some slight chance to beat out Ron Paul for the nomination.

C) I don't have to either, but I don't use them as a way to pretend I can see out of my own box but really only do it to attack others.

 

[Antiderivative]

rw kooks are up in celebration. They hate people who put principle before party.

 

[Avorysuds]

rw kooks are up in celebration. They hate people who put principle before party.

Good post! I mean really good, not bigoted at all!

 

[Modbert]

Did YOU even bother to read?

A) I said I'm not shocked you support someone that stands no chance who on almost any issue is opposed to you. I only mentioned if he won the nom you would turn on him, meaning you would attack him because you never really liked him. You use Gary as a way to attack others, "he's the smartest of the bunch" crap

B) I said I liked Ron Paul more and then I added he has a better chance... Not that I base my support off who has the better chance. I even said I'd support Gary IF he won the nomination, not if I felt me might have some slight chance to beat out Ron Paul for the nomination.

C) I don't have to either, but I don't use them as a way to pretend I can see out of my own box but really only do it to attack others.

A.) I don't use Gary as a way to attack others. I've always been pretty upfront about how I feel about him as a candidate. The GOP has the best shot of beating President Obama I think by nominating him as their candidate. Gary Johnson and I are not "almost any issue opposed."

Like I said before, we have our agreements and disagreements.

B.) That's exactly where I was getting at. You're attacking me for saying something nice about Gary Johnson because Johnson represents the biggest threat to Ron Paul. And when I say biggest threat, I mean that he takes away the most votes from Paul. I understand you want Paul to win, however that's no reason to attack someone simply because they have something nice to say about Johnson.

C.) I'll repeat myself, I'm not using Johnson simply as a way to attack others.

Like I said before, you're lashing out against me because Gary Johnson is a threat to Ron Paul's candidacy. If Gary Johnson somehow won the nomination, I'd have the same agreements and disagreements with him that I have now.

 

[Antiderivative]

rw kooks are up in celebration. They hate people who put principle before party.

Good post! I mean really good, not bigoted at all!

Why thank you. I remember clearly when rw kooks censored and attacked Paul unmercifully. They even hijacked the tea party from him.

If despising rw kooks makes me bigoted, then so be it. However, these people are an enemy to humanity.

 

[Avorysuds]

Did YOU even bother to read?

A) I said I'm not shocked you support someone that stands no chance who on almost any issue is opposed to you. I only mentioned if he won the nom you would turn on him, meaning you would attack him because you never really liked him. You use Gary as a way to attack others, "he's the smartest of the bunch" crap

B) I said I liked Ron Paul more and then I added he has a better chance... Not that I base my support off who has the better chance. I even said I'd support Gary IF he won the nomination, not if I felt me might have some slight chance to beat out Ron Paul for the nomination.

C) I don't have to either, but I don't use them as a way to pretend I can see out of my own box but really only do it to attack others.

A.) I don't use Gary as a way to attack others. I've always been pretty upfront about how I feel about him as a candidate. The GOP has the best shot of beating President Obama I think by nominating him as their candidate. Gary Johnson and I are not "almost any issue opposed."

Like I said before, we have our agreements and disagreements.

B.) That's exactly where I was getting at. You're attacking me for saying something nice about Gary Johnson because Johnson represents the biggest threat to Ron Paul. And when I say biggest threat, I mean that he takes away the most votes from Paul. I understand you want Paul to win, however that's no reason to attack someone simply because they have something nice to say about Johnson.

C.) I'll repeat myself, I'm not using Johnson simply as a way to attack others.

Like I said before, you're lashing out against me because Gary Johnson is a threat to Ron Paul's candidacy. If Gary Johnson somehow won the nomination, I'd have the same agreements and disagreements with him that I have now.

Ok dude, whatever... One of the biggest anti Government, anti Government HC guy next Ron Paul is your pick, LOL. And no I don't think Gary is a threat to Ron Paul, Mitt is a threat so I'm not "lashing out" because of that.

Funny thing is I'd bet issue by issue you agree with Mitt on more issues and more important issues than Gary by far...

 

[Modbert]

They even hijacked the tea party from him.

I remember that quite well. The original incarnation of the Ron Paul Tea Party group looks nothing like the group that is called the Tea Party today.

 

[jillian]

Just got that on the radio. I will post articles as they come. If you find any, post them.
I will have to modify my opinion of the man from political hack and career politician to a true believer. He wont run for congress to focus on running for president.

you mean, "mr. i believe in term limits.... for other people" is finally gving up his seat?

 

[Modbert]

Ok dude, whatever... One of the biggest anti Government, anti Government HC guy next Ron Paul is your pick, LOL. And no I don't think Gary is a threat to Ron Paul, Mitt is a threat so I'm not "lashing out" because of that.

Funny thing is I'd bet issue by issue you agree with Mitt on more issues and more important issues than Gary by far...

I'm going to address your post by addressing what I bolded. All of the Republicans are anti Government and anti Federal Government HC last I checked. The difference is that Gary Johnson as far as I can see isn't a hypocrite by invoking the powers of the Federal Government when it suits him like some of the Social Conservatives running. By almost default, that makes him the best candidate of the bunch.

Mitt Romney is so dishonest that I wouldn't vote for him if you paid me. The stance that he's willing to take on the issues is the one that will garner him the most votes.

 

[signelect]

We are losing one of the last good ones. I wish Barry would resign from office so he could run for President, maybe he could learn what to do.

 

[Antiderivative]

you mean, "mr. i believe in term limits.... for other people" is finally gving up his seat?

More lies from the left. Ron Paul would have abided by his own rules. However, left wing moonbats think that he was going to create special rules for himself.

 

[Avorysuds]

Ok dude, whatever... One of the biggest anti Government, anti Government HC guy next Ron Paul is your pick, LOL. And no I don't think Gary is a threat to Ron Paul, Mitt is a threat so I'm not "lashing out" because of that.

Funny thing is I'd bet issue by issue you agree with Mitt on more issues and more important issues than Gary by far...

I'm going to address your post by addressing what I bolded. All of the Republicans are anti Government and anti Federal Government HC last I checked. The difference is that Gary Johnson as far as I can see isn't a hypocrite by invoking the powers of the Federal Government when it suits him like some of the Social Conservatives running. By almost default, that makes him the best candidate of the bunch.

Mitt Romney is so dishonest that I wouldn't vote for him if you paid me. The stance that he's willing to take on the issues is the one that will garner him the most votes.

And of course Ron Paul is a hypocrite.

This is getting old, just admit you support Gary because he stands no chance and by calling him the "smart guy" of the bunch you have done as I proved, you attacked everyone else including Ron Paul because that was your entire goal in the first place... 90% of what you want would be abolished if Gary had his way... "He's sooOOo dreamy!" Or wait, you both agree high fives are cool!