I Disagree With Ron Paul.

urmomis100

urmomis100

Well-Known Member
Dan Kone said:
His policies are the proof. I know you think he's omnipotent, but unfortunately he is a politician.

If you guys acted more like Beardo, objectively weighing the positives and negatives of Ron Paul's policies and then decided the positives out weigh the negatives I'd have a little more respect for support of Ron Paul. But when you do this thing where you insist every view point Ron Paul has is perfect and he is not a politician but an infallible truth teller, you just sound like cult worshipers.

I've worked on many political campaigns and I know your type. You're a koolaid drinker. Don't worry, you're not alone. We've got plenty of them on the left too. When I worked on the Obama campaign I had to deal with them all the time.

On all the campaigns I've worked on I've wildly disagreed with the candidate on many issues. I just disagreed with them less than I did their competition. But that's not what most of the Ron Paul supporters seem to be like. You guys are fanatics that seem to agree with him 100% of the time no matter how absurd it is. I promise you, if you continue to support any politician like that you will be disappointed 100% of the time. And yes, Ron Paul is a politician. They all lie, they all hide their true motivations. There are no exceptions to that. FDR did it, Reagan did it, Lincoln did it, Clinton did it. Ron Paul is not an exception to that rule. There are no exceptions to that rule. You need to accept that fact.

View Ron Paul objectively. If you like most of his policies that's fine. But put down the koolaide and quit acting like he's some sort of deity. Yes, his trade policies favor multinational corporations especially the ones who keep their money off shore and import goods from places like east asia. Now you can argue so do Obama's trade policies and you'd be right about that. What you can't argue with any credibility is that Ron Paul's policies are all perfect in every way. That's insane and makes you sound like a cult follower.
Click to expand...

His policies, for the most part, are proof that he ISNT/Does not do favors for corporations, bureaucracies, etc. Im a RP supporter, I dont agree w/ him on everything but I support him bc he is not comparable to Clinton, Obama, Lincoln, FDR because they sold their souls to win an election. RP will not sell his soul and will not win a pres election. All politicians have to spit some "rhetoric" to win, but hey, they have to appeal to the fundamental "right" or "left" in the primaries, then look neutral in the general election. Its asking them to spit some BS. And as for RP's trade policies, Im not a koolaid drinker, Im an economics major :)
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
Dan Kone said:
This thread is separating the people who objectively support Ron Paul from the koolaide drinking cult fanatics.
Click to expand...
or is it separating those who adhere to a traditional interpretation of the constitution from the fair weather patriots who are willing to sacrifice the rights of some for the welfare of others? i'm sure it's a bit of both. there are, after all, quite a few of us who believe in the supremacy of the rights of the individual and that a healthy society is the eventual outcome of that ideal, that see the forced shortcuts we take to provide for some as huge steps backward in the evolution of our society.
 
txhazard

txhazard

Well-Known Member
beardo said:
I have been listening to Ron Paul and reading his books and I have found a couple issues I disagree with him on.
He says we should not have tariffs on imported goods.
He says illegal immigrants are not taking our jobs
He is pro Nuclear power.
I have heard his reasoning for his view points and he has good reasoning behind his stance although I do not agree with him on these issues.
When it is time to vote I will vote Paul because even though I may disagree with him on some major issues I feel he will continue to do what he is supposed to and what is right for our country.
Click to expand...
Its okay to disagree with him on some of the things he stands for, he is just a man. Im not 100% on board with all of his views, but he really is the only politician that ive seen ever that sticks to his guns and i respect that.

He still believes a man or woman can decide what is good for them and not have the Fed tell you how you need to live your life. I dont think Ron Paul will be able to fix everything if he is elected but i think he is a step in the right direction.
 
sync0s

sync0s

Well-Known Member
urmomis100 said:
His policies, for the most part, are proof that he ISNT/Does not do favors for corporations, bureaucracies, etc. Im a RP supporter, I dont agree w/ him on everything but I support him bc he is not comparable to Clinton, Obama, Lincoln, FDR because they sold their souls to win an election. RP will not sell his soul and will not win a pres election. All politicians have to spit some "rhetoric" to win, but hey, they have to appeal to the fundamental "right" or "left" in the primaries, then look neutral in the general election. Its asking them to spit some BS. And as for RP's trade policies, Im not a koolaid drinker, Im an economics major :)
Click to expand...
I think the reason he says that is because his personal views on regulation. RP is non regulatory and Dan has said multiple times that we need regulation. So to him, non regulatory view is one that is 'in bed with' multinational corporations. That's completely a philosophical viewpoint if it is the reason he says that. Although, knowing Dan, he probably has other reasons too.
 
sync0s

sync0s

Well-Known Member
undertheice said:
or is it separating those who adhere to a traditional interpretation of the constitution from the fair weather patriots who are willing to sacrifice the rights of some for the welfare of others? i'm sure it's a bit of both. there are, after all, quite a few of us who believe in the supremacy of the rights of the individual and that a healthy society is the eventual outcome of that ideal, that see the forced shortcuts we take to provide for some as huge steps backward in the evolution of our society.
Click to expand...
Well, my objectives to RP stances stems from the interpretation of the constitution and basic human rights. I don't think abortion should be illegal for two reasons: human life is not clearly defined (and probably never will be) well enough to determine when murder is involved, and historically when abortion has been illegal the accidental suicide rate skyrocketed because women resorted to doing "back door ally" abortions and ended up killing themselves. I understand his stance on marriage definition, but our federal government has one job set by the founding fathers and that's to protect the citizens rights, IMO means we need to stop infringing on gay rights.
 
budlover13

budlover13

King Tut
Dan Kone said:
His policies are the proof. I know you think he's omnipotent, but unfortunately he is a politician.

If you guys acted more like Beardo, objectively weighing the positives and negatives of Ron Paul's policies and then decided the positives out weigh the negatives I'd have a little more respect for support of Ron Paul. But when you do this thing where you insist every view point Ron Paul has is perfect and he is not a politician but an infallible truth teller, you just sound like cult worshipers.

I've worked on many political campaigns and I know your type. You're a koolaid drinker. Don't worry, you're not alone. We've got plenty of them on the left too. When I worked on the Obama campaign I had to deal with them all the time.

On all the campaigns I've worked on I've wildly disagreed with the candidate on many issues. I just disagreed with them less than I did their competition. But that's not what most of the Ron Paul supporters seem to be like. You guys are fanatics that seem to agree with him 100% of the time no matter how absurd it is. I promise you, if you continue to support any politician like that you will be disappointed 100% of the time. And yes, Ron Paul is a politician. They all lie, they all hide their true motivations. There are no exceptions to that. FDR did it, Reagan did it, Lincoln did it, Clinton did it. Ron Paul is not an exception to that rule. There are no exceptions to that rule. You need to accept that fact.

View Ron Paul objectively. If you like most of his policies that's fine. But put down the koolaide and quit acting like he's some sort of deity. Yes, his trade policies favor multinational corporations especially the ones who keep their money off shore and import goods from places like east asia. Now you can argue so do Obama's trade policies and you'd be right about that. What you can't argue with any credibility is that Ron Paul's policies are all perfect in every way. That's insane and makes you sound like a cult follower.
Click to expand...
This is what i propose Dan. Thank you.

Sorry for my, quite often unbridled, enthusiasm. i'm back from being apathetic and RP has struck a chord with me and many friends. He is the only one that i see applying the logical thinking process that you describe. While he definitely is not above reproach and has surely accepted some questionable donations but when i measure him against the rest of the field, he shines.
 
Dan Kone

Dan Kone

Well-Known Member
urmomis100 said:
His policies, for the most part, are proof that he ISNT/Does not do favors for corporations, bureaucracies, etc. Im a RP supporter, I dont agree w/ him on everything but I support him bc he is not comparable to Clinton, Obama, Lincoln, FDR because they sold their souls to win an election. RP will not sell his soul and will not win a pres election. All politicians have to spit some "rhetoric" to win, but hey, they have to appeal to the fundamental "right" or "left" in the primaries, then look neutral in the general election. Its asking them to spit some BS. And as for RP's trade policies, Im not a koolaid drinker, Im an economics major :)
Click to expand...
Yep. Cult fanatic detected.
 
Dan Kone

Dan Kone

Well-Known Member
undertheice said:
or is it separating those who adhere to a traditional interpretation of the constitution from the fair weather patriots who are willing to sacrifice the rights of some for the welfare of others? i'm sure it's a bit of both. there are, after all, quite a few of us who believe in the supremacy of the rights of the individual and that a healthy society is the eventual outcome of that ideal, that see the forced shortcuts we take to provide for some as huge steps backward in the evolution of our society.
Click to expand...
That's a much different thing than believing Ron Paul is infallible, defender of all things good and right, and never engages in any dishonest behavior ever. For some reason people here are under the impression that Ron Paul is some sort of political anomaly. He's not. It's fine if you share his views, but anyone who thinks he's something other than a politician is in for a world of heartache.
 
deprave

deprave

New Member
Im also going to vote for Ron Paul as someone who usually votes democrat I obviously disagree with Ron Paul on a few issues, abortion is one of them, but Ron Paul is not the status quo, its not the same old shit, and contrary to what dan says he is not in bed with corporations, the truth is that Ron Paul is in bed with the people. I am voting Ron Paul for revolution, for the drug war, to bring the troops home, and to restore America.

Dan says Ron Paul is in bed with the corporations, far from the truth, the proof is in his record, Ron Paul voted FOR anti-trust act, Ron Paul voted against free trade agreements, embargos, not only did Ron Paul VOTE against things like corporate welfare and fraud but he is the man on the front lines AUDITING these sons of bitches! I mean it when i say Ron Paul votes for the people EVERY-TIME you can "take that to the bank"..Ron Paul is the modern Ralph Nader when it comes to protecting the consumer, but more successful, to say he is in bed with the corporations is a ridiculous conspiracy theory, its outright laughable. The truth is that with Ron Pauls philosophy implemented most of us would be more free and prosperous then we have been in a long time.
 
Dan Kone

Dan Kone

Well-Known Member
deprave said:
Im also going to vote for Ron Paul as someone who usually votes democrat I obviously disagree with Ron Paul on a few issues, abortion is one of them, but Ron Paul is not the status quo, its not the same old shit, and contrary to what dan says he is not in bed with corporations, the truth is that Ron Paul is in bed with the people. I am voting Ron Paul for revolution, for the drug war, to bring the troops home, and to restore America.

Dan says Ron Paul is in bed with the corporations, far from the truth, the proof is in his record, Ron Paul voted FOR anti-trust act, Ron Paul voted against free trade agreements, embargos, not only did Ron Paul VOTE against things like corporate welfare and fraud but he is the man on the front lines AUDITING these sons of bitches! I mean it when i say Ron Paul votes for the people EVERY-TIME you can "take that to the bank"..Ron Paul is the modern Ralph Nader when it comes to protecting the consumer, but more successful, to say he is in bed with the corporations is a ridiculous conspiracy theory, its outright laughable. The truth is that with Ron Pauls philosophy implemented most of us would be more free and prosperous then we have been in a long time.
Click to expand...
So why dose Ron Paul constantly claim to support free trade if he's really against it as you claim?

And no, Ron Paul is no Ralph Nader.
 
deprave

deprave

New Member
He promotes free markets, big difference from a lot of 'free' trade agreements. Ron Paul voted down NAFTA CAFTA etc... these are free trade agreements that Ron Paul has voted agianst, but at the same time he does promote trade with other countries.
 
deprave

deprave

New Member
http://www.ontheissues.org/tx/Ron_Paul_Free_Trade.htm

Free trade agreements threaten national sovereignty

I opposed both the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organization, both of which were heavily favored by the political establishment. Many supporters of the free trade market supported these agreements. Nearly six decades ago when the International Trade Organization was up for debate, conservatives and libertarians agreed that supranational trade bureaucracies with the power to infringe upon American sovereignty were undesirable. Source: The Revolution: A Manifesto, by Ron Paul, p. 96 Apr 1, 2008
FactCheck: NAFTA Superhighway not a conspiracy; it’s I-35

On his campaign website, Paul describes the NAFTA Superhighway as “a ten-lane colossus the width of several football fields, with freight and rail lines, fiber-optic cable lines, and oil and natural gas pipelines running alongside.” According to Paul, th ultimate plan is to form a North American Union with a single currency and unlimited travel within its borders.The problem with Paul’s claim is that there are no plans to build a NAFTA Superhighway. Or a North American Union, for that matter.
Paul cites a map from the North America’s SuperCorridor Organization (NASCO), which is a consortium of public and private entities. But the map does not show a new highway. Those bright blue lines show only I-35 and I-29--interstates that already exist. NASCO says it and some of the local governments along I-35 have been referring to that route as the “NAFTA Superhighway” for years. NASCO advocates improvements to existing roads, but is not lobbying for, or planning to build, any new thoroughfares.
Source: FactCheck.org: AdWatch of 2008 TV Ad, “The Only One” Feb 11, 2008
Look at the monetary system and deal with the trade issues

We need to adopt free trade agreements with other countries. We inhibit the export of, say, farm products to countries li


CONTINUED AT: http://www.ontheissues.org/tx/Ron_Paul_Free_Trade.htm
 
BendBrewer

BendBrewer

Well-Known Member
Ron Paul might sound appealing at times and nobody is going to agree with a candidate on 100% of things.

The problem with Ron Paul is that he would be a Lame duck President from day one of his first term. A President has to have strong support from Congress to get anything done and RP just doesn't have that. For all he says, the sad reality is that he had to go to Barney Frank the last time he needed someone to agree with him.

Those are simply the facts and the number one reason Ron Paul will never be President. Sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top