We need Ron Paul for President and here is why

[ShackledNation]

A bonafide racist said he would not vote for it.

Ron Paul (for his reasons and i know what they are) said he would not vote for it.

End result is it not being passed by the racist and Ron Paul. Same end result.

His sons thoughts on blacks/asians/gays/jews etc not being served in restaurants if the business owner says so scares me as well. Libertarians scare me and I dont want one in the white house. Period.

I will take that as a no. Ron Paul has consistently argued that the Civil Rights Act worsened race relations at the expense of individual liberty. He makes the argument that without it (more specifically title II, he was not against the whole thing), we would have better race relations today.

Ron Paul was all in favor of repealing Jim Crow laws which mandated segregation. But the position is you cannot have forced segregation or forced desegregation. Because of Jim Crow Laws in the south, if you WANTED to open a restaurant (or run a hotel) that served blacks and whites equally, in most Southern states, you COULDN'T. Do you really think every single business in the south refused to serve blacks because they all voluntarily agreed not to? No, the reason was because treated blacks equally was illegal. That was the problem, and ending those laws was something the act did right. But turning around and also forcing integration of private property (public forced integration is fine because it is owned by government) was a step in the wrong direction.

The State should neither force segregation in the private sector, nor force force integration in the private sector. You simply cannot regulate behavior like that, no matter how stupid it is. If you try, people will just get even angrier. Martin Luther King Jr. practiced the libertarian principles of nonviolence and civil disobedience, a form of private nullification of law. Ron Paul praises King for this. The key point is that it was all voluntary.

Voluntary business integration would have been inevitable. It would be highly unprofitable to deny service to such a large consumer base. With the large number of white people upset with racism, you would also have massive boycotts of businesses that refused to integrate, making them lose profits. They eventually would not have been able to segregate even if they wanted to. In today's society, this is even more the case.

So you agree with ron paul. A business owner should have the right to not serve blacks/Asians gays etc.

Really? I cant even attempt to make you see clearly then. Good luck in 2012 and I guess we will see who is more correct...you or I.

Fuck some ass hole posting a sign saying he does not accept me or my family in their business because I am black. Imagine me trying to explain to a young son how I, a black man who is a vet of 20 years in the Navy fighting for this fucking country, cant go in to eat because I am black.

Fuck that. What year does that idiot live in? Fuck Ron Paul and fuck libertarians.

Should you force the gay softball association to except straight people? What about black student organizations? What about black colleges? Or private organizations that currently discriminate now? Should boy scouts be forced to accept girls? What is the difference between these associations and businesses? What about the consumer side? It is currently legal for consumers to refuse to buy goods from people based on whatever reason. I could choose to never purchase goods from asians. I don't, and wouldn't, but could. This is the exact same type of discrimination, yet it is not even given a second thought in America. The producer cannot discriminate based on race, but the consumer can. And certain organizations can. Why?

The question is not so simple, as you probably would agree. "Freedom of association applies to not just employees, but also to employers. Just as you and I should be free to work, or not to work, for anyone we wish, so employers should be free to hire, or not to hire, anyone they choose. There should be no legal privileges; freedom of association applies to all."

As terrible as it sounds, yes, businesses have a right to discriminate for whatever reason. However, I would boycott such a business, as I am sure most Americans today would. No business in their right mind would make such a stupid decision. Such a policy would cut their profits. A black business owner could also create a business and say no whites. I would be offended, and I would pressure the business owner to change his mind. But such a business plan is equally stupid, for it would destroy the consumer base for that business.

Businesses have the right to refuse service. If they do so for racist reasons, they will go out of business, and rightly so. If a private business wants to say no blonde anchor women or bearded guys, it is there right. We have the right to make bad stupid choices.

The problem with the South was that government had forced discrimination through Jim Crow laws. A business that wanted integrate could not do so.

I favor voluntary free association, not forced association. People have a right to be wrong and make stupid choices. You can't force people to get along, and trying to will only build contempt. What you can do is allow for people to make a choice. Make a choice to get along. This choice is in their self interest and the interest of society, so ultimately people will make it. And in doing so, a better culture will result, one in which people voluntarily get along and care for each other, rather than one in which people are forced to get along and only resent each other.

 

[Paulie]

A bonafide racist said he would not vote for it.

Ron Paul (for his reasons and i know what they are) said he would not vote for it.

End result is it not being passed by the racist and Ron Paul. Same end result.

His sons thoughts on blacks/asians/gays/jews etc not being served in restaurants if the business owner says so scares me as well. Libertarians scare me and I dont want one in the white house. Period.

I will take that as a no. Ron Paul has consistently argued that the Civil Rights Act worsened race relations at the expense of individual liberty. He makes the argument that without it (more specifically title II, he was not against the whole thing), we would have better race relations today.

Ron Paul was all in favor of repealing Jim Crow laws which mandated segregation. But the position is you cannot have forced segregation or forced desegregation. Because of Jim Crow Laws in the south, if you WANTED to open a restaurant (or run a hotel) that served blacks and whites equally, in most Southern states, you COULDN'T. Do you really think every single business in the south refused to serve blacks because they all voluntarily agreed not to? No, the reason was because treated blacks equally was illegal. That was the problem, and ending those laws was something the act did right. But turning around and also forcing integration of private property (public forced integration is fine because it is owned by government) was a step in the wrong direction.

The State should neither force segregation in the private sector, nor force force integration in the private sector. You simply cannot regulate behavior like that, no matter how stupid it is. If you try, people will just get even angrier. Martin Luther King Jr. practiced the libertarian principles of nonviolence and civil disobedience, a form of private nullification of law. Ron Paul praises King for this. The key point is that it was all voluntary.

Voluntary business integration would have been inevitable. It would be highly unprofitable to deny service to such a large consumer base. With the large number of white people upset with racism, you would also have massive boycotts of businesses that refused to integrate, making them lose profits. They eventually would not have been able to segregate even if they wanted to. In today's society, this is even more the case.

So you agree with ron paul. A business owner should have the right to not serve blacks/Asians gays etc.

Really? I cant even attempt to make you see clearly then. Good luck in 2012 and I guess we will see who is more correct...you or I.

Fuck some ass hole posting a sign saying he does not accept me or my family in their business because I am black. Imagine me trying to explain to a young son how I, a black man who is a vet of 20 years in the Navy fighting for this fucking country, cant go in to eat because I am black.

Fuck that. What year does that idiot live in? Fuck Ron Paul and fuck libertarians.

Yeah, because business owners know that in today's society, the best way to gain more business is to exclude races

 

[editec]

I at least credit Ron Paul for marching to the beat of a different drummer.

He's refreshing even if one disagrees with some of what he says.

If he were elected I suspect he would be be assassinated if he attempted to take apart the cozy relationships between big capital and big government.

Not that ANY POTUS has much hope of doing that, of course, but he could stumble across some policy that might so annoy the Insiders that they might decide its time for him to meet a magic bullet from a lone assassin.

Some of his proposed polcies would be taking on the power of the BANSTERS and their allies.

I don't think the man stands a chance of attaining office.

They'll find some way to tar him leading up to the nominations, if it looks like he's gaining too much political traction.

You know...like they did to Pat Bucannan, and like they also did to Rosss Perot?

 

[Stashman]

I at least credit Ron Paul for marching to the beat of a different drummer.

He's refreshing even if one disagrees with some of what he says.

If he were elected I suspect he would be be assassinated if he attempted to take apart the cozy relationships between big capital and big government.

Not that ANY POTUS has much hope of doing that, of course, but he could stumble across some policy that might so annoy the Insiders that they might decide its time for him to meet a magic bullet from a lone assassin.

Some of his proposed polcies would be taking on the power of the BANSTERS and their allies.

I don't think the man stands a chance of attaining office.

They'll find some way to tar him leading up to the nominations, if it looks like he's gaining too much political traction.

You know...like they did to Pat Bucannan, and like they also did to Rosss Perot?

That's a good point and one that have I considered as well. Everyone that goes against the machine and bucks the system has historically paid a price. I believe Kennedy did.

But I think now Ron Paul's message has been heard and it will go forward with or without Ron Paul. It will be interesting to see where it ultimately ends up at. I hope for the betterment of this country.

 

[Sallow]

Ron Paul is a nut.

 

[cutter]

Ron Paul is a nut.

Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't. I guess that makes you a mounds kind of guy. Make that a peter/PAUL Mounds

 

[editec]

Ron Paul is a nut.

Why do you think he's nuts, Sallow?

Can you be more specific about his proposed platform that makes you believe makes him crazy?

 

[geauxtohell]

We need Ron Paul for president as he is the only one that is not a globalist piece of crap that wishes to spend our wealth and blood on nation building. We've been in Afghanistan for over a decade and you have to ask yourself for what? The leadership hasn't had the balls to win the damn thing and the nation building that we're doing IS NOT advancing the nation at all. These people once we leave- either tomorrow or 50 years from now will be ruled by extremist islamic thugs one way or the other. Truth is It's UP to them to rebuild there nation and to fight for there freedom, and not for us to do for them. We need a president that will give a damn about our nation and defending our nation through closed borders. As Ron Paul said in the debate---Iran doesn't have a airforce that is able to attack us or any thing else that can. All they have like the rest of our enemy is a bunch of fucking thugs that will cross our open borders.

Why is all these men and woman saying that we must attack another nation, while our borders are open. That is the only way they can hurt us at all here half way around the fucking world. Ask your self seriously, why? He is right about China, Russia, Pakistan. You fucking think that Pakistan is stable? but we live with it. Truth is the world has nuclear bombs and the best way to deal with it is to let the other nation know that you will use YOURS if they ever try it. This is another area I agree with Ron Paul. Seriously, we have 6,000 nukes and ways to knock them down if need be. Why does the United states need to spend trillions of dollars and thousands of more troops blood into another war. Seriously, after the past 10 years any one that is running for president that said that they would outright start another one should be laughed off the fucking stage.

We need to withdraw from these wars. As they cost us a lot of blood and treasure and we GET NOTHING FOR IT. Iraq gave China the oil and shit. Let other nations handle there wars them selfs and worry about our problems for once. Lets stop the invasion of mexico into America. That is a trillion times more important then getting into a pissing match with Iran.

We need to go back to the gold standard to back our money and end the fucking fed. Ever since 1913 our value of our money has gone, down, down, down. You wonder why our grand fathers talk all the time about buying bread for penny's, while you must pay two plus dollars for it or of buying a house for thousands--- instead of hundreds of thousands of dollars. You wonder why family's in the old days only needed a man to provide, but today both need to work there ass off to get anything off the ground. Theres your answer. It is called inflation and it is killing this nation. The worthless fed thinks it can print trillions on trillions of dollars that are worthless to buy or pay for everything out of thin fucking air. Guess what the truth is it's going to cause us to be a very sorry and poor nation if we don't stop soon. Look up wiener republic before, nazi germany or Zimbabwe(Mugabe) that is our future if we we can keep doing what we're doing with the fucking fed. The fed is evil. Andrew Jackson and many of our founding fathers did everything in there power to keep us away from it and a central bank.

Idiocy. Ron Paul will end it and back our money with mental that will make it strong.

We need Ron Paul in 2012 because the rest of the idiots(globalist, money loving assholes) will give us a nation that is poor. You people all grew up in a nation that is richer then any other empire that had came before--- Greece, Rome, Holy roman empire, French empire, British empire, but if we're not careful we will fall and our children and grand children won't have that.

Vote for Ron Paul to get our troops home with there family's and to strengthen our economic system. He is a true believer in what the founders imagined our nation to be.

How do you propose we win in Afghanistan?

I am just curious. I was there for a year and don't have a fucking clue how we are going to overcome the major problems in Afghanistan.

As it stands, Obama has the troops scheduled to start coming home. The best we can do with Afghanistan is stabilize it as best as possible and get the hell out.

 

[Harry Dresden]

If he were elected I suspect he would be be assassinated if he attempted to take apart the cozy relationships between big capital and big government.

as old as he is he would not last 2 years anyway.......

 

[Auxous]

How do you propose we win in Afghanistan?

I am just curious. I was there for a year and don't have a fucking clue how we are going to overcome the major problems in Afghanistan.

As it stands, Obama has the troops scheduled to start coming home. The best we can do with Afghanistan is stabilize it as best as possible and get the hell out.

They same way we ''won" Vietnam.

It's been nearly 40 years since Daniel Ellsberg supplied The New York Times and other news organizations with the Pentagon Papers, thousands of internal Defense Department documents that detailed how the U.S. became enmeshed in Vietnam.

Today, Ellsberg sees Vietnam parallels in Obama's approach to Afghanistan, bolstered by his reading of Bob Woodward's new book, Obama's Wars.

"Change the names and the place names and you've got the Pentagon Papers of Afghanistan," Ellsberg said of Woodward's book. "It's uncannily similar."

"We're hopelessly stalemated, and will remain so."

(Indeed, Woodward reported that Vice President Biden warned Obama not to get "locked into Vietnam.").

Vietnam War opponent Daniel Ellsberg sees parallels in Afghanistan


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGVHUMhWdpE]Ellsberg: From Vietnam to Afghanistan - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

If he were elected I suspect he would be be assassinated if he attempted to take apart the cozy relationships between big capital and big government.

as old as he is he would not last 2 years anyway.......

Is that what your magic eight ball told you?

 

[California Girl]

It took the US only 4 years to go from a small military to forcing Japan and Germany to surrender in just 4 years.

The reason we haven't won in Afghanistan is because the powers that be don't want us to win. There is much more money to be made in a conflict that lasts 10 years or more.

Look at Vietnam. US advisers arrived in 1950 and we didn't get out until 1973. 23 fuckin' years of defense contracts. The number of dead US servicemen doesn't matter to them.

Watch less movies and read more history. We didn't force Japan and Germany to surrender all by ourselves. We had help.

That's your only criticism? You think I don't know that we didn't do it "all by ourselves"? Oh is that why we were the Allies and they were the Axis? Gee thanks CG, never knew that. I can see now why the Libs here call you snobby and patronizing.

The fact remains, if the US didn't enter the war vast areas of Europe would be speaking German. Plus it was done in years not decades. THATis my point.

Kissinger: "Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy." This is the typical thinking of the Military Industrial Complex. The only thing I would ad is "...and to make us more money."

It's taken you this long to work that out? Really?

 

[Harry Dresden]

If he were elected I suspect he would be be assassinated if he attempted to take apart the cozy relationships between big capital and big government.

as old as he is he would not last 2 years anyway.......

Is that what your magic eight ball told you?

ever notice how fast they age in just 4 years.....and this guy is what.....late 70's?......no magic 8 ball......just this.....and this aint the only article on this.....
The White House effect: Why American presidents 'age TWICE as fast while in office' | Mail Online