toldailytopic: Ron Paul. At CPAC Ron Paul won the straw poll as their top potential p

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I will let the libertarians speak for themselves.

http://kgov.com/bel/20080102

My mistake. I found the interview. States rights concedes that if Georgia wants to lynch blacks, the federal government has no right to intervene. According to states rights, of which Paul belongs. I will give him a chance to rebuke things in the past he has said and supported when he is ready.

http://kgov.com/bel/20080103
 

The Berean

Well-known member
I think Paul knew he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of being elected and saw his campaign more as a means of raising awareness about the topics near and dear to him. Dr. Paul's a lot of things but he's not stupid, or naive.

I have no doubt Paul knew he couldn't win. But what better place to spread his message than Silicon Valley, a place known for innovation, out-of-the-box thinking, and one of the major centers of business and education?
 

WizardofOz

New member
No way

No way

States rights concedes that if Georgia wants to lynch blacks, the federal government has no right to intervene. According to states rights, of which Paul belongs. I will give him a chance to rebuke things in the past he has said and supported when he is ready.

Lynch blacks?

I think the "M" from "Nick M" stands for might.

Nick M ight be a :troll: because no one could be this stupid on accident.

You obviously have no idea what Paul stands for nor do you have the mental capacity or desire to educate yourself. You sir, are hopeless.

Regarding the interview, I didn't know Kevin Craig was Ron Paul's spokesperson. :hammer:

Tell me Nick, if Ron were to succeed in getting the Sanctity of Life Act passed, could Georgia still lynch blacks? It's going to require some thinking on your part but give a it a shot. :thumb:


Ron Paul's commitment to the sanctity of human life goes beyond
rhetoric. He is the man who sponsored H.R. 776, entitled the "Sanctity
of Life Act of 2005." Had it passed, H.R. 776 would have recognized
the personhood of all unborn babies by declaring that "human life
shall be deemed to exist from conception." The bill also recognized
the authority of each State to protect the lives of unborn children.

In addition, H.R. 776 would have removed abortion from the
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, thereby nullifying the Roe v. Wade
decision, and would have denied funding for abortion providers. In
plain language, H.R. 776 would have ended abortion on demand. (It is
more than interesting to me that none of the Religious Right's pet
politicians, including George W. Bush, even bothered to support Paul's
pro-life bill.)



You really are incapable of putting 2 and 2 together.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
I have no doubt Paul knew he couldn't win. But what better place to spread his message than Silicon Valley, a place known for innovation, out-of-the-box thinking, and one of the major centers of business and education?

Well I guess that's a judgment call, dude; you could say that speaking on college campuses and inspiring young people is just as important (if not more so) than talking to the propeller heads and wonks out on the west coast. Different strategy, different thinking.
 

drbrumley

Well-known member
For MMStroud, enjoy.

Being Pro-Life Is Necessary to Defend Liberty

by Congressman Ron Paul




Pro-life libertarians have a vital task to perform: to persuade the many abortion-supporting libertarians of the contradiction between abortion and individual liberty; and, to sever the mistaken connection in many minds between individual freedom and the "right" to extinguish individual life.
Libertarians have a moral vision of a society that is just, because individuals are free. This vision is the only reason for libertarianism to exist. It offers an alternative to the forms of political thought that uphold the power of the State, or of persons within a society, to violate the freedom of others. If it loses that vision, then libertarianism becomes merely another ideology whose policies are oppressive, rather than liberating.

We expect most people to be inconsistent, because their beliefs are founded on false principles or on principles that are not clearly stated and understood. They cannot apply their beliefs consistently without contradictions becoming glaringly apparent. Thus, there are both liberals and conservatives who support conscription of young people, the redistribution of wealth, and the power of the majority to impose its will on the individual.

A libertarian's support for abortion is not merely a minor misapplication of principle, as if one held an incorrect belief about the Austrian theory of the business cycle. The issue of abortion is fundamental, and therefore an incorrect view of the issue strikes at the very foundations of all beliefs.

Libertarians believe, along with the Founding Fathers, that every individual has inalienable rights, among which are the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Neither the State, nor any other person, can violate those rights without committing an injustice. But, just as important as the power claimed by the State to decide what rights we have, is the power to decide which of us has rights.

Today, we are seeing a piecemeal destruction of individual freedom. And in abortion, the statists have found a most effective method of obliterating freedom: obliterating the individual. Abortion on demand is the ultimate State tyranny; the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law. The State protects the "right" of some people to kill others, just as the courts protected the "property rights" of slave masters in their slaves. Moreover, by this method the State achieves a goal common to all totalitarian regimes: it sets us against each other, so that our energies are spent in the struggle between State-created classes, rather than in freeing all individuals from the State. Unlike Nazi Germany, which forcibly sent millions to the gas chambers (as well as forcing abortion and sterilization upon many more), the new regime has enlisted the assistance of millions of people to act as its agents in carrying out a program of mass murder.

The more one strives for the consistent application of an incorrect principle, the more horrendous the results. Thus, a wrong-headed libertarian is potentially very dangerous. Libertarians who act on a wrong premise seem to be too often willing to accept the inhuman conclusions of an argument, rather than question their premises.

A case in point is a young libertarian leader I have heard about. He supports the "right" of a woman to remove an unwanted child from her body (i.e., her property) by killing and then expelling him or her. Therefore, he has consistently concluded, any property owner has the right to kill anyone on his property, for any reason.

Such conclusions should make libertarians question the premises from which they are drawn.

We must promote a consistent vision of liberty because freedom is whole and cannot be alienated, although it can be abridged by the unjust action of the State or those who are powerful enough to obtain their own demands. Our lives, also, are a whole from the beginning at fertilization until death. To deny any part of liberty, or to deny liberty to any particular class of individuals, diminishes the freedom of all. For libertarians to support such an abridgement of the right to live free is unconscionable.

I encourage all pro-life libertarians to become involved in debating the issues and educating the public; whether or not freedom is defended across the board, or is allowed to be further eroded without consistent defenders, may depend on them.
 

mmstroud

Silver Member
Silver Subscriber
For MMStroud, enjoy.

Being Pro-Life Is Necessary to Defend Liberty

by Congressman Ron Paul

Awesome! Thanks drbrumley! I've read a lot of his issue statements, but only skimmed this one until now. I hope others will read it and get a feel for this man of integrity.
 

WizardofOz

New member
Keynesian Economics vs. Austrian Economics

Keynesian Economics vs. Austrian Economics

Keynesian's really need to be run out of town. There is no way at all these are the people who should be in charge of our markets.

Capitalism vs. "capitalism"

:mock: Keynesianism
It's time to move on. And socialism is not the answer.

Listen to Peter Schiff get laughed at while he is telling Keynesian's exactly what is going to happen to the markets.

Who was right?


Giving conservatives the spanking they deserve on his way to winning their straw poll.
Fast forward to 5:45
Ron Paul at CPAC
 

Andy Curry

New member
He wants to get rid of the FED, NAFTA and put a stop to the NAU so I like him. Also he is Pro-Life so I give him a thumbs up!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top