Ron Paul To Congress: Stop Stealing From The American People...

[bripat9643]

Excuse me? That was taxpayer money that went missing. How was that "not ours" exactly?

No, it was actually cash the belonged to Iraq. The US government was holding it in trust. We delivered it to the standing government of Iraq. What they chose to do with it is none of our concern.

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

Brainwashed Pub Dupes. Your spending cuts are CRAPPE. No details any more than the Dems. A totally manufactured crisis that makes Obama look like the adult, and achieves NOTHING, a media circus of BS, totally irresponsible Rush/Fox/Tea Party. Obama never wanted anymore revenue till 2013. HE actually wants to get the country MOVING again....

 

[Mr.Nick]

Let's not play the race card please. Yes, blacks are typically among the lower income bracket, but a simple historical analysis will shine some light on this problem.

Additionally, corporate welfare is more of a problem than individual welfare.

There is no such thing as "corporate welfare."

Anyone that pays the government receives no ******* welfare...

That concept is not that difficult to understand.

The person who receives money for doing nothing is getting welfare, the fool that pays the government money GETS NO WELFARE.

Its astounding how ******* dumb liberals are..

If you don't understand what I just told you then you are a dumb person..

The lies liberals spew are astounding.... I don't know how an intelligent person could actually accept the notion that those who pay the government money receive welfare.

Thats just mind boggling!

 

[Seawytch]

Yeah...like that big old pallet of cash that was sent to Iraq...and disappeared. Like these unfunded wars were are in. Like tax loopholes that give incentives to companies to move their businesses overseas. Like faith based initiatives that give my tax dollars to organizations that want to discriminate against me. Like in subsidies to companies that make obscene profits. Quit all that!

The wars were funded. Liberal social programs are what hasn't been funded, to the tune of $14 trillion.

However, thanks for enumerating all the knee-jerk leftwing talking points, but it's not like we don't see them virtually every time some libturd posts to this forum.

Sorry, but our current fiscal problems are the result of two unfunded wars, tax breaks and the unfunded Medicare Part D. The stimulus would not have been necessary if not for those things. I'm 100% certain that President Obama would have preferred to walk into the surplus his predecessor walked into rather than the horrific economic mess Bush left.

 

[Antiderivative]

There is no such thing as "corporate welfare."

I disagree and Roderick Long has done a nice write up on the issue of Corporations vs the Free Market.

Corporations tend to fear competition, because competition exerts downward pressure on prices and upward pressure on salaries; moreover, success on the market comes with no guarantee of permanency, depending as it does on outdoing other firms at correctly figuring out how best to satisfy forever-changing consumer preferences, and that kind of vulnerability to loss is no picnic. It is no surprise, then, that throughout U.S. history corporations have been overwhelmingly hostile to the free market. Indeed, most of the existing regulatory apparatus—including those regulations widely misperceived as restraints on corporate power—were vigorously supported, lobbied for, and in some cases even drafted by the corporate elite.[1]

Corporate power depends crucially on government intervention in the marketplace.[2] This is obvious enough in the case of the more overt forms of government favoritism such as subsidies, bailouts,[3] and other forms of corporate welfare; protectionist tariffs; explicit grants of monopoly privilege; and the seizing of private property for corporate use via eminent domain (as in Kelo v. New London). But these direct forms of pro-business intervention are supplemented by a swarm of indirect forms whose impact is arguably greater still.

Corporations versus the Market; or, Whip Conflation Now | Roderick Long | Cato Unbound

Essentially, large corporations are the long arm of the government. Corporatism cannot exist without statism.

 

[Mr.Nick]

I find it ironic that authoritarians refer to themselves as "liberal."

I'm a real liberal - they're ignorant authoritarian nuts.

You don't think they are going to use the word that accurately describes them, do you?

They certainly going to go around calling themselves fascists.

Liberalism is just one vast pile of lies and rationalizations for increasing government control over us. Why concern yourself with one more lie?

I'm actually pissed that progressives call themselves liberal..

I try my best to not refer to them as liberal or individuals.

I'm very "authoritarian" when it comes to those two words.

 

[Seawytch]

Let's not play the race card please. Yes, blacks are typically among the lower income bracket, but a simple historical analysis will shine some light on this problem.

Additionally, corporate welfare is more of a problem than individual welfare.

There is no such thing as "corporate welfare."

Anyone that pays the government receives no ******* welfare...

That concept is not that difficult to understand.

The person who receives money for doing nothing is getting welfare, the fool that pays the government money GETS NO WELFARE.

Its astounding how ******* dumb liberals are..

If you don't understand what I just told you then you are a dumb person..

The lies liberals spew are astounding.... I don't know how an intelligent person could actually accept the notion that those who pay the government money receive welfare.

Thats just mind boggling!

How is it not welfare to give tax payer money to companies that are making obscene profits? What do YOU call that?

 

[Mr.Nick]

There is no such thing as "corporate welfare."

I disagree and Roderick Long has done a nice write up on the issue of Corporations vs the Free Market.

Corporations tend to fear competition, because competition exerts downward pressure on prices and upward pressure on salaries; moreover, success on the market comes with no guarantee of permanency, depending as it does on outdoing other firms at correctly figuring out how best to satisfy forever-changing consumer preferences, and that kind of vulnerability to loss is no picnic. It is no surprise, then, that throughout U.S. history corporations have been overwhelmingly hostile to the free market. Indeed, most of the existing regulatory apparatus—including those regulations widely misperceived as restraints on corporate power—were vigorously supported, lobbied for, and in some cases even drafted by the corporate elite.[1]

Corporate power depends crucially on government intervention in the marketplace.[2] This is obvious enough in the case of the more overt forms of government favoritism such as subsidies, bailouts,[3] and other forms of corporate welfare; protectionist tariffs; explicit grants of monopoly privilege; and the seizing of private property for corporate use via eminent domain (as in Kelo v. New London). But these direct forms of pro-business intervention are supplemented by a swarm of indirect forms whose impact is arguably greater still.

Corporations versus the Market; or, Whip Conflation Now | Roderick Long | Cato Unbound

Essentially, large corporations are the long arm of the government. Corporatism cannot exist without statism.

Well you can disagree and rationalize what you want to believe all you want that still wont make your assertions correct.

Taxpayers/corporations PAY the government...

I know liberals believe this is a socialist nation, where the wealth of the nation in their minds is automatically divided by 300,000,000 and its really the evil rich republicans and their capitalism that is holding their fair share back.

This is why liberals are delusional.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Let's not play the race card please. Yes, blacks are typically among the lower income bracket, but a simple historical analysis will shine some light on this problem.

Additionally, corporate welfare is more of a problem than individual welfare.

There is no such thing as "corporate welfare."

Anyone that pays the government receives no ******* welfare...

That concept is not that difficult to understand.

The person who receives money for doing nothing is getting welfare, the fool that pays the government money GETS NO WELFARE.

Its astounding how ******* dumb liberals are..

If you don't understand what I just told you then you are a dumb person..

The lies liberals spew are astounding.... I don't know how an intelligent person could actually accept the notion that those who pay the government money receive welfare.

Thats just mind boggling!

How is it not welfare to give tax payer money to companies that are making obscene profits? What do YOU call that?

If I give the government 10 dollars and they give me 2 dollars what do you call that??

So the government just got 8 dollars and you call that "welfare?"

Oh and I can clearly see you have a problem with "profits" - this is called CAPITALISM dude..

Yes, creating capital or making profits is what this model is all about. If you have a problem with that move to China and if thats not "liberal" er authoritarian enough for you move to North Korea, maybe thats your utopia.

 

[Antiderivative]

Well you can disagree and rationalize what you want to believe all you want that still wont make your assertions correct.

Taxpayers/corporations PAY the government...

I know liberals believe this is a socialist nation, where the wealth of the nation in their minds is automatically divided by 300,000,000 and its really the evil rich republicans and their capitalism that is holding their fair share back.

This is why liberals are delusional.

Its been fun, but now you are ranting.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Well you can disagree and rationalize what you want to believe all you want that still wont make your assertions correct.

Taxpayers/corporations PAY the government...

I know liberals believe this is a socialist nation, where the wealth of the nation in their minds is automatically divided by 300,000,000 and its really the evil rich republicans and their capitalism that is holding their fair share back.

This is why liberals are delusional.

Its been fun, but now you are ranting.

No, I'm telling you that you have a problem with accepting the truth and that makes you delusional.

When some entity pays the government money, and they're out of pocket - that is not welfare.

You believing tax credits and breaks on taxes is welfare is delusional.

 

[Antiderivative]

No, I'm telling you that you have a problem with accepting the truth and that makes you delusional.

When some entity pays the government money, and they're out of pocket - that is not welfare.

You believing tax credits and breaks on taxes is welfare is delusional.

Not only are you ranting, but lying.

adios.

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

Liberals are authoritarian fascists? The people who have done ALL the compromising? Marxist fascists? You're right off the wall, corporate tools...lol.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Most of today's "Liberals" or Democrats,are actually authoritarian Socialists/Progressives. Classic Liberals are almost non-existent now. Classic Liberals are actually much closer to real Conservatives than they are to Socialists/Progressives. People are just confused about what the Democratic Party has become. They are no longer a Party of Liberals. They are now a Party of authoritarian Socialists/Progressives.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Most of today's "Liberals" or Democrats,are actually authoritarian Socialists/Progressives. Classic Liberals are almost non-existent now. Classic Liberals are actually much closer to real Conservatives than they are to Socialists/Progressives. People are just confused about what the Democratic Party has become. They are no longer a Party of Liberals. They are now a Party of authoritarian Socialists/Progressives.

Real classical liberals place strong emphasis on the Bill of Rights, which is why we insisted on having a Bill of Rights originally.

The federalists wanted a more authoritarian central government.

Republicans have always been opposed to government intervention, and "conservative" is a loose word. We could call those who defend the Bill of Rights conservative, at the same time we can call Muslim Sharia extremists "conservative."

At any rate we don't need progress - our constitution is not a living document and progressives are tyrants. As a matter of fact many amendments from XI-XXVII are tyrannical because they contradict the Bill of Rights and its premise, more specifically the equal protection clause in the Fourteenth Amendment, which IMO is absolutely redundant and is being used by the progressive socialists to justify socialism.

 

[bripat9643]

No, I'm telling you that you have a problem with accepting the truth and that makes you delusional.

When some entity pays the government money, and they're out of pocket - that is not welfare.

You believing tax credits and breaks on taxes is welfare is delusional.

Not only are you ranting, but lying.

adios.

He's right, you are delusional. Tax breaks are not welfare. If a thief robs your house every day and decides not to rob it one day, the stuff he didn't take that day is not a gift from the thief.

Abusing the definitions of words is a classic propaganda technique.

 

[Mr.Nick]

No, I'm telling you that you have a problem with accepting the truth and that makes you delusional.

When some entity pays the government money, and they're out of pocket - that is not welfare.

You believing tax credits and breaks on taxes is welfare is delusional.

Not only are you ranting, but lying.

adios.

He's right, you are delusional. Tax breaks are not welfare. If a thief robs your house every day and decides not to rob it one day, the stuff he didn't take that day is not a gift from the thief.

Abusing the definitions of words is a classic propaganda technique.

The problem is that the asshat liberals view the government as rulers over the people and economy and individuals like us view the people as rulers over the government and economy - therefore the progressive ignorant mind will rationalize and tax break or incentive as a "gift" or welfare from the government, when in reality the wealth an individual or corporation created is theirs and its they who are giving the government a gift when they pay them any money.

Not to mention federal taxation is illegal seizure of wealth, er a Fourth Amendment violation.

 

[tinydancer]

Yeah...like that big old pallet of cash that was sent to Iraq...and disappeared. Like these unfunded wars were are in. Like tax loopholes that give incentives to companies to move their businesses overseas. Like faith based initiatives that give my tax dollars to organizations that want to discriminate against me. Like in subsidies to companies that make obscene profits. Quit all that!

Move to Iran. Be free.

***** about your lack of freedoms there.

You know what really pisses me off about LGBT whackos on the net? you don't even have the balls to go for Irans jugular for offing gays.

You really are lame.

Its beyond sad.

 

[Antiderivative]

The problem is that the asshat liberals view the government as rulers over the people and economy and individuals like us view the people as rulers over the government and economy - therefore the progressive ignorant mind will rationalize and tax break or incentive as a "gift" or welfare from the government, when in reality the wealth an individual or corporation created is theirs and its they who are giving the government a gift when they pay them any money.

Not to mention federal taxation is illegal seizure of wealth, er a Fourth Amendment violation.

I agree with most of your assessment, but I disagree with the part that corporations create wealth. Certainly, some do, but others are just the long arm of the government. Lets not forget this.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Most of today's "Liberals" or Democrats,are actually authoritarian Socialists/Progressives. Classic Liberals are almost non-existent now. Classic Liberals are actually much closer to real Conservatives than they are to Socialists/Progressives. People are just confused about what the Democratic Party has become. They are no longer a Party of Liberals. They are now a Party of authoritarian Socialists/Progressives.

If liberals are ‘authoritarian,’ then how do explain decades of liberal efforts to defend the Constitutional rights of individuals from the excess of government?

Take for example the case of Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), a case summary link is provided below. Review and post your summary of the case, explaining how in light of this evidence your assertion that liberals are ‘authoritarian’ isn’t wrong.

Gideon v. Wainwright | The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law

There are many, many similar cases, btw, evidence of liberals fighting against authoritarian state and local jurisdictions in defense of individual rights. I’d be happy to provide you those links, but I suspect that won’t be necessary.