Why are Republicans afraid of Ron Paul?

[SniperFire]

Wrong.

Libertarians understand the fallibility of human nature...That's why they want the fallible humans involved in gubmint to have as little power as possible over the rest of us.

Try reading The Law some time....It won't take but about an hour or so.

Sorry, but I nailed it.

No, you did not. You claimed that human nature is fallible and therefore needs to be dictated by other fallible humans.

Which is correctly asserted, and it is why I nailed it.

 

[Oddball]

Sorry, but I nailed it.

You didn't nail shit.

A classic liberal (i.e. libertarian) society worked famously in America until progressive/neocon demigod Teddy Roosevelt fucked it all up.

You mean until the group think of human nature derailed it?

I mean until that until fake republicans started throwing in with socialists.

America hasn't had an honest conservative as POTUS since Coolidge.

Small decentralized gubmint scares the shit out of neocon control freaks, no matter whether they carry the (D) or (R) by their names.

 

[Valox]

I wasn't aware Republicans were afraid of Paul. But just out of curiosity how many Democrats would vote for Paul over Obama or any other Democrat running for President?

They are. That is why they cling to their statists freaks, like Romney and Santorum. As for your question, I don't have the data for that.

 

[Valox]

Sorry, but I nailed it.

No, you did not. You claimed that human nature is fallible and therefore needs to be dictated by other fallible humans.

Which is correctly asserted, and it is why I nailed it.

Republicans are tyrants. They have to rule over others rather than letting others rule over themselves. I am glad that we got this out of the way.

 

[SniperFire]

You didn't nail shit.

A classic liberal (i.e. libertarian) society worked famously in America until progressive/neocon demigod Teddy Roosevelt fucked it all up.

You mean until the group think of human nature derailed it?

I mean until that until fake republicans started throwing in with socialists.

America hasn't had an honest conservative as POTUS since Coolidge.

Small decentralized gubmint scares the shit out of neocon control freaks, no matter whether they carry the (D) or (R) by their names.

Human nature creeps in, as I said. Libertarian is no more workable in any sort of pure governing form as Communism.

 

[Ariux]

Ron Paul is the only GOP candidate that isn't in the pocket of the Jews. E.g. he's the only one who supports cutting off handouts to Israel.

"Because, unlike republicans who campaign like libertarians then govern like libroidal democratics, he mans it." - Oddball

That, too.

 

[SniperFire]

No, you did not. You claimed that human nature is fallible and therefore needs to be dictated by other fallible humans.

Which is correctly asserted, and it is why I nailed it.

Republicans are tyrants. They have to rule over others rather than letting others rule over themselves. I am glad that we got this out of the way.

blah blah

You blame this group and that group, and you are correct. Why? Because I am correct.

Human nature makes Libertarianism unworkable.

Don't get me wrong, I would love it, but it would never work now any better than it did in the wild, wild west.

 

[Valox]

You mean until the group think of human nature derailed it?

I mean until that until fake republicans started throwing in with socialists.

America hasn't had an honest conservative as POTUS since Coolidge.

Small decentralized gubmint scares the shit out of neocon control freaks, no matter whether they carry the (D) or (R) by their names.

Human nature creeps in, as I said. Libertarian is no more workable in any sort of pure governing form as Communism.

Why are against human nature and why do you think it needs to be controlled?

Plus, what gives you the authority?

 

[Valox]

Which is correctly asserted, and it is why I nailed it.

Republicans are tyrants. They have to rule over others rather than letting others rule over themselves. I am glad that we got this out of the way.

blah blah

You blame this group and that group, and you are correct. Why? Because I am correct.

Human nature makes Libertarianism unworkable.

Don't get me wrong, I would love it, but it would never work now any better than it did in the wild, wild west.

I am sure you had a point in there somewhere.

 

[SniperFire]

I mean until that until fake republicans started throwing in with socialists.

America hasn't had an honest conservative as POTUS since Coolidge.

Small decentralized gubmint scares the shit out of neocon control freaks, no matter whether they carry the (D) or (R) by their names.

Human nature creeps in, as I said. Libertarian is no more workable in any sort of pure governing form as Communism.

Why are against human nature and why do you think it needs to be controlled?

I did not say I was 'against' human nature. Stop being retarded.

 

[Valerie]

OR you could ask yourself WHY didn't more voters ACTUALLY vote State-to-State for One guy vs Another in The election...

 

[SniperFire]

Republicans are tyrants. They have to rule over others rather than letting others rule over themselves. I am glad that we got this out of the way.

blah blah

You blame this group and that group, and you are correct. Why? Because I am correct.

Human nature makes Libertarianism unworkable.

Don't get me wrong, I would love it, but it would never work now any better than it did in the wild, wild west.

I am sure you had a point in there somewhere.

You have no argument. The vagrancies of human nature destroy Libertarianism just like it destroys Communism.

Sounds great in theory.

 

[Valox]

blah blah

You blame this group and that group, and you are correct. Why? Because I am correct.

Human nature makes Libertarianism unworkable.

Don't get me wrong, I would love it, but it would never work now any better than it did in the wild, wild west.

I am sure you had a point in there somewhere.

You have no argument. The vagrancies of human nature destroy Libertarianism just like it destroys Communism.

Sounds great in theory.

I don't believe that the vagrancies of human nature need to be controlled by another vagrant human.

 

[SniperFire]

I am sure you had a point in there somewhere.

You have no argument. The vagrancies of human nature destroy Libertarianism just like it destroys Communism.

Sounds great in theory.

I don't believe that the vagrancies of human nature need to be controlled by another vagrant human.

Then you are naive, foolish and/or not a student of world history.

 

[Oddball]

You mean until the group think of human nature derailed it?

I mean until that until fake republicans started throwing in with socialists.

America hasn't had an honest conservative as POTUS since Coolidge.

Small decentralized gubmint scares the shit out of neocon control freaks, no matter whether they carry the (D) or (R) by their names.

Human nature creeps in, as I said. Libertarian is no more workable in any sort of pure governing form as Communism.

Libertarian isn't anarchist.

The libertarian mindset took America from virtually nothing to one of the world's economic superpowers in a mere 150 years.

If anything doesn't work, it's republican appeasement of progressive socialists...Like they have been doing since at least Eisenhower.

 

[dblack]

I still can't get over the utter hilarity of watching all the Republocrats trying to convince themselves that Romney is their go-to guy.

SUCKERZZZ!!!

 

[sealybobo]

Because Ron Paul exploits 4 or 5 things that people hate about Republicans. War mongers, won't legalize pot and prostitution, they protect the federal reserve and they are just as unconstitutional as us Democrats if you buy what Ron Paul is selling.

But Republicans would love to deregulate everything and sell off the Commons and privatize everything just like Ron Paul. So in some ways, Ron Paul is an extreme Republican on steroids. Even worse than the Romney's.

And keep in mind even Reagan wouldn't get the nomination today. He'd be considered a flaming liberal in the GOP. More left of Romney.

 

[freedombecki]

Ron Paul offers a lot of individual freedom and this scares Republicans. After all, the outcome of liberty is unknown and most Republicans are scared of the unknown. They need control and they need to manipulate the outcome.

Hence, whey they want to impose their social conservative beliefs onto society. They are afraid of liberty and seek control. Hence, why they lied and manipulate wars instead of practicing diplomacy. Diplomacy brings into the unknown and this does not resonate well with Republicans. They need control, hence why they lied and manipulated into war.

American Conservatism is most closely related to classical liberalism in which there is an element of the unknown. However, an element of the unknown goes against the grain of the Republican and scares them. Instead, they seek to power to control and manipulate, instead of allowing man to be free.

Liberty scares Republicans, hence why they constantly throw their support behind statists freaks like Romney, Santorum, Bush, and even Reagan. Not to mention Nixon and Ike. Liberty scares Republicans and always has. They have always been mostly authoritative statists freaks, backed by soft appeals to liberty.

p.s. liberals are not better. They clamor for individual freedom, yet look for the state to grant them it, often times violating someone's elses freedom. So, please keep your strawman arguments to yourself.

Republicans love Ron Paul. He's conservative, he supports the Constitution, and he has a wide appeal to ultraconservatives. So did Barry Goldwater. that's the rub. Our concern is as far from personal as it can get. The opposition is adroit at taking an extreme and likely untrue spin that "too conservative" means the earth will be blown up after the oceans start boiling from pollution extreme conservatives somehow make.

Looney? Stuff like that worked in Goldwater's demise. We don't want that to happen to a truly nice man like Ron Paul. He doesn't deserve it, and we've had our share of Titanic elections in the past 50 years.

 

[dblack]

because ron paul exploits 4 or 5 things that people hate about republicans. War mongers, won't legalize pot and prostitution, they protect the federal reserve and they are just as unconstitutional as us democrats if you buy what ron paul is selling.

But republicans would love to deregulate everything and sell off the commons and privatize everything just like ron paul. So in some ways, ron paul is an extreme republican on steroids. Even worse than the romney's.

And keep in mind even reagan wouldn't get the nomination today. He'd be considered a flaming liberal in the gop. More left of romney.

wtf???

 

[Oddball]

because ron paul exploits 4 or 5 things that people hate about republicans. War mongers, won't legalize pot and prostitution, they protect the federal reserve and they are just as unconstitutional as us democrats if you buy what ron paul is selling.

But republicans would love to deregulate everything and sell off the commons and privatize everything just like ron paul. So in some ways, ron paul is an extreme republican on steroids. Even worse than the romney's.

And keep in mind even reagan wouldn't get the nomination today. He'd be considered a flaming liberal in the gop. More left of romney.

wtf???

He's a dope...Get used to it.