Ron Paul Off the Rails Yet Again - Page 20
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > Ron Paul Off the Rails Yet Again

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-27-2011, 12:04 AM   #191
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona,Glendale, Arizona
Posts: 1,642
Liked 157 Times on 108 Posts
Likes Given: 119

Default

What you are failing to realize is the fact that Ron Paul is not a conservative. He is a Libertarian. And as such he continues to, and will continue to poll in the single digits, with no hope what so ever of either getting the Republican nomination or being elected President.

His platform has not changed in the last three times he's done this. People in the Republican Party know he is not a Republican, and over 90% of them will not vote for him as a result. By running as a Republican this time around he has improved nothing simply because Republicans will not elect a Libertarian.

__________________
billt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2011, 12:13 AM   #192
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
KalashnikovJosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,156
Liked 320 Times on 191 Posts
Likes Given: 426

Default

Libertarians DO come in all stripes,granted.However,an important issue at hand here is whether or not the Republican party can become the party of Constitutional adherence,in order to actually offer a distinct difference to the democrats.

I don't "fail to realize" that alot of Republicans don't like Paul- Republicans have a better chance at putting someone like Mitt Romney at the head of their party,then someone who offers that REAL and TANGIBLE alternative to democratic socialism and big government.

In American political history,parties have often changed their belief structures,platforms and agendas based on changes within that parties political body.

Personally,I'd be very pleased to see Republicans offer a different platform then the democrats.

But it looks as if thats not going to change,and this is why some people refer to the two parties as really ONE single party-

The Big Government Party.

And we aren't going to get our Republic back that way.

__________________
"You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance. Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil. A good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul."
-Mahatma Gandhi

http://jpfo.org/
III%

Last edited by KalashnikovJosh; 11-27-2011 at 12:15 AM.
KalashnikovJosh is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2011, 12:23 AM   #193
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona,Glendale, Arizona
Posts: 1,642
Liked 157 Times on 108 Posts
Likes Given: 119

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KalashnikovJosh View Post
Libertarians DO come in all stripes,granted.However,an important issue at hand here is whether or not the Republican party can become the party of Constitutional adherence,in order to actually offer a distinct difference to the democrats.

Personally,I'd be very pleased to see Republicans offer a different,contradictory platform then the democrats.

But it looks as if thats not going to change,and this is why some people refer to the two parties as really ONE single party-

The Big Government Party.

And we aren't going to get our Republic back that way.
Just Ron Paul disciples. Most Republicans don't see it that way. They see a difference between the two that Ron Paul voters do not, or don't want to see. That is why he polls so badly among Republicans in general. They simply don't buy into the bulk of his platform. They see a difference between the Republican candidates and Hussein. Ron Paul voters don't, and lump them all into one basket.

This is part of the reason Ron Paul's base hurts him more than they help him with Republican voters in general. The Ron Paul voters call Republicans "sheep". Republican voters reject this soundly. They don't see, and will never see things the same way politically. This is why it did not help Ron Paul to run as a Republican. Putting a different name on the can doesn't change what is inside. This is why Ron Paul will always be a 9%'er.
__________________
billt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2011, 02:13 AM   #194
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
KalashnikovJosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,156
Liked 320 Times on 191 Posts
Likes Given: 426

Default

You know what,billT-

I really don't see much difference between Goldwater Republicans and Libertarians.

And what I DO see,is more and more libertarian leaning,TEA Party republicans taking office,and more Barry Goldwater then George W.

Because of Reagan and Barry Goldwater,the strain of Republicanism that is more Libertarian is quite real and alive today.

Just look at the TEA Party.

It was a thrill and a great pleasure to see Rand Paul,among other candidates that espouse limited by Constitutional law government as well as those supporting fiscal conservatism, join congress.(Not to mention seeing The Wicked Socialist Witch of The West,Nancy Pigloosie,get FIRED from her throne in the House ).

The real difference,and the difference I might add that democrats are hoping for- is the fracture lines of the Republican party between NeoCons and Goldwater folks.

And while I don't refer to all republicans as "sheep" as you mention in your obtuse generalization,I don't believe that NeoCon republicans are aware of the fact that THEIR policy is HELPING the socialist progressives to enlarge the big government to the degree where it becomes easier for them to implement their grand agendas,so YES,I find moral majority Neo conservatism to be a bit ignorant,to put it mildly.

I'm having a real problem with your generalizations,speaking of which.
Ron Paul supporters do not "lump" all candidates that are NOT Ron Paul "in one basket".

But what I see,is that the problem of big government will not be solved by pro-big government supporters of either party.
Just as you said that you can't change the content of a can by changing the label,big government is big government whether its got an "R" or a "D" in front of its name.

AND like I said,I'd -begrudgingly,of course- vote for a million Mitt Romneys or Michelle Bachmanns' before Obuttburglar,or before just sitting at home discontent with the vote because Ron Paul isn't on the ticket.
Unfortunately for the democrats,and something you can take heart in,is that the majority of Libertarians I've talked to are of the same mind- its more important to get that Marxist douche out of the Oval Office then to act like scorned lovers and bicker over the particulars of conservativeness.

But allow me to make my own generalization here-We will show up to vote,and we will vote to get Obuttboy out,period.

Besides,as I've said before,Perhaps what it will take to get Goldwater libertarian principles back in the forefront of Republican ideology is another NeoCon or Big Government Republican.

But thats not the point.

Your thread here,as you started it,was about how Paul "went off the deep end",and not about Paul's candidacy in the coming election.

Paul did not "go off the deep end",as I pointed out,however,I think YOU might be doing a little diving off the high platform yourself with all the generalizations of people and,frankly,the goofy attempt at placing Republican ideology so far from Goldwater and libertarian philosophy its almost like you think Ronald Regan didn't exist.

Fine,you don't agree with or like Ron Paul.
But its not like libertarians and Republicans are so different from each other that we should inhabit different parties.

Lets refrain from outright slandering a guy,calling him "off the deep end" and such with no actual merit to such an accusation,just to incite an argument.

OK?

In the end,were gonna have to learn to hang together,or as Franklin said- we shall for sure hang separately.

__________________
"You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance. Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil. A good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul."
-Mahatma Gandhi

http://jpfo.org/
III%

Last edited by KalashnikovJosh; 11-27-2011 at 02:26 AM.
KalashnikovJosh is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2011, 09:35 AM   #195
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona,Glendale, Arizona
Posts: 1,642
Liked 157 Times on 108 Posts
Likes Given: 119

Default

You are entitled to that opinion, just like most Ron Paul supporters. All I am saying is that the polls prove, and have proven, that over 90% of Republican voters don't parallel your thinking. They don't see Romney, Gingrich, or Bachmann "the same" as Hussein. Never have and never will.

They aren't going to change, and neither are the 9% that follow Ron Paul along with his philosophies. Until Ron Paul closes that 91% rift, which he will not, he has zero chance. That is written in granite. All that is assured is that Ron Paul voters are in for yet another disappointment at the polls. And in the process Republican voters hope and pray they don't screw up the election enough to the point we end up with another 4 years of Hussein.

__________________
billt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2011, 01:28 PM   #196
bkt
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,973
Liked 1305 Times on 664 Posts
Likes Given: 151

Default

What is meant by "conservatism"? Ron Paul is a constitutional conservative. That is, he wants to conserve the constitution. Others who call themselves conservatives often advocate laws that trample our rights in the name of personal safety, national security, or their personal idea of moral correctness. But those laws are every bit as illegal, in regard to the constitution, as anything the liberals have pushed for.

The real issue is whether or not we understand that only political and social freedom truly brings the greatest amount of fairness in opportunity, and that morality is determined by the individual and cannot foisted on him or her by laws. If we as a nation understand that, then Ron Paul starts to make a lot of sense.

But if we are willing to set aside the constitution and the security of the rule of law for personal gain of one sort or another in a never-ending battle against our ideological or religious foes, then we will continue on the path we're on: an ever-quicker slide into systemic failure.

__________________
bkt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2011, 02:20 PM   #197
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona,Glendale, Arizona
Posts: 1,642
Liked 157 Times on 108 Posts
Likes Given: 119

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkt View Post
What is meant by "conservatism"? Ron Paul is a constitutional conservative. That is, he wants to conserve the constitution. Others who call themselves conservatives often advocate laws that trample our rights in the name of personal safety, national security, or their personal idea of moral correctness. But those laws are every bit as illegal, in regard to the constitution, as anything the liberals have pushed for.

The real issue is whether or not we understand that only political and social freedom truly brings the greatest amount of fairness in opportunity, and that morality is determined by the individual and cannot foisted on him or her by laws. If we as a nation understand that, then Ron Paul starts to make a lot of sense.

But if we are willing to set aside the constitution and the security of the rule of law for personal gain of one sort or another in a never-ending battle against our ideological or religious foes, then we will continue on the path we're on: an ever-quicker slide into systemic failure.
Assuming you are correct with that statement, the obstacle lies in the fact Ron Paul cannot seem to convince the other 91% of Republicans who do not support him. Until he successfully addresses that problem, he is going nowhere politically.
__________________
billt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2011, 03:41 PM   #198
bkt
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,973
Liked 1305 Times on 664 Posts
Likes Given: 151

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by billt View Post
Assuming you are correct with that statement, the obstacle lies in the fact Ron Paul cannot seem to convince the other 91% of Republicans who do not support him. Until he successfully addresses that problem, he is going nowhere politically.
Forget Ron Paul. This isn't about him. Pretend he doesn't exist. People have to decide whether or not the constitution says what it says and whether or not rule of law is better than mob rule.

Looking at the other GOP candidates, I see many of them won't stand by the rule of law; it is more expedient and desirable, in their opinion, to push their ideas of necessary and proper legislation on us by hook or by crook. What difference is there between that and what the liberals have done?

Any group or individual who says they are willing to work outside the existing framework of the law has to be recognized as evil, even if you happen to personally agree with their views.
__________________
bkt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2011, 06:16 PM   #199
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona,Glendale, Arizona
Posts: 1,642
Liked 157 Times on 108 Posts
Likes Given: 119

Default

Of the current batch, I'll go with Gingrich. He's not perfect, but he'll be a vast improvement over what we currently have.

__________________
billt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2011, 06:26 PM   #200
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
gutz47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by billt
Of the current batch, I'll go with Gingrich. He's not perfect, but he'll be a vast improvement over what we currently have.
you're a fool
__________________
gutz47 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
1911 rails AznZOhAn 1911 Forum 26 07-19-2011 08:09 PM
Rails for my AR Simpleman Firearm Accessories & Gear 4 04-16-2011 01:48 AM
Rails? zmac4040 Firearm Accessories & Gear 1 03-06-2011 06:27 PM
Frame Rails, What? SHAMUSPI 1911 Forum 2 04-07-2010 12:36 AM
Utg rails stone2 AR-15 Discussion 2 03-22-2010 04:25 PM