Fuck Ron Paul

[gnosticheresy_2]

Only in America could giving money to impoverished old people spark a debate about whether it's constitutional to do so

[SonicG]

Please show me an explanation of how auditing or destroying the Federal Reserve will lead to a more egalitarian society? How will it strike a blow against international capitalism and actually empower people to live with reduced impact on the environment? Its not like the banks and corporations are just going to roll over and say, "Ugh, ok, got us...the gigs up".

http://professorfekete.com/articles%5CA ... andard.pdf

it's not a specific or comprehensive answer bu it is a start.

Huh? Typical gold standard "Libertarian" bullshit.
From the article:

Optimism should become wide-spread because the money of the nation would once more have the quality of integrity.
The problem of credit-control should be easier to solve. Business enterprise should expand, domestically as well and internationally, and on a sounder basis. Gold should flow in from abroad. Imbalances in foreign trade should rectify themselves.

Ahh yes, the "gold-en" days of capitalism. Although I agree that calling Paul a racist is a canard, the whole return to Main Street USA capitalism pie-in-the-sky bullshit usually thinly covers a very middle America conservative mindset of: "If only I didn't have to pay so much in taxes for those lazy (minorities) and illegal aliens, I'd be rich..." Capitalism is any form must, by definition, be an economic pyramid scheme. Anyhow Bob Black is much more eloquent about it:

Libertarians complain that the state is parasitic, an excrescence on society. They think it’s like a tumor you could cut out, leaving the patient just as he was, only healthier. They’ve been mystified by their own metaphors. Like the market, the state is an activity, not an entity. The only way to abolish the state is to change the way of life it forms a part of. That way of life, if you call that living, revolves around work and takes in bureaucracy, moralism, schooling, money, and more. Libertarians are conservatives because they avowedly want to maintain most of this mess and so unwittingly perpetuate the rest of the racket. But they’re bad conservatives because they’ve forgotten the reality of institutional and ideological interconnection which was the original insight of the historical conservatives. Entirely out of touch with the real currents of contemporary resistance, they denounce practical opposition to the system as “nihilism,” “Luddism,” and other big words they don’t understand. A glance at the world confirms that their utopian capitalism just can’t compete with the state. With enemies like libertarians, the state doesn’t need friends.

The Libertarian as Conservative

[Searcher08]

(A shorter, different version of this article was delivered as an address at the fourth annual convocation of the Eris Society in Aspen, Colorado in August 1984. )

I started reading the article on that site and about two lines in "A Libertarian is just a Republican who takes drugs".

My life is too short etc etc

http://orlingrabbe.com/

[The Consul]

Only in America could giving money to impoverished old people spark a debate about whether it's constitutional to do so

After the exceptions of plenary power to the congress for the general welfare by the Supreme Court for the last 80 + years this is but an extracurricular activity to engorge the ever withering shaft of Aryan Randlouchees everywhere.

[Simulist]

Only in America could giving money to impoverished old people spark a debate about whether it's constitutional to do so

Right — the fuck! — ON.

[Joe Hillshoist]

When he stops investing in and promoting mining companies that fuck over poor brown people in the third world then he might deserve some respect till then he is just another another dumbfuck enabler of fascism. Obviously the system is racist and colonialist and he takes full advantage of that.

He invests in companies that murder union officials in third world countries, that rort local populations and steal resources for a fraction of their value. And everyone thinks he is some glittering bauble of freedom.

When he is just another fuckead oligarch.

Not only is he a fascist exploitationmeister he is a religious freak.

Check this shit out:

The War on Religion

As we celebrate another Yuletide season, it's hard not to notice that Christmas in America simply doesn't feel the same anymore. Although an overwhelming majority of Americans celebrate Christmas, and those who don't celebrate it overwhelmingly accept and respect our nation's Christmas traditions, a certain shared public sentiment slowly has disappeared. The Christmas spirit, marked by a wonderful feeling of goodwill among men, is in danger of being lost in the ongoing war against religion.

Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view. The justification is always that someone, somewhere, might possibly be offended or feel uncomfortable living in the midst of a largely Christian society, so all must yield to the fragile sensibilities of the few. The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity.

This growing bias explains why many of our wonderful Christmas traditions have been lost. Christmas pageants and plays, including Handel's Messiah, have been banned from schools and community halls. Nativity scenes have been ordered removed from town squares, and even criticized as offensive when placed on private church lawns. Office Christmas parties have become taboo, replaced by colorless seasonal parties to ensure no employees feel threatened by a “hostile environment.” Even wholly non-religious decorations featuring Santa Claus, snowmen, and the like have been called into question as Christmas symbols that might cause discomfort. Earlier this month, firemen near Chicago reluctantly removed Christmas decorations from their firehouse after a complaint by some embittered busybody. Most noticeably, however, the once commonplace refrain of “Merry Christmas” has been replaced by the vague, ubiquitous “Happy Holidays.” But what holiday? Is Christmas some kind of secret, a word that cannot be uttered in public? Why have we allowed the secularists to intimidate us into downplaying our most cherished and meaningful Christian celebration?

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders' political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government's hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life.

The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance. Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people's allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation's Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

What a fucking fruitcake.

The last bit in bold cracks me up.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

A libertarian theocrat. Verily, the Lord hath created many wonders.

[8bitagent]

Well, if Ron Paul is such a bad guy I guess it's good Fox and the MSM is stonewalling him?

[Joe Hillshoist]

Compared to thew other politicians in the States he may actually be awesome. But from the outside looking in he's just a prick.

[barracuda]

A libertarian theocrat. Verily, the Lord hath created many wonders.

Yea, He hath, hathen't He though?

More words of wisdom from ol' bones:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.

Just on principle, I won't vote for a Texas Republican with a face like my cat's hiney.



Or for an ubermensch:

Well, if Ron Paul is such a bad guy I guess it's good Fox and the MSM is stonewalling him?

I think this is a good question. My guess would be that they don't want to have to focus on his "unpatriotic"" issues with the Fed and the wars, both of which are perfectly valid and important issues when taken at face value. However, Paul's stances on these issues don't actually have me reconsidering the fact that he is a lousy candidate, a Texas Republican, and a racist mofo.

[Simulist]

The Flat Earth Society has been pretty effectively "stonewalled" by "Fox and the MSM" too, but that doesn't exactly enhance its street cred.

Even Fox News can't promote every idiot on the loose.

[norton ash]

Ay, basta. The Kochs and Murdoch and the corporate gang can't count on controlling him like they can the other Repubs. That's still my short answer.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Ay, basta. The Kochs and Murdoch and the corporate gang can't count on controlling him like they can the other Repubs. That's still my short answer.

So its a tiff between different elements of the ruling class?

[Elvis]

Whatever one thinks of Ron Paul (or of Jon Stewart for that matter), I think this tragicomic Daily Show clip is worth watching:



I don't have TV and don't often see the network 'analysts' at work, so I was a little stunned by the desperate attempts to pretend that Ron Paul just doesn't exist.

[eyeno]

Whatever one thinks of Ron Paul (or of Jon Stewart for that matter), I think this tragicomic Daily Show clip is worth watching:



I don't have TV and don't often see the network 'analysts' at work, so I was a little stunned by the desperate attempts to pretend that Ron Paul just doesn't exist.

Exactly. He is the only guy with a real answer to the shhhhh (lending problem) What problem huh? Which prompted my comment following:

eyeno wrote:
My point is basically that he is one of the few, along with Kucinich, that dares speak against the federal reserve. That alone makes him stand out regardless of his other weak points he may have. Can't have anyone speaking against the fed reserve ya know, its just not fashionable these days.

Which prompted the following:

SonicG wrote,
Please show me an explanation of how auditing or destroying the Federal Reserve will lead to a more egalitarian society?

To which I say....BWAHHaaaha ha

Are you serious?