Comments on: The Limits of Ron Paul-ism http://washingtonindependent.com/68498/the-limits-of-ron-paul-ism National News in Context Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:40:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: internet marketing courses http://washingtonindependent.com/68498/the-limits-of-ron-paul-ism/comment-page-1#comment-109611 internet marketing courses Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:59:43 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=68498#comment-109611 I will bookmark and continue reading your blog in the future! Thanks alot for the informative post!<br><br>respect<br>jenny martin<br>______________________________________________ I will bookmark and continue reading your blog in the future! Thanks alot for the informative post!

respect
jenny martin
______________________________________________

]]> By: brendanm http://washingtonindependent.com/68498/the-limits-of-ron-paul-ism/comment-page-1#comment-108992 brendanm Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:51:31 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=68498#comment-108992 You're a fool if you remain willfully ignorant of Ron Paul's courting of repugnant extremists. You're a fool if you remain willfully ignorant of Ron Paul's courting of repugnant extremists.

]]> By: shade12 http://washingtonindependent.com/68498/the-limits-of-ron-paul-ism/comment-page-1#comment-108934 shade12 Mon, 23 Nov 2009 04:27:32 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=68498#comment-108934 I wouldn't worry too much about the Medicare and Social Security issue. As far as social security goes at the moment, he doesn't want to abolish it, merely offer an opt out option. And if you were then worried about funding, Ron/Rand Paul would probably divert money saved from military spending to sustain current entitlements that are deemed essential. Also, the poverty and suffering would probably be worse since people expect the benefits and have become dependent.<br><br>Rand isn't a threat to those programs anyway. Those programs will need to be abolished or diminished out of necessity if current spending priorities remain constant. If they are diminished, it will be to a point where they might as well have been abolished. Basically, when you take into consideration future forecasted liabilities and budgets, it's not sustainable.<br><br>One last note, you're being a jackass by judging the man based on a minority of people that follow him. The varied minority of kooks, nuts, flakes, and other breakfast cereal varieties endorse him, not the other way around. I wouldn't worry too much about the Medicare and Social Security issue. As far as social security goes at the moment, he doesn't want to abolish it, merely offer an opt out option. And if you were then worried about funding, Ron/Rand Paul would probably divert money saved from military spending to sustain current entitlements that are deemed essential. Also, the poverty and suffering would probably be worse since people expect the benefits and have become dependent.

Rand isn't a threat to those programs anyway. Those programs will need to be abolished or diminished out of necessity if current spending priorities remain constant. If they are diminished, it will be to a point where they might as well have been abolished. Basically, when you take into consideration future forecasted liabilities and budgets, it's not sustainable.

One last note, you're being a jackass by judging the man based on a minority of people that follow him. The varied minority of kooks, nuts, flakes, and other breakfast cereal varieties endorse him, not the other way around.

]]> By: brendanm http://washingtonindependent.com/68498/the-limits-of-ron-paul-ism/comment-page-1#comment-108826 brendanm Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:44:55 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=68498#comment-108826 I'm glad to hear that. You sound like one of the good ones. But I will never be able to think of Ron Paul as a good or decent man or truly principled politician due to his deliberate and cynical courtship of extremists during his long career. His links to racists and anti-government militants sympathetic to terrorism are far too many to be coincidental and his willingness to take money from and speak to despicable groups and individuals is not much better than the corporate whores who dominate our politics.<br><br>Regardless, as long as you don't hold Ron Paul rallies or tea parties on Second Life or World of Warcraft, you are all right by me. I must attend to my fire now. I'm glad to hear that. You sound like one of the good ones. But I will never be able to think of Ron Paul as a good or decent man or truly principled politician due to his deliberate and cynical courtship of extremists during his long career. His links to racists and anti-government militants sympathetic to terrorism are far too many to be coincidental and his willingness to take money from and speak to despicable groups and individuals is not much better than the corporate whores who dominate our politics.

Regardless, as long as you don't hold Ron Paul rallies or tea parties on Second Life or World of Warcraft, you are all right by me. I must attend to my fire now.

]]> By: Dan http://washingtonindependent.com/68498/the-limits-of-ron-paul-ism/comment-page-1#comment-108781 Dan Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:43:46 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=68498#comment-108781 Rand's official stance is that he wants Gitmo prisoners to be tried in Military Court, as they are not residents on North American soil, nor US Citizens.<br><br>This doesn't include domestic terrorism, which would be tried in civilian courts on domestic soil. This goes hand-in-hand with his father's belief that we shouldn't force our Constitution on others around the world, outside of American soil. Rand's official stance is that he wants Gitmo prisoners to be tried in Military Court, as they are not residents on North American soil, nor US Citizens.

This doesn't include domestic terrorism, which would be tried in civilian courts on domestic soil. This goes hand-in-hand with his father's belief that we shouldn't force our Constitution on others around the world, outside of American soil.

]]> By: Joehoevah http://washingtonindependent.com/68498/the-limits-of-ron-paul-ism/comment-page-1#comment-108724 Joehoevah Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:14:26 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=68498#comment-108724 Yes, because there are so many non-neo-con defense-hawk libertarians about who held their nose and voted McCain instead of Ron Paul, right? <br><br>This is /KENTUCKY/ for God's sake, he's not running for fucking president. Yes, because there are so many non-neo-con defense-hawk libertarians about who held their nose and voted McCain instead of Ron Paul, right?

This is /KENTUCKY/ for God's sake, he's not running for fucking president.

]]> By: ericdondero http://washingtonindependent.com/68498/the-limits-of-ron-paul-ism/comment-page-1#comment-108612 ericdondero Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:03:02 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=68498#comment-108612 Well, for every Ron Paul supporter Rand loses, he'll pick up twice as many Pro-Defense Libertarians who were not inclined to support him. <br><br>Good move on Rand's part. I feel confident now he's gonna win. Well, for every Ron Paul supporter Rand loses, he'll pick up twice as many Pro-Defense Libertarians who were not inclined to support him.

Good move on Rand's part. I feel confident now he's gonna win.

]]> By: Austin http://washingtonindependent.com/68498/the-limits-of-ron-paul-ism/comment-page-1#comment-108571 Austin Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:43:15 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=68498#comment-108571 Mr. Dondero, is that you? Mr. Dondero, is that you?

]]> By: ddg33 http://washingtonindependent.com/68498/the-limits-of-ron-paul-ism/comment-page-1#comment-108544 ddg33 Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:19:39 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=68498#comment-108544 I would describe myself as a hardcore Constitutionalist libertarian (small 'l'), and a contributor to Ron Paul and C4L. Your portrayal of RP supporters does not jive with my experience. I will not associate with rascists and people who see conspiracies everywhere. I certainly don't think of myself that way. In my years involved in politics (since late 70's) I have seen good and bad people in both major parties (and 3rd for that matter), as candiates and supporters. Dirty tricks, deception, questionable financial dealings, pay to play, etc. I just do not like generalizations.<br><br>So your right. I suspect, we would not agree on much, but maybe enough. Then I would fight you tooth and nail. But win or lose, go home, come back and fight another day. I would describe myself as a hardcore Constitutionalist libertarian (small 'l'), and a contributor to Ron Paul and C4L. Your portrayal of RP supporters does not jive with my experience. I will not associate with rascists and people who see conspiracies everywhere. I certainly don't think of myself that way. In my years involved in politics (since late 70's) I have seen good and bad people in both major parties (and 3rd for that matter), as candiates and supporters. Dirty tricks, deception, questionable financial dealings, pay to play, etc. I just do not like generalizations.

So your right. I suspect, we would not agree on much, but maybe enough. Then I would fight you tooth and nail. But win or lose, go home, come back and fight another day.

]]> By: annrand http://washingtonindependent.com/68498/the-limits-of-ron-paul-ism/comment-page-1#comment-108519 annrand Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:35:03 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=68498#comment-108519 Love that mainstream politicians (even libertarians) can get away with supporting Alice in Wonderland courts.<br><br>And I don't care that he doesn't mean what his press releases say. Its pathetic. Love that mainstream politicians (even libertarians) can get away with supporting Alice in Wonderland courts.

And I don't care that he doesn't mean what his press releases say. Its pathetic.

]]>