To Get Ron Paul's Insanity, You Have To Understand Libertarianism

[FUCK THE POLICE]

And yes, Ron Paul has intimated, on more than one occasion, that the United States is to blame for the 9/11 massacre. He claims al-Qaeda slaughtered 3,000 U.S. civilians because America is "bombing them," because we have military bases in the sacred sand pit and because we support Israel over the dear Palestinians.

9/11 was not a justified reaction to interventionist policies. Vengeance, especially against innocents you attack merely to get at someone else, is never justified. However, it was a reaction. To deny that is stupidity.

This is as if a man rapes a girl, the girl's father murders the mans brother in order to get back at the man, and the man responds by murdering the father. What a happy story.

 

[Alias]

funny, some people tend to think that you're worse. especially since you ignore the constitution.

Oh my God, YES. Some people think I'm worse than an Islamic terrorist. Oh my God. That's beautiful, man. Gorgeous. That is the height of sound reasoning. Nothing more can be said to top that.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

In his essay, "War Guilt in the Middle East," Rothbard excoriated Israel's "aggression against Middle East Arabs," "confiscation of Arab lands" and its "refusal to let these refugees (Palestinians) return and return the property taken from them." He had nothing to say about the equal number of Jews driven from Arab lands by pogroms at the time of Israel's founding.

What does -1 + -1 equal? This is really childish, to justify things by saying "Nuh uh! He did it too!"

The entire idea of founding Israel was stupid, a dream pushed by naive western Christians who believed that doing so would make Jesus come back faster. it's resulted in nothing but tragedy. Why do we need a state dedicated to one religion? If the Jews were in fear of persecution in their own country, America could take them in perfectly well, and they would be treated justly. The solution we dreamt up, of creating a Jewish state in a land inconveniently occupied at the current moment by Muslims who's ancestors have resided there for millenia, was stupidity. The Arab states response was not justified, but it was a reaction to an outrageous plan that, even had everything worked out perfectly, split up palestine with little regard to anything but creating a strip of land with a majority Jewish population, regardless of the Muslims who happened to live there.

It would be like if you split Mississippi into "Whiteistan" and "Blackistan", foolishly believing that this would solve all racial tension. You would have to be extraordinarily naive to believe that there was no unspoken agreement to kick the Muslims out, and that's what happened as soon as the Zionists had a chance. But, my friend, you cannot hope to strip an entire peoples of their homeland and everything they own and expect them not to want to put a bullet in your head. If you don't want any of those whom you've treated unjustly to want to take vengeance against you, you should've massacred them, tied up the loose ends. You undoubtedly find my advice very appealing. Well, whatever. I just hope it makes Jesus come back faster. We don't need peace anyway.

Conservatives seem to get their philosophy from Harry Potter villians:

""There is no good and evil; there is only power, and those too weak too seek it."

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Ayn Rand, who unintentionally provided the impetus for the movement, disdained libertarians, calling them "right-wing hippies.' She was unequivocal in her support for Israel, which she explained this way in a 1974 appearance: "When you have civilized men fighting savages, you support the civilized men, no matter who they are."

And what we have is savages fighting savages.

I also love the fact that she seems to be parodying herself. Is she knowingly using rhetoric that imitates what people said back in the 19th century to justify European imperialism? She does so down to the t, even using "savage", the classic label an ignorant ethnocentrist applies to any culture that don't know or understand.

Anyway, shouldn't I expect better from "civilized men" than from savages? The reason you don't is because you ARE a savage.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Oh my God, YES. Some people think I'm worse than an Islamic terrorist. Oh my God. That's beautiful, man. Gorgeous. That is the height of sound reasoning. Nothing more can be said to top that.

as long as you can disregard the constitution in certain instances, you're no better than them. deal with it, traitorous bitch.

 

[signalmankenneth]

President Ron Paul??? (Not!!!)

 

[apple0154]

(Originally Posted by apple0154) Obama. He's dealing with defence/international affairs the proper way.

By spending recklessly and being overtly aggressive towards nations that aren't a threat?

(Originally Posted by apple0154) Obama. He's dealing with defence/international affairs the proper way.

he's not done anything differently than GW Bush did, so you're saying the Bush did defense/international affairs the proper way?

Obama has done things differently. First, he acknowledged the US had made mistakes regarding the Middle East. (Referred to derogatorily as Obama’s apology tour.) Second, he has not pounded his chest like Bush uttering such phrases as “Bring it on”. Third, he’s cleaning up all the back room deals and underhanded alliances such as with Pakistan. Lastly, he has honored the commitment to withdraw. While Bush may have set the timetable history has shown it's doubtful Bush had any intention of withdrawing and past actions lead any sensible person to acknowledge Bush would have made some excuse to stay. After all, the main reason for staying was to train the troops. Eight years to train troops?? Maybe it was time to fire the trainer!

Of course, we have to remember an apology is not going to bring back the thousands of innocent people who were killed so we can expect attempted attacks to continue. Nothing can be done to change history, however, by withdrawing the situation will slowly change as time passes. Obama is dealing with the consequences of Bush’s Middle East disastrous policies.

An example of Obama’s change in policy was the capturing of Bin Laden. He went into Pakistan without telling them. Recall Bush’s idea of letting the Pakistanis capture Bin Laden in Bora Bora? Obama took a more direct approach.

Have you seen/heard Cheney’s comments about Obama’s withdrawal? After witnessing the last Republican Vice President condemning the move is anyone supposed to believe Bush would have honored the withdrawal timetable?

The Republican party campaigns on two main platforms; defence and fiscal restraint. We’ve seen the abject failure they’ve been at both and now one of their candidates, the one known as the “Great Thinker”, comes up with the idea of putting 14 year olds to work as a fiscal solution. Dare we even imagine his defence solution?

 

[Damocles]

No the ACLU protects the constitution.

Ron Paul just reads into it anything he wants

I might agree if the ACLU spent any time whatsoever protecting the 2nd Amendment rights, or the 10th.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Obama has done things differently. First, he acknowledged the US had made mistakes regarding the Middle East. (Referred to derogatorily as Obama’s apology tour.) Second, he has not pounded his chest like Bush uttering such phrases as “Bring it on”. Third, he’s cleaning up all the back room deals and underhanded alliances such as with Pakistan. Lastly, he has honored the commitment to withdraw. While Bush may have set the timetable history has shown it's doubtful Bush had any intention of withdrawing and past actions lead any sensible person to acknowledge Bush would have made some excuse to stay. After all, the main reason for staying was to train the troops. Eight years to train troops?? Maybe it was time to fire the trainer!

Of course, we have to remember an apology is not going to bring back the thousands of innocent people who were killed so we can expect attempted attacks to continue. Nothing can be done to change history, however, by withdrawing the situation will slowly change as time passes. Obama is dealing with the consequences of Bush’s Middle East disastrous policies.

An example of Obama’s change in policy was the capturing of Bin Laden. He went into Pakistan without telling them. Recall Bush’s idea of letting the Pakistanis capture Bin Laden in Bora Bora? Obama took a more direct approach.

Have you seen/heard Cheney’s comments about Obama’s withdrawal? After witnessing the last Republican Vice President condemning the move is anyone supposed to believe Bush would have honored the withdrawal timetable?

The Republican party campaigns on two main platforms; defence and fiscal restraint. We’ve seen the abject failure they’ve been at both and now one of their candidates, the one known as the “Great Thinker”, comes up with the idea of putting 14 year olds to work as a fiscal solution. Dare we even imagine his defence solution?

i strongly recommend seeing a shrink because you obviously have lost touch with reality.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

I might agree if the ACLU spent any time whatsoever protecting the 2nd Amendment rights, or the 10th.

At the state level there are several cases that the ACLU is supporting the 2A. Not the best situation, but certainly an improvement.

 

[wanderingbear]

If Ron Paul wins the White house it will mean the end of conservative power in the republican party.

 

[apple0154]

i strongly recommend seeing a shrink because you obviously have lost touch with reality.

Unfortunately, what I wrote is the reality. The Repub party has gone from bad to worse but I must admit they offer comedic relief during the dull, overcast winter season.

From the derailed Cain train, "I've never been inappropriate. You can ask my mistress", to Newt's fiscal solution, "Let's fire the janitors and hire 14 year olds", the occasional belly-laugh is much appreciated.

 

[Socrtease]

I quit the ACLU because the NM chapter did not view the 2d Amendment as protecting an individual right.

 

[WinterBorn]

I quit the ACLU because the NM chapter did not view the 2d Amendment as protecting an individual right.

An excellent reason to quit.

I never understand why people contend that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right. The rest of the bill of rights is never considered collective rights.

 

[Damocles]

An excellent reason to quit.

I never understand why people contend that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right. The rest of the bill of rights is never considered collective rights.

You have to squint and believe that they meant something different when they said "the people" in that particular amendment than they did in every other of the Bill of Rights as well as the rest of the constitution...

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Unfortunately, what I wrote is the reality. The Repub party has gone from bad to worse but I must admit they offer comedic relief during the dull, overcast winter season.

From the derailed Cain train, "I've never been inappropriate. You can ask my mistress", to Newt's fiscal solution, "Let's fire the janitors and hire 14 year olds", the occasional belly-laugh is much appreciated.

If reality is watching Obama do the same things that Bush did, but believing Obama when he says 'it's different this time', is reality, then yes, what you wrote is reality. It's also drinking the pitcher of koolaid, but whatever.