Posting mode: Reply
[Return]
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Verification
Get a new challenge Get an audio challengeGet a visual challenge Help
File
Password(Password used for file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 3072 KB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Read the rules and FAQ before posting.
  • このサイトについて - 翻訳

  • File : 1326519967.jpg-(517 KB, 1400x2000, ron-paul-2012-the-time-is-right-parchmen(...).jpg)
    517 KB Arguments. Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:46 No.1122984  
    So what exactly are all the arguments against Paul and his stances? Other than misconceptions I can't really seem to put my finger on anything.

    Both /pol/'s and other candidates would be greatly appreciated.

    sincerely,

    a confused weeaboo
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:50 No.1123033
    age
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:51 No.1123040
         File1326520268.jpg-(160 KB, 1304x754, 1326162054219.jpg)
    160 KB
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:51 No.1123045
    Every single fucking thread is about this cunt

    >implying
    >> animal !eeDbeu1Bp. 01/14/12(Sat)00:51 No.1123046
    hes a racist
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:51 No.1123047
    who is ron paul?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:51 No.1123049
         File1326520302.jpg-(105 KB, 922x782, 1326162074358.jpg)
    105 KB
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:52 No.1123058
         File1326520336.jpg-(101 KB, 862x760, 1326162133690.jpg)
    101 KB
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:52 No.1123062
    >>1123047
    he's the guy who lost iowa and newhampshire
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:52 No.1123066
    >>1123045
    look at where you are.

    we may as well be /paul/.

    /b/ did it.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:52 No.1123067
         File1326520368.jpg-(98 KB, 1218x754, 1326162170342.jpg)
    98 KB
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:53 No.1123072
    JESUS WHAT IS HAPPENING
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:53 No.1123073
         File1326520410.jpg-(125 KB, 1082x728, 1326162221581.jpg)
    125 KB
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:54 No.1123084
    >>1123062
    ahhh i gotcha... he's the racist one, right?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:54 No.1123085
    His "state's rights" policy, if taken to an implied extreme, could have the potential of destabilizing the union as a whole.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:55 No.1123100
         File1326520542.jpg-(38 KB, 343x361, bf5.jpg)
    38 KB
    >>1123072
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:57 No.1123122
    He thinks states don't have to abide by the Constitution because he's against the Incorporation Doctrine.

    He is a minarchist, which would mean a virtually nonexistent federal government.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:57 No.1123126
    Alright, so
    >>1123085
    States rights extremism,

    >>1123046
    Alleged racism

    and
    >>1123073
    his inability to triforce.

    I'll start reading around.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:58 No.1123127
         File1326520681.png-(365 KB, 600x446, Abraham-Lincoln-Geralt.png)
    365 KB
    >>1123085

    >"muh union"

    go cry to mamma, loyalist scum
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)00:59 No.1123152
    >>1123073
    /pol/ has probably had the most OC 4chan has seen in months.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:00 No.1123161
    >>1123126
    >Ron Paul supports constitutional government
    >extreme

    >gave free medical care to blacks
    >must be racist

    >her dur
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:00 No.1123165
         File1326520842.gif-(397 KB, 222x200, 1321073939502.gif)
    397 KB
    >>1123040
    >>1123049
    >>1123058
    >>1123067
    >>1123073
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:00 No.1123168
         File1326520854.jpg-(144 KB, 900x900, 1324161328385.jpg)
    144 KB
    >>1123152
    Hell yeah.
    >> Zetsubou Sensei !!42JVl9SkflZ 01/14/12(Sat)01:03 No.1123195
         File1326521023.jpg-(252 KB, 1436x1075, RP6.jpg)
    252 KB
    >>1123073

    Creator of this here, dumping rest.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:04 No.1123216
         File1326521086.jpg-(58 KB, 500x400, tumblr_lxngh4wGnf1qh6gzao1_500.jpg)
    58 KB
    >>1123195
    /paul/ oc train
    >> Zetsubou Sensei !!42JVl9SkflZ 01/14/12(Sat)01:06 No.1123232
         File1326521170.jpg-(244 KB, 1431x1079, RP7.jpg)
    244 KB
    >>1123195
    >> Zetsubou Sensei !!42JVl9SkflZ 01/14/12(Sat)01:07 No.1123254
         File1326521270.jpg-(152 KB, 1437x779, RP8.jpg)
    152 KB
    >>1123232
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:08 No.1123258
    >>1123232
    holy fuck, this is intense
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:09 No.1123268
         File1326521342.jpg-(59 KB, 600x431, haha.jpg)
    59 KB
    >>1123254

    >gary johnson fairy
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:09 No.1123271
         File1326521366.png-(469 KB, 838x1334, OBAMA VS RON PAUL.png)
    469 KB
    /thread
    >> Zetsubou Sensei !!42JVl9SkflZ 01/14/12(Sat)01:10 No.1123285
         File1326521426.jpg-(164 KB, 1439x786, rp9.jpg)
    164 KB
    >>1123254
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:10 No.1123287
    >>1122984
    Against gay marriage.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:10 No.1123289
    >>1123271
    Ron Paul wants to cut funding to Isreal

    lol you just convinced me to vote for him you fuck
    >> Zetsubou Sensei !!42JVl9SkflZ 01/14/12(Sat)01:11 No.1123303
         File1326521477.jpg-(212 KB, 1443x787, RP10.jpg)
    212 KB
    >>1123285
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:11 No.1123305
    >>1123303
    OH SHIT
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:11 No.1123306
    >>1123271
    >A tool of the 1%
    If Ron Paul is going to be so good for corporations and the 1%, why don't they support him?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:12 No.1123314
    No.1123271
    small fry from kindergarden
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:12 No.1123316
    >>1123303

    Don't you holocaust me again goy.
    >> Zetsubou Sensei !!42JVl9SkflZ 01/14/12(Sat)01:12 No.1123323
         File1326521576.jpg-(218 KB, 1519x935, rp11.jpg)
    218 KB
    >>1123303
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:13 No.1123324
    >>1123306
    The corporations are using reverse psychology to convince people to vote for him.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:15 No.1123354
    >>1123324
    I'm pretty sure anyone who wants to audit/eliminate the Fed is no friend to bankers who make money from exploiting it.
    >> Zetsubou Sensei !!42JVl9SkflZ 01/14/12(Sat)01:15 No.1123357
         File1326521718.jpg-(216 KB, 1487x923, RP12.jpg)
    216 KB
    >>1123323
    >> Zetsubou Sensei !!42JVl9SkflZ 01/14/12(Sat)01:17 No.1123380
         File1326521854.jpg-(242 KB, 1530x917, rp13.jpg)
    242 KB
    >>1123357
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:17 No.1123381
    Wait so who's Ganondorf?
    >> Zetsubou Sensei !!42JVl9SkflZ 01/14/12(Sat)01:19 No.1123396
         File1326521948.jpg-(242 KB, 1530x917, rp14.jpg)
    242 KB
    >>1123380
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:19 No.1123406
    "If anything, the Supreme Court should have refused to hear the Kelo case on the grounds that the 5th amendment does not apply to states. If constitutional purists hope to maintain credibility, we must reject the phony incorporation doctrine in all cases — not only when it serves our interests. " - Ron Paul

    my biggest problem with his platform is his idea that the incorporation doctrine is bullshit. im kind of fond of the states not being able to ignore the bill of rights.
    >> Zetsubou Sensei !!42JVl9SkflZ 01/14/12(Sat)01:19 No.1123407
         File1326521997.jpg-(223 KB, 1530x917, rp15.jpg)
    223 KB
    >>1123396
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:20 No.1123410
         File1326522009.jpg-(140 KB, 450x337, adult-mittens.jpg)
    140 KB
    >>1123381
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:20 No.1123414
         File1326522046.jpg-(99 KB, 300x401, Foxman.jpg)
    99 KB
    >>1123381
    who else but the king of the jews

    INRI
    >> Zetsubou Sensei !!42JVl9SkflZ 01/14/12(Sat)01:22 No.1123432
         File1326522146.jpg-(194 KB, 1530x917, rp16.jpg)
    194 KB
    >>1123407
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:28 No.1123491
    >>1123432
    thanks for that.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:31 No.1123520
    >>1122984

    His foreign policy is predicated on the concept that the USA can hide behind the Atlantic and Pacific as our forefathers did back in the 1800s. The problem with that as a concept is that those oceanic shields are a lot smaller now. Wireless communications, satellite technology, jet engines, and the Internet have made those oceans much smaller deterrents than they once were.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:32 No.1123532
    Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy (a bill which he has repeatedly re-introduced), pull out of the UN, disband NATO, end birthright citizenship(http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110%3AH.J.RES.46:), deny federal funding to any organisation "which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style" (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096%3Ah.r.7955:), and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110%3AH.R.2755:). He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan. (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2007-764)

    Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html) , he's against gay marriage (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul197.html) , is against the popular vote (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul214.html), wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, believes that the Panama Canal should be the property of the United States (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106%3Ah.con.res.231:), and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories, not to mention his belief that the International Baccalaureate program is UN mind control(http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r109%3AE14AP5-0007:).
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110%3AH.R.2597:
    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll446.xml
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:33 No.1123545
    >>1123520
    Nobody has a large enough fleet to project any sort of force to America. Even China only has one aircraft carrier.

    Plus, there's the fact that we have one of the largest nuclear arsenals on the planet to deter invasion.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:35 No.1123561
         File1326522911.jpg-(64 KB, 638x458, 1326479617465.jpg)
    64 KB
    >>1123532
    hello mainstream media
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:35 No.1123565
    Electing someone who isn't a shrink wrapped standard issue Republican or Democrat would upset our corporate masters.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:35 No.1123571
    >>1123545
    >>1123545
    >2012
    > referring to nuclear arsenal as a deterrent.

    ISHYGDDT
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:36 No.1123579
    >>1123561
    >>1123561
    none of that is mainstream media fucktard. those sites are exact copies of congressional role call votes. lolumad
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:37 No.1123588
    >>1123520

    you fucking idiots dont seriously think any would attack the US do you? the global economy has become so intertwined that the world could not handle an america that can't export/import.

    Nobody and I mean nobody will attack America on a full scale battle on our shores.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:38 No.1123594
         File1326523102.jpg-(45 KB, 625x400, 1326475172044.jpg)
    45 KB
    >>1123579
    don't be a sheeple
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:38 No.1123599
    >2012
    >voting for Ron Paul
    >not voting for Newt Gingrich
    Have fun being controlled by the kikes.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:39 No.1123604
    >>1123588
    this

    not only would it destroy the world economy but diplomatic agencies would prevent full scale invasion from ever happening
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:39 No.1123605
    >>1123532
    Hey look copypasta from reddit that was debunked in a subsequent post, which I am too lazy to copypasta. Also you are a faggot for unoriginality.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:39 No.1123606
         File1326523162.gif-(231 KB, 504x2938, 20100415.gif)
    231 KB
    >>1123571
    >2012
    >Not realizing the only reason we haven't had WWIII is due to nuclear weapons.
    Seriously hope, etc.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:40 No.1123615
    >>1123532
    back to reddit with you scumbag
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:41 No.1123618
         File1326523268.jpg-(118 KB, 400x400, ronpaullol.jpg)
    118 KB
    >>1123594
    >>1123594
    hahaha and the truth comes out. its ok you've probably never read a congressional role call vote have you?

    suck in that bullshit libertarian rhetoric. your candidate has a shitty voting past and his supporters are the best at denying facts when its staring them in the face
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:42 No.1123628
         File1326523346.jpg-(99 KB, 884x666, 1326397698616.jpg)
    99 KB
    >>1123618
    it's not too late
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:42 No.1123632
         File1326523363.gif-(488 KB, 1098x750, mutherfuckingscumsuckers2.gif)
    488 KB
    >>1123062
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:43 No.1123637
    >>1123618
    >Federal Control is bad, elect president so I can unilaterally change things.
    >Give back power to the people and take power from the Corporations and lobbyists.

    Strawmanning and calling others rhetoric bad?

    Pot to Kettle, Pot to Kettle, you are a faggot.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:44 No.1123643
    >>1123520

    i would also like to point out that he isn't abolishing the military. He's simply against us having a base of 50k+ troops stationed in countries and against going to wars we have no business being in.

    The military would still be here incase the need ever arises such as either going to war or defending the country.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:44 No.1123644
    >>1123605
    >>1123605
    >debunked
    ya no.. no RP supporter has been able to debunk his voting past because its on the record. the only response ever given is "mainstream media"

    please click the links follow to the roll call vote and show me how you can debunk the fact staring you in the face. lolumad
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:47 No.1123674
    >>1123637
    my rhetoric is backed with roll call votes in congress that are published thanks to transparency acts allowing the public to view votes

    lolol

    >strawman
    you mean he hasnt emphasized dismantling federalism and giving the states power? hmmm you clearly dont know your candidate do you
    >> ­Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:47 No.1123680
    >>1123637
    Paul has a PAC. if he is so against corporate financing of elections why does he provide a way for them to do so?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:47 No.1123681
    >>1123532
    Don't forget that he wants to end the incorporation of the bill of rights, the civil rights act and voted against a ban on lead toys
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:47 No.1123684
         File1326523656.jpg-(216 KB, 472x676, ronpaulisracist12.jpg)
    216 KB
    >>1123046
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:47 No.1123685
    >>1123674
    >>1123644
    Could someone post that copypasta?

    weeabootician still here.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:48 No.1123696
    >>1123126

    Don't waste your time. The racist stuff has already been debunked and the author of the controversial passages of the newsletters was discovered.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GWff8ay5v4
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:51 No.1123716
    http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r109%3AE14AP5-0007:
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106%3Ah.con.res.231:
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110%3AH.J.RES.46:
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096%3Ah.r.7955:
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110%3AH.R.2755:
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110%3AH.R.2597:
    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll446.xml
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul197.html
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul214.html
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:51 No.1123717
    >>1123696
    What do his opponents say?

    I notice the dude hasn't changed his views in 20 years.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:54 No.1123746
         File1326524060.jpg-(47 KB, 200x200, face15.jpg)
    47 KB
    >>1123716
    >mfw ron paul supporters look at his roll call votes
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:56 No.1123758
    >>1123696
    That doesn't debunk shit. Who cares if it wasn't Paul writing them. No oversight whatsoever on a newsletter going out in your name? Fuck that.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:58 No.1123774
    It's cool we all joke and what not, but Amerifags need to help the cause.
    >> Aw shit you made me look for it to make umadlol Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:59 No.1123783
         File1326524348.png-(31 KB, 949x261, lol.png)
    31 KB
    >>1123644
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)01:59 No.1123784
    >>1123717

    That don't have much against except blatant slander and distortions, such calling him an "isolationist" or saying that he thinks America deserved 9/11 or that he's apart of the "9/11 Truth Movement."
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:01 No.1123807
    >>1123783
    >>1123783
    lol you do realize that all those links in what you are calling a "debunk" take you to the roll call sheet and show you that he indeed did do those. its not a debunk reply, its a reply with the action he did with proof

    hahaha did you even click the links?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:02 No.1123818
    He is a right-wing capitalist.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:02 No.1123819
    >>1123271
    Israel can go fuck itself.
    >> Now you get your shit wrecked. Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:02 No.1123825
         File1326524579.png-(85 KB, 899x823, LOLUMADBITCHNIGGA.png)
    85 KB
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:03 No.1123828
    >>1123807
    >>1123807
    all the links i provided are the same ones and if you actually took the time to read over them you'd see that they, in fact, confirmed the charges HAHAHAHAHAHAH you dumbass
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:04 No.1123850
    >>1123825
    >>1123825
    hahahahhahahahahahahahhaahahahahahahah
    so your proof to counter the roll call votes is individual testimony from an anonymous on reddit. oh my you're definitely a ron paul supporter

    his roll call votes say different

    hahaha oh man this must be your first election cycle
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:05 No.1123856
         File1326524734.png-(88 KB, 863x811, BITCHNIGGA2.png)
    88 KB
    >>1123807
    You were saying faggot?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:05 No.1123857
    >>1123758
    it was 8 occurrences out of 1000s of newsletters
    also, you don't hear about the newsletters which condemn racism, they do exist.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:06 No.1123868
    >>1123828
    >>1123850
    >desperation.
    And calling me out on reddit while you posted reddit copypasta? Really?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:07 No.1123873
    >>1123783
    >>1123783
    >>1123825
    >>1123825
    >>1123850
    >>1123850
    thank you so much for making my day by proving how ron paul supporters rationalize their candidate.

    lets go over this:

    congressional vote record proves my original point in the affirmative
    you attempt to debunk, what has already been proven by fact through the roll call votes, with individual testimony.

    my god thank you for making this that much funnier
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:08 No.1123881
    >>1123868
    >>1123868
    haha i didnt call you out on reddit i copypasta'd but i dont even know what thread you got that from. i got it from elsewhere hahahaha

    someones paranoid. definitely a ron paul supporter
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:09 No.1123890
    >>1123881
    >haha i didnt call you out on reddit i copypasta'd but i dont even know what thread you got that from. i got it from elsewhere hahahaha

    >hahahaha

    >someones paranoid
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:10 No.1123901
    >>1123856
    >posts picture with 0 links to credible sites or references to "debunk"

    yep def a RP supporter
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:11 No.1123910
    >>1123890
    >>1123890
    first election cycle im guessing.. please tell me more about ron paul

    he will fade into obscurity just like he did in the 2008 election because hes a political nightmare.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:12 No.1123921
    >>1123825
    >>1123856
    >NOW YOU GET YOUR SHIT WRECKED
    >the majority of the post agrees with the reddit op and affirms Paul's worst positions

    That's how you kids 'wreck shit'? Completely concede almost the entire argument?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:12 No.1123922
    >>1123910
    >samefagging hard.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:12 No.1123925
    Ron Paul also voted no on giving Rosa Parks a metal.

    What a racist.

    ...or maybe he has other reasons for voting the way he does. Reasons that you have trouble grasping because you are a black and while one issue asshole.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:13 No.1123933
    Ron Paul hates invasive government but supports state-mandated sonograms

    WEST COLUMBIA, South Carolina — When GOP presidential hopeful Ron Paul was asked today about Tuesday’s federal court ruling upholding an aggressive new sonogram law in his home state of Texas, the congressman said the requirement that women seeking an abortion first get a sonogram “should always have been a Texas state position.’’

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/post/ron-paul-hates-invasive-government-but-suppo
    rts-state-mandated-sonograms/2012/01/11/gIQAcikYrP_blog.html

    Federal court clears Texas law requiring pre-abortion sonogram

    AUSTIN, Texas—A federal appeals court cleared the way Friday for the immediate enforcement of a new abortion law in Texas requiring doctors to conduct a sonogram before the procedure.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204542404577159081725023066.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:13 No.1123946
    >>1123933
    This is a great idea.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:14 No.1123947
         File1326525241.jpg-(45 KB, 471x485, blouses.jpg)
    45 KB
    >>1123922
    >>1123922
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:14 No.1123949
    >>1123758

    Ron Paul was the publisher of the newsletters, not the editor. I doubt the CEO of every newspaper screens every copy of every of every single article in every single one of his papers. The newsletter ran under his name for 20 years. The racial comments existed during a 4 year period from 1990 to 1994. There were two or three quotes that were racist, over a 4 year period, out of a 20 year newsletter. The accusations of him being a racist are slander. Dr. Paul offered free medical services to minorities that couldn't afford it, and has the backing of the NAACP president who he's been good friends with for decades.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:14 No.1123956
    >>1123925
    Actually he did that because the medals were at the expense of the taxpayer, he asked everyone to pony up personal money in the Congress, he offered 100 dollars for it. He also did it to various other people.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:15 No.1123966
    >>1123949
    Hey bro, this guy is immune to reason.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:15 No.1123968
    >>1123956
    ...I know.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:16 No.1123971
         File1326525375.jpg-(48 KB, 322x242, OJmad.jpg)
    48 KB
    >>1123922
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:17 No.1123982
    >>1123947
    >>1123971
    still samefagging.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:18 No.1123988
         File1326525494.jpg-(162 KB, 764x421, libertybitchez.jpg)
    162 KB
    >>1123910
    something you clearly do not understand is that the desire for liberty and freedom is spreading

    in 2008 it was 4-5%

    now its 20%

    Its game over Statist.

    We aren't rejoicing because we think he will win, we are rejoicing because the movement is finally taking hold.

    It's not about Ron Paul. Its about Liberty.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:19 No.1123998
         File1326525573.jpg-(25 KB, 230x180, koberape.jpg)
    25 KB
    >>1123982
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:19 No.1123999
    >>1123949
    Except he wasn't the head of a multibillion dollar media conglomerate, he was the head of a firm that published his personal newsletter to his political supporters. The letters were written in the first person, with his name. That's not the independent commentary of a lowly journalist far removed from your sphere of responsibility, that's ghost writing. He's responsible for those words.

    And he agreed that he was responsible for them, in fact was happy enough to tell others that he wrote them during the 96 campaign, when the media pressed him on some of the more atrocious parts. He defended them as his own.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:20 No.1124005
    >>1123956

    Yep, and he chided his colleagues by challenging them to personally contribute $100 to mint the medal. No one did. Paul observed, "It's easier to be generous with other people's money."
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:20 No.1124007
    >>1123988
    2016 it will be 100%!!!!
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:20 No.1124008
    >>1123925
    like i said before regarding his :no" vote for federal money for gay adoptions, a lot of his positions seem inflammatory and counter-intuitive at first, and a lot of people stop there and write him off at the face value of his record. but it takes more digging to find out exactly why he supports it, and you encounter some surprises along the way, too. he would just as easily vote no for federal funding for straight adoption.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:21 No.1124020
    >>1123988
    >>1123988

    >20%
    >NH
    >less then 10% of actual voters come out

    oh man the hilarity keeps on rolling in
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:22 No.1124038
    >>1123988
    he wont be running in 2016. the movement isnt taking hold. the movement is just another swing voter flare up. like ralph nader. clearly you havent observed american politics very long
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:23 No.1124048
    You just going to keep samefagging again and again?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:24 No.1124051
    >>1123999
    he contributed to the newsletter occasionally, but the bulk of it was ghost written by people he apparently trusted at the time. he defended one statement because it was taken out of context, but ultimately took responsibility for the words because that's what big boys do. he was made aware of the comments before his 1996 campaign for congress.

    we paul supporters apologize because the man is not a perfect jesus reincarnate.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:25 No.1124063
    >>1124008
    >but it takes more digging to find out exactly why he supports it

    i find this hilarious because you dont give other politicians the same credit when supporting/opposing the same issue. so you are a hypocrite because you judge other politicians on face value and dont go into their reasoning for backing or opposing legislation but you automatically give ron paul your support. its hillarious
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:26 No.1124066
    >>1124038
    >implying Ralph Nadar support is remotely like Ron Paul

    somethign you still dont understand is that supporters of Ron Paul will not be changing their minds.

    its about Liberty, not some trendy fab of the day
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:26 No.1124072
    >>1124063
    funnily enough, the more you learn about newt gingrich, the more you hate him. the inverse is true with paul.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:27 No.1124081
         File1326526026.jpg-(59 KB, 585x511, 1326498751019.jpg)
    59 KB
    >>1124048
    >>1124048
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:28 No.1124089
    >>1124063
    Because it's proven that Paul is the only incorruptible politician running for office.

    Why should I waste my time with people who are sell outs? I shouldn't have to accept that.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:28 No.1124095
    >>1124051
    >he defended one statement because it was taken out of context

    What part of his defense of the absurd belief that 95 of black men are criminals was taken out of context?

    >but ultimately took responsibility for the words because that's what big boys do.

    Before suddenly repudiating responsibility when he realized it might be politically expedient, lying about having ever defended the comments and complaining endlessly about media persecution when these facts are ever brought up in his presence. What he's done is somewhat worse than failing to live up to Jesus. He's lied and pandered to the absolute lowest common denominator as shamelessly as he felt he had to to get elected.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:29 No.1124097
    in all this time, i've never seen ONE well thought out rational objection to Ron Paul.

    it's all either stuff they simply don't understand properly (some of these are hilarious though - he wants to shut all public schools!!!!1!!!), or it's absurd stuff like 'america needs to continue to spread democracy to the middle east'
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:29 No.1124098
    >>1124089
    Quit feeding the troll.
    >>1124081
    u mad cause I called you out?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:29 No.1124099
    >>1124066
    >>1124066
    haha im not saying ron paul is like ralph nader. i said the thing you call a "movement" is the same type of support that ralph nader and the green party were given. you really think ron paul is starting a revolution? 3rd party candidates flare up every election cycle ron pauls not the first and he wont be the last.. hes just another politician
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:30 No.1124104
    >>1124089
    >>1124089
    lol so you just admitted you're a hypocrite. awesome thanks for playing
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:31 No.1124115
         File1326526306.jpg-(10 KB, 265x190, somad.jpg)
    10 KB
    >>1124098
    >>1124098
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:34 No.1124139
    >>1124095
    because 95% of black males are semi-criminal according to the (racist) judicial system. paul was bashing the judicial system and it's bias toward punishing minorities.

    as for your second part, i'm not entirely sure of what happened, but like i said, nobody is perfect. and he has repeatedly apologized for what has happened. i tend to judge on voting record and platform. paul is the only one who will dismantle the federal war on drugs which disproportionately punishes minorities. no one else is even touching that subject, yet he is campaigning on it.

    get your priorities straight, man.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:34 No.1124140
    >>1124099
    you still dont have a clue.
    I am old enough to have voted for Ross Perot, and this would be much more in line with Perot then Nadar, and much closer to a Goldwater movement.

    What you still dont understand is that Ralph Nadar is a joke (in principle) compared to the ideas of Pauls.

    Paul's record and ideas are 180 degrees from statist government.

    Supporting the guy that will end the federal government as we know it, is not a choice taken lightly. it is a revolutionary idea.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:36 No.1124156
    The only reason anyone likes him is because he says he will legalize weed (which won't happen btw) and he talks like a little kid
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:36 No.1124160
    >>1124140
    once again
    im not comparing the two politicians
    i stated that its simply a swing voter flare up... this is nothing new in the american political cycle. it happens every election cycle so when people come out and say this is a revolution. its laughable. this happens every 4 years its completely assbackwards
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:37 No.1124166
         File1326526646.jpg-(3 KB, 126x126, 1321413981544s.jpg)
    3 KB
    >>1124156
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:38 No.1124183
    >>1124160
    *yawn*

    you're wrong
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:39 No.1124190
    >>1124160
    i did my grad thesis on swing voters activism leading up to and during the election cycle.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:40 No.1124203
    >>1123999

    >He's responsible for those words.

    You're right and he said that he bears the moral responsibility for irresponsibly allowing the letters to be published under his name in 2008, has apologized for them numerous times in the past and has disavow the contents of the comments.

    The newsletter ran under his name for 20 years. The controversial comments existed during a 4 year period from 1990 to 1994. To be sure, his endeavor was a money farm, but engrossed in other activities, and just assuming others would be responsible for his welfare, is a reasonable explanation for something that only existed for 20% of the newsletters existence.

    >In fact was happy enough to tell others that he wrote them during the 96 campaign

    Misinformation. During the 1996 campaign he mentioned a newsletter about investments/economics and "the value of the dollar". He never specified the oversight or writing of the newsletter or anything pertaining to race.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:40 No.1124205
    >>1124183
    ya
    im really not
    >>1124190
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:40 No.1124210
    >>1124139
    >because 95% of black males are semi-criminal according to the (racist) judicial system.

    citation needed.

    >as for your second part, i'm not entirely sure of what happened, but like i said, nobody is perfect. and he has repeatedly apologized for what has happened.

    There's only one recorded instance of him ever owning up to what he really did. That was back in 2001. NOW he pretends that he never did anything wrong, has nothing to apologize for and is being smeared and slandered unfairly by the media.

    >get your priorities straight, man.

    I have this wacky theory that a candidate's trustworthiness and integrity are kind of important factors when deciding to vote for them. Happily, Ron Paul has tons of awful policies that any sensible person would never vote for anyway, like his stance on corporate taxes, income taxes, the epa, the housing department, judicial policy, abortion, sarbines-oxley and dodd-frank, the federal reserve, his drug policy, his stance on wars, all the way down to really kooky stuff like not wanting to incorporate the bill of rights. He's a fucking crackpot, and that has nothing to do with his being a slimeball too.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:42 No.1124234
    >>1124190
    just goes to show how you are confusing swing voting with a real movement.

    you should know that real cultural shifts happen(however rare)

    we are in the 4th turning and its prime season for change.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:43 No.1124246
    >>1124203
    >Misinformation.

    In the interview, he did not deny he made the statement about the swiftness of black men.

    "If you try to catch someone that has stolen a purse from you, there is no chance to catch them," Dr. Paul said.

    He also said the comment about black men in the nation's capital was made while writing about a 1992 study produced by the National Center on Incarceration and Alternatives, a criminal justice think tank based in Virginia.

    Citing statistics from the study, Dr. Paul then concluded in his column: "Given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

    "These aren't my figures," Dr. Paul said Tuesday. "That is the assumption you can gather from" the report.

    http://reason.com/blog/2008/01/11/old-news-rehashed-for-over-a-d

    That whole article is a good read.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:45 No.1124266
    >>1124246

    blacks are fleet of foot because that was an advantage in Africa(so they breed to be more fleet of foot)

    intelligence however wasnt all that important so they are stupid as shit.

    there are genetic differences between the races. deal with it
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:47 No.1124278
    >>1124234
    >>1124234
    its not a real movement. the green party "movement" characterized itself as so. and you hear nothing but whispers from that caucus anymore. its the swing voters attempt to align with a perceived new movement in the political structure to stay out of the 2 party system. this has been happening since career politicians came to light.

    stop calling it a movement. its not a movement. a movement doesnt all of a sudden pop up and become active only during election cycles. a movement doesnt have 1 career politician at the forefront of its message. its another attempt by swing voters aka independents to find another solution to the 2 party problem.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:52 No.1124322
         File1326527560.jpg-(24 KB, 400x404, stossel-is-my-homeboy-t-shirt-(...).jpg)
    24 KB
    If you can't also offer an alternative,

    then you're argument holds no value.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:57 No.1124375
    >>1124322
    i have an alternative. get rid of the electoral college system and the country will be opened up to a multi party system with true majoritarian rule. guess who opposes this reform proposal? the electoral college system was designed with 2 political cultures in mind. it will stay that way as long as the electoral college is in place. take away an unfair voting system and you remove the shackles that hold back small political cultures from rising up. germany has a multi party system, as well as many others because they use a popular, or majoritarian, voting structure
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)02:57 No.1124378
         File1326527829.png-(41 KB, 663x343, dumb.png)
    41 KB
    >>1124278
    Derr.. the movement has been going on since 2007

    you keep saying you are not comparing to Ralph Nadar, but then you keep using that as your example of Swing voting.

    as someone who lived through it, this is much closer to Ross Perot,(who very well could have won if he had not temporally dropped out).


    you are seriously living in a bubble
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:02 No.1124433
    >>1124378
    >>1124378
    >Derr.. the movement has been going on since 2007


    election campaign starts in 2007.... just like its started in 2011 for the 2012 campaign

    you're picture just proved my point. look at the trend it only becomes active in the media during election season

    and please tell me where has your "movement" been these past 3 years? not out raising awareness. they've been sitting idly by and what do you know.. were back in campaign season hahaha

    you dont get it do you? im not comparing the two candidates on their political value. im comparing them because they both were the tip of the spear for a perceived "movement". ralph naders "movement" died off just like this one will after ron paul announces he wont be running for re-election
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:04 No.1124451
    >>1124433

    did you really just search for ralph nader in comparison to rp in google trends? do you not understand they ran for presidential nominations during different election cycles. ralph nader was a candidate during the 2000 election and he tried in 96 as well in the primary. do you really not know this?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:05 No.1124464
    >>1124433
    >yfw environmentalism
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:05 No.1124467
    >>1124433
    poll amounts going from 4% in 2008 to 20% 2012

    >not raising awareness.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:05 No.1124469
    >>1124378
    >>1124378
    um
    http://www.google.com/trends/?q=ralph+nader
    yeahhhhh
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:06 No.1124481
    >>1124467
    >>1124467
    20% in a NH primary hahahah
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:07 No.1124495
    >>1124467
    that does not equate to raising awareness. that means the "movement" did exactly what all others have historically done in election cycles. oh man its like talking to a wall
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:08 No.1124502
    >>1124481
    uhm.. yes I am comparing 2008 results for NH vs this year.

    I get it your trolling.. yes I am mad.

    adios
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:10 No.1124525
    This ron paul crap is a fucking cult. Maybe you should open a church, you won't pay taxes for one.
    Goddamn imbecile children.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:11 No.1124532
         File1326528694.jpg-(13 KB, 312x267, 1594115441654412..jpg)
    13 KB
    >>1124375
    The U.S.is a republic. With its own rules and jurisdictions. By no means is the government (which has kept us going for >200 years) going to scrap what they have to ensure the impractical, brash, and relaticely uneducated publc have total control.
    Direct democracy happens to be a terrible political ideology for only some of these reasons.

    Your statement about 2 political factions duking it out happens to be entirely correct. The system was intentionally designed this way so the country could adjust itself between Jeffersonian democratic and federalist views.

    The thing about Paul, he is a Jeffersonian Democrat. The U.S. has slowly crept it's way up to nanny state since the 30s with Huey Long and then epitomized this with Lyndon B. Johnson.

    You're alternative is paramount to the absurdity if your arguments discounting Paul to alleged claims, supporting states rights, and probably accidents. Paul by no means is perfect, but a vote for him will change American politivs back to what they were intended to be.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:11 No.1124540
    http://www.google.com/trends/?q=ralph+nader,+ron+paul&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&so
    rt=1

    do you see the pattern. election season. spike. election season. spike

    this is the pattern of a swing voter flare up. a movement would have equated to something. henceforth. RP isnt a movement. its just another 3rd party - swing voter popular flare up.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:16 No.1124581
    >>1124532
    >Your statement about 2 political factions duking it out happens to be entirely correct. The system was intentionally designed this way so the country could adjust itself between Jeffersonian democratic and federalist views.

    I think I'm in love. You're the only person in this thread who understands this.


    >>1122984
    Op... Here is why I am not voting for Ron Paul. Because I feel that, while he has some amazing and incredibly needed views on limited power, size, and scope of the federal government...

    ...I do not want the age of Pax Americana to end.

    ...I feel he uses religion as an influence for his views, far too often for my tastes.

    ...I feel that his isolationist views, while idealistic, are unrealistic as a legitimate tactic for American foreign policy.

    ...I feel that his espoused foreign policy views would leave many of our valued, long-time, and/or important allies across the globe out in the cold, or utterly annihilated (Israel, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, much of NATO). I do not believe this is a desirable, admirable, or appropriate course of action.

    ...I feel that while many of his proposed economic and governmental reforms would, in the long term, yield a benefit, that their short-term effects would be little short of devastating, and that there are better, less dramatic alternatives.

    ...I feel that he, along with the overwhelming majority of other candidates that appear viable at the moment, have a very poor idea of just how much of a threat China is our way of life.

    Among other things.

    Guy's got some good ideas, but he's kind of batshit.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:17 No.1124588
    >>1124532
    >>1124532
    popular vote != direct democracy

    direct democracy would be a citizens voter initiative on the federal ballot and we would have to vote on every piece of legislation congress passed before it became a law

    a vote for ron paul is a vote for the republican party because hes chasing their ticket. you claim hes some golden geese, i say not. i say hes just another 3rd party candidate. i hope he runs as a 3rd party candidate in the presidential election. so once again we can see the fidelity of independent voters because of the electoral college

    reformation of the electoral college isnt absurd at all and its been talked about multiple times in whip meetings from both sides. a vote for ron paul is a vote for a republican, because he holds similar values and he cannot unilaterally change things. just like obama couldnt unilaterally change things.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:18 No.1124606
    >>1124581
    Also...
    THINGS THAT AMERICA'S INFLUENCE ACTIVELY PREVENTS:

    >The PRC from invading Taiwan
    >North Korea from invading S. Korea
    >Japan from having an army
    >Japan from being slapped around by China because it doesn't have an Army
    >Russia from controlling half of Eastern Europe and Central Asia more than it already does
    >Israel attempting to destroy half of the Middle East
    >Half of the Middle East attempting to destroy Israel
    >China's government being the main source of foreign investment for Africa
    >NATO from being worthless and Europe being defenseless
    >ANZUS from being worthless and Oceania having to succumb to Chinese influence
    >Nuclear war between Pakistan and India
    Among others I've forgotten

    If every other country in the world minded its own goddamn business then yeah, we could be isolationist and it wouldn't matter. But that isn't the case. Major countries will always try to exert influence on other countries to get them to do what they want, and I'd much rather have America being the one calling the shots instead of China or Russia. Obviously, we shouldn't invade countries for stupid reasons like we did in Iraq, but we shouldn't just turn our back on the rest of the goddamn world either, because everything will go to shit if that happens.

    Please.... come at me, bros.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:20 No.1124619
    >>1124525
    >wanting to live free
    >must be a cult
    >only children want freedom

    fuck off statist
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:21 No.1124629
    >>1124532
    >>1124532
    we have a federalist system for a reason, because jeffersonian democracy would evolve into states becoming so different in policy and cultures without a unifying federal system that it would break the country up. ron paul supports shrinking the federal government down so far that it would eventually be able for states to unalign themselves with federal policy. but thanks to the articles of confederation and federalism our federal government has the grant of power to keep the united states together
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:24 No.1124660
    >>1124588
    also. ron paul doesnt have the ability to unify the swing vote.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:26 No.1124669
    >>1124619
    >>1124619
    lol you say statist as if its an insult
    as if social democracies , such as those following the scandanavian social democratic models dont produce the happiest citizens and most benefits to its citizens.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:27 No.1124673
    >>1124629
    >implying that smaller, more represnetative and localized government would be a bad thing
    >implying that we shouldn't break up into smaller countries
    >implying using authoritarian control to keep unlike people together is a good thing
    >> Look, not trying to be a dick. Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:28 No.1124683
    >>1124606
    >The PRC from invading Taiwan
    No, Ron would not eliminate the Navy, if anything he would still keep relevant bases, plus China/Taiwan are working together economically. Likewise the Taiwanese have a badass military.
    >North Korea from invading S. Korea
    That is never going to happen, the South would ass rape the North. Like I mentioned, Ron wants to shut down some bases, not all, and no strategic ones. We have 50,000 troops in Germany alone, there is no threat to Germany (inb4 Russia) Russia's military is a shell of its former self, and they rely on Germany for petrol sales.
    >Japan from having an army
    Japan has enough money to have an army and already has a substantial navy.
    >Japan from being slapped around by China because it doesn't have an Army
    Does not mean he would shut down Okinawa.
    >Russia from controlling half of Eastern Europe and Central Asia more than it already does
    As stated before.
    >Israel attempting to destroy half of the Middle East
    Thats not even possible. MAD.
    >Half of the Middle East attempting to destroy Israel
    MAD. Likewise Israel has strong relations with Jordan, and nominal relations with Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
    >China's government being the main source of foreign investment for Africa
    Eh, our military is doing nothing to stop that.
    >NATO from being worthless and Europe being defenseless
    Europe is a military powerhouse.
    >ANZUS from being worthless and Oceania having to succumb to Chinese influence
    Never said he would downgrade the military to the point of ineffectiveness, only remove the excess.
    >Nuclear war between Pakistan and India
    Impossible, plus their ties are strengthening, especially economically. Ron is especially right about this one, diplomacy is needed, not force.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:28 No.1124689
         File1326529720.jpg-(410 KB, 1189x1424, 1324721456292.jpg)
    410 KB
    Because only people on the internet take Austrian Economics seriously
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:30 No.1124705
    God forbid I live in a state that represents my views.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:32 No.1124719
         File1326529960.jpg-(38 KB, 437x443, 1311450531303.jpg)
    38 KB
    >>1124669
    >happy citizens

    low populations, not multicultural and large amounts of oil and gas have a lot to do with it

    I would be ok with a socialist system if the culture was a strong uniculture... say leave it to beaver style america.. It AINT.

    As for scandanavia, they are fuckign up their culture and they will eventually run out of oil and gas
    >> Totally didn't take it as such, just happy to have actual debate Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:42 No.1124798
    >>1124683
    BEOFER I BEGIN: This was some very well-worded copypasta. Actually from two different posts, so the second is pretty derpy. First one is >>1124581


    >No, Ron would not eliminate the Navy, if anything he would still keep relevant bases, plus China/Taiwan are working together economically. Likewise the Taiwanese have a badass military.
    Economic cooperation doesn't imply political. The Chinese are seeking to project power in the region, and one way of doing that is through dominance of economy. As for the bases, the things I've heard him say on the subject suggest he WOULD eliminate the bases.
    >That is never going to happen, the South would ass rape the North. Like I mentioned, Ron wants to shut down some bases, not all, and no strategic ones.
    This one was pretty derpy, I have to say. However, the threat of American ANYTHING is definitely a factor keeping them in line. And if you'll notice, America isn't ensuring that SK WINS that war- we're ensuring it doesn't happen at all.
    >Japan has enough money to have an army and already has a substantial navy.
    They have a Self-Defense Force.
    >Does not mean he would shut down Okinawa.
    I agree with this. However, I think that the threat the Chinese pose (to Japan at least) is a political and economic based one, augmented by military realities.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:43 No.1124808
    >>1124798
    >We have 50,000 troops in Germany alone, there is no threat to Germany (inb4 Russia) Russia's military is a shell of its former self, and they rely on Germany for petrol sales.
    Putin would try it, though. Remember Georgia? A void left by America would lead to repeats. Especially if there's oil involved.
    >Thats not even possible. MAD.
    Israel wouldn't nuke 'em, but I can see them attacking key targets and crippling the region for years to come.
    >MAD. Likewise Israel has strong relations with Jordan, and nominal relations with Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
    Extremists (and I hate to bring them up, but bear with me) don't care about MAD. They want the Jews out, at all costs.
    >Eh, our military is doing nothing to stop that.
    Eh, I agree. I think we SHOULD be, but that's a whole different thread...
    >Europe is a military powerhouse.
    Yes, but it's also one half of a single coin at this point. They're moving past this, but America going the way of Lindberg would be too jarring all at once.
    >Never said he would downgrade the military to the point of ineffectiveness, only remove the excess.
    If his opinions on the UN are as consistent as he says they are, he'll see the ANZUS as excesses...
    >Impossible, plus their ties are strengthening, especially economically. Ron is especially right about this one, diplomacy is needed, not force.
    Yeah, this is pretty derp.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:44 No.1124824
         File1326530694.jpg-(32 KB, 565x600, 1313716997001..jpg)
    32 KB
    >>1124588
    Please never use a syllogism relating Paul to Obama like that ever again.

    Well, this does happen to be the first time in a long time a real libertarian has snuck under the radar in the republican party. But you mistake him as a status quo republican anyway. I'm not going to fight you to thr death over how we can change the current situation. It's simply against the nations foundations to do so. I agree, American politics has sadly changed for the worse, allow me to explain why I think so.

    The media. Yeah, I know conspiracy, amirite? Well, the media is fuelled by 2 things: strifes between morality and death. Starring with the latter, the media happens to love war and violence. It captivates the interest of readers--and not just in todays world where people love Call of Duty and support nuke donations.

    Look back to the roots of the Cuban-American war. The whole thing was caused by Pulitzer and Hurst trying to outsell their newspapers by fabricating Cuban dissent and violence. It was hardly in the best interest of the people to invade beforehand, but rising emotions from the media furthernore extended ideas about Manifest Destiny, the extension of the Monroe doctrine, ans Roosevelt collolary.

    Part 2. Remember that slogan "sex sells?" So does moral conflict. Let's first state the obvious: Moral conflict is widesoread and existent. Look at religion. Ok, now let's compare debates from early 1900s American and now. We see sex allegations and religious arguments littering debates left and right in both time periods--but nobody cared that Woodrow Wilson was a huge bigot. Now, that's all anyone cares about regardless of platform. The high demand for moral debate only leads to coverage of moral debate. The media feels no obligation to the truth.

    Just my crazy idea. I'm pretty sure I could get Chompky to back me up.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:49 No.1124867
    >>1124719
    This.

    Socialistic governments really can only work in homogeneous societies. America is too diverse. We're a nation of strangers, and I didn't invent that term.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:52 No.1124900
    >>1124798
    >>1124808
    >Economic cooperation doesn't imply political. The Chinese are seeking to project power in the region, and one way of doing that is through dominance of economy. As for the bases, the things I've heard him say on the subject suggest he WOULD eliminate the bases.
    I cannot verify he would, and I am sure Ron would defer to the judgment of the military regarding essential allies. Also the Taiwanese have been slowly selling themselves out to China. if you want to discuss China flexing muscles I think Vietnam and the Philippines are more relevant.
    >However, the threat of American ANYTHING is definitely a factor keeping them in line. And if you'll notice, America isn't ensuring that SK WINS that war- we're ensuring it doesn't happen at all.
    But the war would not happen. NK knows they stand no chance, even China at this point would not back them.
    >(Japan) They have a Self-Defense Force.
    Yes, and as I stated I am pretty sure Ron understands the need for a military presence there, albeit that the Japanese should be in charge of their region more. And they should. They have such a powerful economy partly due to lack of military expenditure.
    >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Maritime_Self-Defense_Force#Capabilities_and_recent_developme
    nts
    They are by no means weak.
    >> Confidential 01/14/12(Sat)03:53 No.1124913
         File1326531228.jpg-(20 KB, 500x362, 1324963417728..jpg)
    20 KB
    >>1124629
    2 things.
    1. Quit the samefagging. It's becoming blatantly obvious more and more.
    2. Read up on your fallacies. Saying Ron Paul would eventually shrink to nonexistence is quite abslippery slope.

    I'll be using this new alias in the thread because my walls of text are taking too long and I won't get any short posts recognised as the same guy.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:54 No.1124922
         File1326531287.jpg-(85 KB, 450x666, 1324634318312.jpg)
    85 KB
    >>1124532
    See? Not everyone on 4chan is an idiot! Bravo, anon.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)03:57 No.1124944
    >>1124808
    >Putin would try it, though. Remember Georgia? A void left by America would lead to repeats. Especially if there's oil involved.
    Putin does not have the income to properly arm the military to take on Germany, likewise Germany is many times more powerful than little Georgia. And without oil sales then where would the money come from?
    >Israel wouldn't nuke 'em, but I can see them attacking key targets and crippling the region for years to come.
    Which is already happening.
    >Extremists (and I hate to bring them up, but bear with me) don't care about MAD. They want the Jews out, at all costs.
    Already happening.
    >Europe is a military powerhouse.
    >Yes, but it's also one half of a single coin at this point. They're moving past this, but America going the way of Lindberg would be too jarring all at once.
    Not sure if accurate.
    >If his opinions on the UN are as consistent as he says they are, he'll see the ANZUS as excesses...
    I don't think he can ignore the necessity of the Asian region. Like I said he would still defer to the military generals.
    >Impossible, plus their ties are strengthening, especially economically. Ron is especially right about this one, diplomacy is needed, not force.
    Still stand behind that statement. Likewise there is nothing the US can do to stop a conflict between both of our allies except via diplomacy.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:00 No.1124975
         File1326531617.jpg-(31 KB, 330x460, 1326399152050.jpg)
    31 KB
    >Ron Paul voted AGAINST net neutrality, which would prevent big companies like AT&T and Verizon from stopping internet users from having free & equal access to all online media.
    >Ron Paul voted AGAINST net neutrality, which would prevent big companies like AT&T and Verizon from stopping internet users from having free & equal access to all online media.

    >Ron Paul voted AGAINST net neutrality, which would prevent big companies like AT&T and Verizon from stopping internet users from having free & equal access to all online media.

    >Ron Paul voted AGAINST net neutrality, which would prevent big companies like AT&T and Verizon from stopping internet users from having free & equal access to all online media.

    >Ron Paul voted AGAINST net neutrality, which would prevent big companies like AT&T and Verizon from stopping internet users from having free & equal access to all online media.

    >Ron Paul voted AGAINST net neutrality, which would prevent big companies like AT&T and Verizon from stopping internet users from having free & equal access to all online media.


    That alone should be enough reason not to vote for him, but here's the rest

    http://pastebin.com/7ZHfqS8A

    Yes, he really is batshit fucking insane.
    >> Confidential 01/14/12(Sat)04:03 No.1125008
    >>1124975
    Don't use ATT. Don't use Verizon.
    /invisible hand.

    That's exactly what Paul voted on. If it was the government on the other hand...
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:03 No.1125011
    >>1124900
    >I cannot verify he would, and I am sure Ron would defer to the judgment of the military regarding essential allies. Also the Taiwanese have been slowly selling themselves out to China. if you want to discuss China flexing muscles I think Vietnam and the Philippines are more relevant.
    I can't verify that he would either, but it isn't a stretch. An isolationist like Paul doesn't see geopolitcal stratagems. He sees budgets to be cut. As for the bit with Vietnam and Philippines, you're absolutely right. Philippines is key here.
    >But the war would not happen. NK knows they stand no chance, even China at this point would not back them.
    While I DO agree with you, the fact of the matter is that NK is being held in check by American influence. Their research into nukes can be either them waving their collective dicks, or they can be part of something more long term. And they don't care about MAD. AT the very least, the Kims don't. Personally, I don't think that nation should exist. Liberation or something needs to be done. But again, another thread.
    >Yes, and as I stated I am pretty sure Ron understands the need for a military presence there, albeit that the Japanese should be in charge of their region more. And they should. They have such a powerful economy partly due to lack of military expenditure.
    While it is strong there, they have the same problem everyone in Asia seems to be having- they cannot into power projection. If Ron wants to do a "phase out", then by all means. But from the looks of it, he means "pull out". I can't say how much he means this, so I can only judge him on the intentions he says he has.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:04 No.1125016
    >>1124867
    Most European societies are far more diverse than America. Hell, 100 years ago you could walk from one end of most European countries and find a different language in every village. Even today, Italy has a billion different dialects. Polish still has 4 major variations, Lesser Polish, Greater Polish, Masovian and Everything Else.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:04 No.1125017
    >>1124975
    Lol, that doesn't sound like something Ron Paul would do. Also, nice source that you created.

    Ron Paul approving of an unregulated internet;
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c76yeqQY2ms
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:04 No.1125020
    >>1125008
    >like AT&T and Verizon
    >like

    Enjoy losing your internet freedom so you can have your hero in office you fuckface
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:05 No.1125035
    >>1125008
    >Don't use ATT. Don't use Verizon.
    If only it was that easy. Does Ron Paul support regulating monopolies?

    There are significant barriers to entry to the telecom market. I can't just say "I'm tired of ATT/Verizon/T-Mobile's abuse of their monopoly, I'm going to start my own phone carrier or ISP". That requires millions of dollars of infrastructure. The free market can't just fix this one.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:09 No.1125063
    >>1125017
    >video of Paul bullshitting out of his ass to get supporters

    What he actually voted on is the reality, kid.

    http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Ron_Paul.htm?

    >Voted NO on establishing "network neutrality" (non-tiered Internet).


    Yes, he is a fucking moron. Even Obama was for it.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:11 No.1125085
    >>1125063
    >get mad that Ron Paul supports free market
    >not a word about SOPA

    there wont be an internet left bro
    >> Confidential 01/14/12(Sat)04:12 No.1125089
    >>1125035
    Troll.
    >>1125020
    I possess the intellectual means and capabilities to do so. Who's going to stop me?

    And it's absurd to thing all of the members of the mobile internet oligopoly would conspire for anything other than fixing prices. Honestly, could you think of one thing they would block?
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:13 No.1125095
    >>1124944
    >Putin does not have the income to properly arm the military to take on Germany, likewise Germany is many times more powerful than little Georgia. And without oil sales then where would the money come from?
    Hate to do this but...
    >implying Germany would intervene in Uzbekistan.
    >Or Africa
    >Or anywhere there's cheap oil/nuclear power to be found

    >Already happening
    >Already happening
    Again, you're right. The only reason it isn't FAR WORSE is because America will smack down HARD and the first shit it sees go down. And NATO will follow it.


    >Not sure if accurate.
    I don't either, but this is the one case where I'd rather NOT take the risk.


    >I don't think he can ignore the necessity of the Asian region. Like I said he would still defer to the military generals.
    No, I actually disagree. I have full faith that he WILL ignore it.


    >Impossible, plus their ties are strengthening, especially economically. Ron is especially right about this one, diplomacy is needed, not force.
    Sorry. Meant to say that the original copypasta of "Pakistan and India will nuke each other!" was derp. You make a valid point here.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:13 No.1125102
    >>1125085
    SOPA isn't going to get passed. IF Ron Paul gets his way you'll have a basic Yahoo/Youtube/Google/ limited network, like cable TV


    If you have any common decency you'll admit that you support a kook and just vote Obama.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:16 No.1125125
         File1326532601.png-(310 KB, 400x604, 1323546124563.png)
    310 KB
    >>1125102
    LOL.... your statist ways are coming to an end bro
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:16 No.1125129
    >>1125089
    >Troll
    Haha, what? I was just asking what Ron Paul's stance on monopolies/duopolies/oligopolies is, and what regulations should be applied to them. The telecom market was the particular example I gave of an oligopoly with significant barriers to entry (and therefore competition).

    Explain to me what in that statement was trolling.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:18 No.1125140
         File1326532738.jpg-(47 KB, 600x449, 12-19-10allot.jpg)
    47 KB
    >>1125089
    enjoy your shitty internet bro.
    >> The guy you are discussing this with. Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:20 No.1125156
    >>1125011
    >>1125095
    Africa really isn't a region where conflicts are being waged like the old proxy wars between the USSR and the US and their allies, now it is economical. Eveything the Chinese are doing is 100% legal, they are investing and buying. Want to stop that? Then we need to do the same. Likewise China has 1.3 billion people, they are using that to aid their weak infrastructure, not military (solely). The only way to combat that is fire with fire, that is increase investment as well. We cannot do that in a recession. And on a lesser note, China's investment DOES aid stability in the region.
    As for Europe, Germany, France, and England are strongly allied, and outnumber Russia in population and arms. I am not worried at all about Europe. Asia, well that is the real issue at the moment, as is the Middle East. But diplomacy not war would best benefit that region. Ron has some good points regarding blowback being some of the sources of terrorism.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:25 No.1125192
    >>1125129
    >I was just asking what Ron Paul's stance on monopolies/duopolies/oligopolies is, and what regulations should be applied to them
    dont do anything, that would be interfering with the market. the market will fix all problems.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:29 No.1125236
    Because global warming is real, and will become the defining issue of the century. Paul has consistently said he thinks its BS, and a shitty record voting for measures that would protect the environment and reduce dependance on foreign energy.

    He claims to be "free market", yet votes against free-trade agreements.

    I reckon he talks sense, but his stance on the environment means I could never vote for him.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:32 No.1125257
    >>1125236
    Global warming is a red herring because

    >If it is false it is the biggest and most wasteful hoax of the last, oh 3 decades.

    >If it is true is beyond stopping because we overegulated our economy to where all the manufacturing was sent to China, etc. where they arbitrarily pollute.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:32 No.1125259
    >>1125156
    Yeah, I realize who you are. We're the only two people actually discussing intelligently, heh.

    China/Africa, I'm not too worried about. What does worry me (potentially) is that anyone with an army to burn and a nation to fuel could very easily turn to the natural resources housed there. Russia, in particular, give me a bad feeling. As for the Chinese, their investment in Africa is stabilizing the region, but not to the extent I would hope. Ever heard of the Invisible Children movie? It follows a bunch of kids who could, at any moment, be conscripted into a warband composed of other kids. And they murder and rape women. And they're led by a dude claiming to be Satan, but is more probably a heroin addict. Why aren't we sending a kill team after this guy? Why aren't we doing something, ANYTHING?

    As for Europe, I'm not worried about them militarily, but infra-structurally. Withdrawing form NATO would rock the boat a little too hard for my taste.

    And in Asia... Diplomacy and military aren't mutually exclusive. You don't want to be dealing with a dude who is armed to the teeth if you yourself aren't at least capable of defending your interests. Moreover, the military can be used as purely strategic presence. Think Cold War. We didn't fight Russia inEurope. But if we hadn't been there, they would've overrun the West.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:33 No.1125269
    >>1125236

    he also voted against the "PATRIOT Act"
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:33 No.1125271
    >>1125257
    Its real, and humans make a defining contribution.

    China is taking alot more action towards regulating carbon emissions and building clean energy than the US bro
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:34 No.1125275
    Well, he sponsored the Marriage Protection Act, protecting an act (DOMA) that inhibits full faith and credit from constitutional challenges. It shows his support of the Constitution is hardly universal.

    He never discusses how he's going to renegotiate the treaties necessary to withdraw troops and never discusses the fact that we are in treaties that are constitutionally binding.

    His policies would make getting work in many fields virtually impossible for the next (at minimum) four years due to a flood of highly qualified experienced regulators (these aren't DMV people he wants fired) to the market. Enjoy even more dissatisfied young people.

    And that's assuming you even think his economic policies are coherent. I don't vote based on them because they're designed in a way that makes them impossible to disprove or prove by their very nature, which makes it hilarious when he touts predictions.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:34 No.1125277
    Most people do not actually believe in the libertarian property rights or the libertarian view on markets/foreign relations. That is the real reason Paul and his supporters are fighting a pointless battle. If their policies got implemented people would freak and reverse them overnight.
    >> Confidential 01/14/12(Sat)04:34 No.1125278
         File1326533674.png-(20 KB, 265x75, if3yV.png)
    20 KB
    >>1125129
    Calling me a fuckface andnot using any quotation marks is an excellent way to ask a question.

    As for the newly proposed issue-- I probably can't say. I'm not a RP maniac I'm an idealist libertarian and voting constitutionalist.
    From what I know, the only regulations the government enforces are those that occur when a monopoly uses coercion to leave others out.

    Paul would leave it to the state to decide additional ones.
    Try google. I found this pic gold with it.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:34 No.1125279
    austrian economics doesn't promote a desirable advancement of society.

    or, simpler, austrian economics doesn't fucking work.

    and this incorporation doctrine bullshit. "dur, i <3 constitution, except these bits anyone thought were good ideas after 1790."
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:36 No.1125298
    >>1125278
    >Calling me a fuckface andnot using any quotation marks is an excellent way to ask a question.
    But I didn't call you a fuckface. Now I'm confused. I entered this conversation at that point, so maybe you're mistaking me for someone else? I'm not >>1125020
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:36 No.1125301
    >>1125271
    Not even. Look at Beijing, the air pollution is the worst in the world. They had to shut down a SOLAR PLANT factory due to its pollution. And due to their slowing economy and the ability for investors to open up shops without problems from the government (likewise the widespread corruption and bribery) I doubt pollution will significantly decline.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:37 No.1125305
    >>1125269
    Yeah good on him. As I said, climate change is an important environmental and moral issue for me. Our pollution will make the lives of the 3rd world even more pathetically shit, yet wont really effect us.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:38 No.1125313
    >>1125279
    >austrian economics doesn't promote a desirable advancement of society.

    Economics do not advance society, society advances society, as in when Ron said while debating drugs laws, it is a societal issue. Austrian merely allows the market to fulfill the necessities, which demand does, and to correct itself without government influence or obstruction.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:40 No.1125326
    >>1125313
    > he thinks markets are perfect

    > lol at the libertarian market religion
    >> Confidential 01/14/12(Sat)04:41 No.1125337
    >>1125298
    My sincerest apologies. It's quite late. Just switch the posf I called a troll with the fuckface comment and vice versa.


    Wow. Look at the time. Hope you all enjoyed my text walls.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:42 No.1125348
    >>1125301
    Well, their air quality is one good reason why they are taking action on energy.

    They are the leading consumer of solar energy, the second biggest invesstor in wind power. They haev also closed more than 2000 cement and steel factories; some of the most energy intensive industries in an economy.

    They want to produce 16% of their power from renewable energy by 2016 I think.

    They are doing shit man

    Also public opinion in China is hgley in favour of pollution reduction, probably because of theur air quality as you have mentioned
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:45 No.1125369
    >>1125313
    >hurp durp.

    where's that paultard who thinks paul's economic policy would result in him being middle class while working 2 days a week?

    that shit is a fucking hoot.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:46 No.1125381
    >Russia, in particular, give me a bad feeling.
    Agreed, but look at the public outrage at the recent elections. I see good things happening.
    >As for the Chinese, their investment in Africa is stabilizing the region, but not to the extent I would hope. Ever heard of the Invisible Children movie? It follows a bunch of kids who could, at any moment, be conscripted into a warband composed of other kids. And they murder and rape women. And they're led by a dude claiming to be Satan, but is more probably a heroin addict. Why aren't we sending a kill team after this guy? Why aren't we doing something, ANYTHING?
    Good point, but that is the UN, but eh, well man I don't know. Honestly I would like to see stronger players in that region, like Nigeria and Ethiopia. But you are correct.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:46 No.1125382
    >>1125348
    >doesnt realize that "Renewable energy is a net loser
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:47 No.1125386
    >>1125381

    >As for Europe, I'm not worried about them militarily, but infra-structurally. Withdrawing form NATO would rock the boat a little too hard for my taste.

    Good points, I do not wholly agree with NATO withdrawal, but after Libya I don't know how to feel about supporting them either. They seem to be driven by banks interests.

    >And in Asia... Diplomacy and military aren't mutually exclusive. You don't want to be dealing with a dude who is armed to the teeth if you yourself aren't at least capable of defending your interests. Moreover, the military can be used as purely strategic presence. Think Cold War.
    Agreed.
    >We didn't fight Russia in Europe. But if we hadn't been there, they would've overrun the West.
    Also agreed, but we need to adjust to the times. Should Russia become economically strong we should respond with caution, that is if Russia hasn't changed for the better ( I think they will). Remember our military was strong but not bloated at the time we entered WW2, but we responded accordingly to the war after entering. There is a time and place for everything. But yes, a strong Navy in the Pacific and Middle East/West Africa is sound policy.
    I (believe) Ron would receive this information, and he is a rational man, I am sure he would be properly advised on how far he can go with the cuts. At best they could go back to 2000 levels, pre-9/11.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:48 No.1125399
    >>1125382
    Only if the energy used to create the infrastructure is provided by non renewable sources
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:50 No.1125413
    >>1125348
    Yes, you are right about China investing in renewable, but may I remind you the 1.3 billion expected to be 1.6 soon population. They are also building 20 new Nuclear Power plants in the next decade. They need to fill the gaps and are doing everything possible, I do not believe they are doing it out of ecological conscience, their history displays otherwise. And as far as 99% manufacturer of solar panels, most of those are for export and all of them are profitable.
    >> Yes, still the same guy. Namefagging everywhere else, might as well here. The Inquisitor With No Name 01/14/12(Sat)04:56 No.1125464
    >>1125381
    Putin is bad, I agree, but I'm actually more concerned about the system that created him and the one that he has created himself. The Soviet Union fell, but its power structures and way of doing things remained, and Putin only kicked that into overdrive due to his background in the Cheka. While even now, there is hope for man, it'll take a long while for it to recover.

    >Good point, but that is the UN, but eh, well man I don't know. Honestly I would like to see stronger players in that region, like Nigeria and Ethiopia. But you are correct.

    And Ethiopia that can stand on its own?? Oh God, I think I just came.

    When I hear "spreading Democracy", I don't think "Iraq".

    I think "little brother". I want us to be the big, badass nation in the background, making sure that China doesn't pull tricky shit and that the nations we want to "Democratize" remain stable. I want to teach them how to run their own show, not teach them how to fight our own guys. I want Ethiopia and Nigeria and hell, even KENYA to stand on its own, but never forget that it can call on their big brother America to help out if its needed. And only WHEN needed.

    That's part of the reason I consider myself a neo-conservative. Although I hate the way we've been doing it, I believe we SHOULD spread democracy. And sadly, Paul fails to deliver on that ideal.

    Got work tomorrow. Good show, Anon. Glad to see SOMEONE on 4chan knows how to debate like a boss.
    >> Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:57 No.1125470
    He has spent decades in congress, despite being an 'advocate for term limits'. He added billions of dollars to his district, being one of the only GOP Reps not to sign a voluntary earmarks ban- he ended up getting more federal spending for his district than the district in 47 other states. He let his own campaign manager/best friend die because he couldn't afford a 400k treatment; the same friend raised more than 18 million for his 2008 campaign. He has no problem avoiding responsibility for his campaign considering he couldn't handle a 6 person newsletter team and just blames someone else, he appointed a prominent KKK organizer as one of the campaign leaders and he takes money and endorsement from a felon KKK Grand Wizard without distancing himself from him. He constantly distorts the founding father's opinions to justify his own. He claims to be a constitutionalist when his entire message has been about avoiding the 14th amendment, destroying the 16th amendment, intentionally misinterpreting Article 1 Section 8 and being against the "phone incorporation doctrine", which supreme court has recognized as saying means the bill of rights apply to the states- in other words, Paul believes it doesn't. He also believes there's very little separation from church and state, the constitution doesn't guarantee a right to privacy and that corporation rights are more important than individual rights (which he has made clear by being against Net Neutrality and being the only congressman who voted against re-acknowledging the Civil Rights Act). He's a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, which I find hilarious and hypocritical considering he's running as a Republican. And he wouldn't have intervened in World War 2 if it was up to him.
    >> That guy you are talking to Anonymous 01/14/12(Sat)04:59 No.1125489
    >>1125464
    Aw shit, whats up fellow tha/tg/uy?


    [Return]
    Delete Post [File Only]
    Password
    Style [Yotsuba | Yotsuba B | Futaba | Burichan]