My war with Paul supporters is over

[NeoTemplar]

Do you have a problem with Gary Johnson?

Other than the fact that he looks perpetually stoned?

It's mind-boggling how Republicans believe libertarians are all stoners just because we believe government shouldn't be involved in what substances people ingest.

I don't smoke weed and if weed was legal I still wouldn't smoke weed.

It's not like people who don't do drugs will run out and start doing drugs if they were legal.

Who cares about that we as a nation and a people have much bigger fish to fry and even if it did pass ti could always be repealed.

 

[Google]

It's funny that you want to say Ron Paul supporters are part of a cult, and then you bring up things Ayn Rand of all people said about libertarians. Talk about a cult leader.

Really? If it weren't for her and her ideas there would not be a libertarian party. Hell, Ron Paul thought so highly of her he named his son after her.

What is your point? Go through my older posts, I was an ardent Paul supporter--it is his supporters that I detest.

 

[tererun]

This last couple of days has opened me up to things.....While I disagree staunchly with many things Paul does and I do not see him in rose colored glasses it is time I put the country first and politics last. We all know he isn't going to be the nominee and I doubt he will run third party but truthfully right now he doesn't matter.

Yesterday saw us as a nation become far less free then we use to be. Yesterday was a tremendous blow to liberty for all of us whether you believe it or not. Yesterday showed a need for a congress that wishes to preserve a republic and deny a democracy. Yesterday after the anger subsided some I started thinking clearly.

So today I put my hand out to those libertarians and Paul libertarians in a act of peace.....The liberal progressives believe we should compromise.....They are completely right. We need to compromise. The libertarians and conservatives need to compromise and move forward together on the things we have in common....Like smaller government....Less taxes....Fewer regulations...Most of all preserving this great nation as a Republic.

It is time we put away childish things. I am putting this many places to show as many as I can my conviction to saving our nation for our children.....


God bless the USA

you do realize that under Ron Paul's supposed view Romneycare could easily be passed by all the states? Nothing under Ron Paul's view stops the abuse of power from going to the states, and wityh how they like to vote away rights to other people i don't see that as a good thing.

Lets see, we have a number of states denying gays right to marry, and some of them entering into the bedroom on sodomy laws. How would you like to go to jail in places like texas for getting a blowjob?

We have states banishing a non-religious education by forcing the christian lie of creationism as scientific fact.

We have Arizona going all Nazi on hispanics including allowing arrapio to set up detention camps.

We have florida purging all non-white democratic voters from their voting roles.

We have wisconsin starting to take away the rights to form unions.

We have TN making it illegal to say gay in school.

How is states rights about freedom. I know Ron Paul says it is, but when you think about it Ron was never about freedom and liberty unless you were white, christian, and republican. Hell, the guy is an old school racist who fought against black rights and for segregation.

There are only 2 reasons to support paul. one is that you are a WASP and want to keep things unequal, and the other is you are a braindead hipster. So which one are you?

 

[dblack]

I was an ardent Paul supporter--it is his supporters that I detest.

All of them? 'Cause, they're all the same, right?

and, compared to who? Romney supporters, Obama supporters?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It's funny that you want to say Ron Paul supporters are part of a cult, and then you bring up things Ayn Rand of all people said about libertarians. Talk about a cult leader.

Really? If it weren't for her and her ideas there would not be a libertarian party. Hell, Ron Paul thought so highly of her he named his son after her.

What is your point? Go through my older posts, I was an ardent Paul supporter--it is his supporters that I detest.

Purely speculation on your part. Libertarian ideas, however, predate Ayn Rand, regardless of how she tried to spin it. Locke, Jefferson, Bastiat, Turgot, Say, Spooner, Mises, Nock, Mencken, and plenty more people who contributed significantly to libertarian thought came before Ayn Rand came along and claimed all of the ideas as hers and hers alone.

Ron Paul did not name Rand after Ayn Rand, as his name is Randal. They previously called him Randy, but his wife thought that was childish so she shortened it to Rand.

My point was that your criticizing Ron Paul for being some kind of cult leader, and then praising Ayn Rand. Anybody who knows anything about the Objectivist movement knows that it was essentially a cult by which anybody who deviated from anything Ayn Rand said was immediately and irrevocably excommunicated.

I don't care whether you supported Ron Paul once or not, since you obviously didn't fully understand his ideas if you think making generalizations about his supporters, or any other group of individuals, makes any logical sense.

 

[Google]

It's funny that you want to say Ron Paul supporters are part of a cult, and then you bring up things Ayn Rand of all people said about libertarians. Talk about a cult leader.

Really? If it weren't for her and her ideas there would not be a libertarian party. Hell, Ron Paul thought so highly of her he named his son after her.

What is your point? Go through my older posts, I was an ardent Paul supporter--it is his supporters that I detest.

Purely speculation on your part. Libertarian ideas, however, predate Ayn Rand, regardless of how she tried to spin it. Locke, Jefferson, Bastiat, Turgot, Say, Spooner, Mises, Nock, Mencken, and plenty more people who contributed significantly to libertarian thought came before Ayn Rand came along and claimed all of the ideas as hers and hers alone.

Ron Paul did not name Rand after Ayn Rand, as his name is Randal. They previously called him Randy, but his wife thought that was childish so she shortened it to Rand.

My point was that your criticizing Ron Paul for being some kind of cult leader, and then praising Ayn Rand. Anybody who knows anything about the Objectivist movement knows that it was essentially a cult by which anybody who deviated from anything Ayn Rand said was immediately and irrevocably excommunicated.

I don't care whether you supported Ron Paul once or not, since you obviously didn't fully understand his ideas if you think making generalizations about his supporters, or any other group of individuals, makes any logical sense.

Regardless, I am saying Ron Paul supporters are blindly loyal in their support to a man over ideals and philosophy. I have personally experienced their venomous hatred and attacks, which is actually worse then the left.

 

[Google]

I was an ardent Paul supporter--it is his supporters that I detest.

All of them? 'Cause, they're all the same, right?

and, compared to who? Romney supporters, Obama supporters?

Oh, pardon me. I should not generalize them all--the ones that attend libertarian meetings and Federal Reserve protests.

They are interchangeable to Occupy Wall Street hippies, which Ron Paul has supported.

Again, screw the fanatical Ron Paul supporters--trying to win over their vote is pointless. They are so fanatical in their blind loyalty to Ron Paul that they do not realize that they are actually hurting their cause and hindering their ideas.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Really? If it weren't for her and her ideas there would not be a libertarian party. Hell, Ron Paul thought so highly of her he named his son after her.

What is your point? Go through my older posts, I was an ardent Paul supporter--it is his supporters that I detest.

Purely speculation on your part. Libertarian ideas, however, predate Ayn Rand, regardless of how she tried to spin it. Locke, Jefferson, Bastiat, Turgot, Say, Spooner, Mises, Nock, Mencken, and plenty more people who contributed significantly to libertarian thought came before Ayn Rand came along and claimed all of the ideas as hers and hers alone.

Ron Paul did not name Rand after Ayn Rand, as his name is Randal. They previously called him Randy, but his wife thought that was childish so she shortened it to Rand.

My point was that your criticizing Ron Paul for being some kind of cult leader, and then praising Ayn Rand. Anybody who knows anything about the Objectivist movement knows that it was essentially a cult by which anybody who deviated from anything Ayn Rand said was immediately and irrevocably excommunicated.

I don't care whether you supported Ron Paul once or not, since you obviously didn't fully understand his ideas if you think making generalizations about his supporters, or any other group of individuals, makes any logical sense.

Regardless, I am saying Ron Paul supporters are blindly loyal in their support to a man over ideals and philosophy. I have personally experienced their venomous hatred and attacks, which is actually worse then the left.

I know what you're saying, it's just that what you're saying is complete nonsense. There's no doubt that there are some who are exactly as you describe them, but to say that every one of us is like that is ridiculous.

 

[Google]

Purely speculation on your part. Libertarian ideas, however, predate Ayn Rand, regardless of how she tried to spin it. Locke, Jefferson, Bastiat, Turgot, Say, Spooner, Mises, Nock, Mencken, and plenty more people who contributed significantly to libertarian thought came before Ayn Rand came along and claimed all of the ideas as hers and hers alone.

Ron Paul did not name Rand after Ayn Rand, as his name is Randal. They previously called him Randy, but his wife thought that was childish so she shortened it to Rand.

My point was that your criticizing Ron Paul for being some kind of cult leader, and then praising Ayn Rand. Anybody who knows anything about the Objectivist movement knows that it was essentially a cult by which anybody who deviated from anything Ayn Rand said was immediately and irrevocably excommunicated.

I don't care whether you supported Ron Paul once or not, since you obviously didn't fully understand his ideas if you think making generalizations about his supporters, or any other group of individuals, makes any logical sense.

Regardless, I am saying Ron Paul supporters are blindly loyal in their support to a man over ideals and philosophy. I have personally experienced their venomous hatred and attacks, which is actually worse then the left.

I know what you're saying, it's just that what you're saying is complete nonsense. There's no doubt that there are some who are exactly as you describe them, but to say that every one of us is like that is ridiculous.

You know what, I apologize. I'm not going to denigrate all Ron Paul supporters, and the way I worded my posts is wrong.

I adamantly believe in Ron Paul's message, and honesty a lot of my frustration originates in the fact that I don't believe Paul did a adequate job to secure the GOP nomination, and did a disservice to his cause. I was pulling my hair out and screaming at the television set knowing damn right well Paul was losing the primary by his own actions. And then his supporters insulted me when I pointed these things out.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This last couple of days has opened me up to things.....While I disagree staunchly with many things Paul does and I do not see him in rose colored glasses it is time I put the country first and politics last. We all know he isn't going to be the nominee and I doubt he will run third party but truthfully right now he doesn't matter.

Yesterday saw us as a nation become far less free then we use to be. Yesterday was a tremendous blow to liberty for all of us whether you believe it or not. Yesterday showed a need for a congress that wishes to preserve a republic and deny a democracy. Yesterday after the anger subsided some I started thinking clearly.

So today I put my hand out to those libertarians and Paul libertarians in a act of peace.....The liberal progressives believe we should compromise.....They are completely right. We need to compromise. The libertarians and conservatives need to compromise and move forward together on the things we have in common....Like smaller government....Less taxes....Fewer regulations...Most of all preserving this great nation as a Republic.

It is time we put away childish things. I am putting this many places to show as many as I can my conviction to saving our nation for our children.....


God bless the USA

Someone's nervous about the Ron Paul voters not giving in and voting for Romney.

Romney isn't who matters, it is the congresscritters that matter.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Ah, but we plan to move forward. Toward a real single payer universal health care system based on an income tax on all forms of income.

So you want to expand the "regressive" tax that Obama just instituted, nice of you to admit it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Roberts upheld the Constitution yesterday and resisted the judicial activism which all conservatives profess to hate.

Court after court after court confirm that the Federal government has ridiculously broad taxing authority under the Constitution. I don't like it, but conservatives of all stripes need to admit it.

ObamaTax is a political matter, not a Constitutional one.

Rewriting a bill that never once said tax to make it a tax isnt upholding the constitution it is pissing on it.

Actually, he just pissed on Congress, don't take it personally. He was wrong, but I think his intentions were solid. This is a political issue, it needs to stay a political issue. If we can't win the argument politically we don't deserve to win.

Some interesting reading.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/304394/what-s-next-opposition-nro-symposium?pg=5

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Rewriting a bill that never once said tax to make it a tax isnt upholding the constitution it is pissing on it.

Bingo!

How so? Does Congress not have absurdly broad tax authority even though they mischaracterize (lie about) said taxation when they put together laws?

Two points, the authority to tax is a lot more limited than you think, and they will never be able to lie about it again. Anything that comes out of Congress that involves someone paying money to the government will be always and forever known as a tax now.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I am a Paul supporter and I will be voting for Romney. I simply do not believe that we can afford 4 more years of Obama. But I can't blame any Paul supporter who will not succumb to politics as usual and I warn all Republicans; if you continue to insist on statists that expand programs, reduce liberties, increase debt, destroy free markets then the day will come that people tire of voting for "the lesser of two evils" and the Republican party will become irrelevant.

Romney must produce tangible results and not be afraid to be hated when the left inevitably pounds him the same way they pounded Bush. He cannot pass the buck. He cannot be soft. If he thinks he can be Obama Lite then he will be out in 4 years and so will an entire wing of the party.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

In its arguments the government argued that if the court could not see it as a penalty, then they could certainly leave it as a tax... That is what the court did. It was a political football punt- and it is frustrating- but it was a savvy move by Roberts. It allows for appeal.

I think sniperfire is right in that if Roberts had sided with the minority opinion it would have been a political activist move- if not in actuality, then in the minds of at least half of the American people.

Robert's gave two opportunities to conservatives. The power of repeal and the move for an amendment to limit the tax authority of Congress. The time has never been more ripe. We have a very clear decision to make about the direction of this country. Now is not the time to throw in the towel in angry defeat- but to reinvigorate the people to action.

So in your mind betraying the constitution and legislating from the bench is a savvy move?

He did not legislate from the bench. He heard oral arguments from the government that claimed the "penalty" was a tax- He basically concurred. He could have gone with the minority opinion- but I agree that he was within his parameters as a jurist to interpret the mandate as a tax- That is not equal to my liking it. But I am not ready to pick up my ball and go home mad. As I posted, I want to use the opportunity his ruling provided conservatives and libertarians to take action.

Technically, he did.

By the way, almost everyone thought the tax argument was absurd, including the guy who made it. The legal types all thought it was the weakest justification for the mandate, and still do.

 

[dblack]

I am a Paul supporter and I will be voting for Romney. I simply do not believe that we can afford 4 more years of Obama.

Yeah! We need 8 more years of Obama(Romney). Four just wouldn't be enough![/QUOTE]

 

[SniperFire]

Bingo!

How so? Does Congress not have absurdly broad tax authority even though they mischaracterize (lie about) said taxation when they put together laws?

Two points, the authority to tax is a lot more limited than you think, and they will never be able to lie about it again. Anything that comes out of Congress that involves someone paying money to the government will be always and forever known as a tax now.

What are the limits on Congress' authority to tax?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I am a Paul supporter and I will be voting for Romney. I simply do not believe that we can afford 4 more years of Obama. But I can't blame any Paul supporter who will not succumb to politics as usual and I warn all Republicans; if you continue to insist on statists that expand programs, reduce liberties, increase debt, destroy free markets then the day will come that people tire of voting for "the lesser of two evils" and the Republican party will become irrelevant.

Romney must produce tangible results and not be afraid to be hated when the left inevitably pounds him the same way they pounded Bush. He cannot pass the buck. He cannot be soft. If he thinks he can be Obama Lite then he will be out in 4 years and so will an entire wing of the party.

We can't afford four years of Romney either.

 

[paulitician]

Some good could come out of this sad debacle. In the future, the People will be much more skeptical when someone is deemed a 'Conservative.' And Constitutional Conservatism is on the rise. Kudos to this OP for giving Dr. Paul another chance.

 

[dblack]

Some good could come out of this sad debacle. In the future, the People will be much more skeptical when someone is deemed a 'Conservative.' And Constitutional Conservatism is on the rise. Kudos to this OP for giving Dr. Paul another chance.

But look at them. All lining up to follow the guy who started this shit in the first place.