A Good Ron Paul article...

Lew Rockwell is the 'best' supporter he has. Sorry, when Paul refuses to repudiate hatemongers, one must assume he is one. That IS NOT what our country is about.

That's horseshit. He has repudiated hatemongers and racism in his written and spoken words.

There is no point in giving individual attention to a few crackpots of no import because a few other crackpot hatemongers of no import want to smear him with this ridiculous nonsense. By singling them out for explicit repudiation would mean that he implicitly endorses all of his other supporters. Since he does not and can not that would be an unwise choice.
 
Further, the notion that Bush or the neocons hate government is absurd. That does not seem to be the authors idea but cypress'.

Con Republicans hate many, if not most, functions of the federal government. Outside of defense spending. Especially as it pertains to government being a promoter of the common welfare, social services, and funding of the public commons.

This is common knowlege.
 
Thank you Soc!

This seems to happen a lot. I post something, and a few posters will follow up, calling me a moron, and dismissing the post. And then you - a libertarian no less - show up, and basically support the exact same thing I was saying!

Wonder if you'll get called a moron! lol

"Bush and the Neocons after 8 years have so alienated the lefty and righty anarchists and anti-war dems that he has put together a group of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" supporters."

Yep, that's exactly what I said. Cheers!

I agree with the article just not your spin. BushCo does not hate government. Neocons love the government.
 
Con Republicans hate many, if not most, functions of the federal government. Outside of defense spending. Especially as it pertains to government being a promoter of the common welfare, social services, and funding of the public commons.

This is common knowlege.

Pill bill, no child left behind, the growth in the police state. These people love big government. Bush has alienated many by showing that.
 
That's horseshit. He has repudiated hatemongers and racism in his written and spoken words.

There is no point in giving individual attention to a few crackpots of no import because a few other crackpot hatemongers of no import want to smear him with this ridiculous nonsense. By singling them out for explicit repudiation would mean that he implicitly endorses all of his other supporters. Since he does not and can not that would be an unwise choice.

Those 'crackpots' are the ones driving his fundraising and 'grass roots' organization. You are either delusional or spinning. Someone posted the candidate's official response, which was to the effect, "We won't let the haters define us, we won't respond." In essence, never mind our backers, we need their money.
 
I agree with the article just not your spin. BushCo does not hate government. Neocons love the government.

NeoCons love war.

And they believe in privitizing the functions of government, and turning the tax money over to private entities.

I assume you've heard of social security privitization, privitization of formerly Defense Dept. function in iraq, hiring private Blackwater security contractors during Katrian, handing tax dollars over to private industry to manage medicare, not funding stem cell research with public dollars, etc?
 
Oh, and I don't believe I ever used the word NeoCon anyway. You simply assumed I did.

I said people are sick of bushism. Bushism includes some neocon foreign policy hawks, who are actually a small part of the Con movement. But a powerful one, placed in key positions in the State Dept. and DOD.

Bushism more broadly speaking, includes movement conservatives, theocrats, and hard core Grover Norquist libertarian-republicans.
 
What a dumb argument. Lefties hand our money over to "private" entities. WTF do you think they are doing when they hand out welfare checks? Most of the shit the neocons are doing that you call "privatization" has not diminished the state at all. They only use it as a way to get around the courts.
 
Oh, and I don't believe I ever used the word NeoCon anyway. You simply assumed I did.

I said people are sick of bushism. Bushism includes some neocon foreign policy hawks, who are actually a small part of the Con movement. But a powerful one, placed in key positions in the State Dept. and DOD.

Bushism more broadly speaking, includes movement conservatives, theocrats, and hard core Grover Norquist libertarian-republicans.

Grover Norquist is a libertarian like Feingold is a libertarian. That is, not at all. They merely agree on a few minor issues.
 
What a dumb argument. Lefties hand our money over to "private" entities. WTF do you think they are doing when they hand out welfare checks? Most of the shit the neocons are doing that you call "privatization" has not diminished the state at all. They only use it as a way to get around the courts.

You're shadow boxing against a phantom problem.

Outside of the fringe libertarian movement, nobody thinks the federal government is going to eliminate social security, medicare, the national weather service, or the environmental protection agency. Not even Con republicans think that. Well, they might wish it, but they can't publically announce it.

Hence, the goal of the Bush cons is to turn tax money that was formerly run by public agencies and subject to public oversight, over to private contractors with limited to no accountability. That's the goal. This is well known. Its not a secret. They simply can't announce their intention is to dismantle the New Deal wholesale. They would be thrown out of office in droves. The shrinking of public functions, and turning them over to private entities is the trojan horse strategy that has been written about many times, by many people. Its been written about by conservatives, who admit this is their plan. I'm not alone is saying this, though you might like to think I am.


Take a look at Iraq, if you want to see what bushism and movement conservatisms ultimate goals our. Iraq was their little experiment. Their opportunity to showcase the glory of unfettered free markets, and limited government. Paul Bremer and BushCo tried to turn iraq into the world's first truly lassaize faire economy. Few regulations, low regressive flat taxes, a trade policy that was completely unrestricted. In fact, I believe they way they set it up, was that Iraq would be the first country on the planet without import tariffs of any sort.

And suprise. It was a complete disaster.
 
Last edited:
Those 'crackpots' are the ones driving his fundraising and 'grass roots' organization. You are either delusional or spinning. Someone posted the candidate's official response, which was to the effect, "We won't let the haters define us, we won't respond." In essence, never mind our backers, we need their money.
And 500 dollars is not going to make or break the Paul campaign. His giving back just that 500 would have said VOLUMES to the other skinheads that would think about it. It would say I don't like you people. I don't need your money. It repudiates that movement so much quicker than if you make the non-statement statement that the campaign made. I have a real dislike for white supremacists. I don't want my candidate to even look like he wants their money let alone their support.
 
Take a look at Iraq, if you want to see what bushism and movement conservatisms ultimate goals our. Iraq was their little experiment. Their opportunity to showcase the glory of unfettered free markets, and limited government. Paul Bremer and BushCo tried to turn iraq into the world's first truly lassaize faire economy. Few regulations, low flat taxes, a trade policy that was completely unrestricted. In fact, I believe they way they set it up, was that Iraq would be the first country on the planet without import tariffs of any sort.

And suprise. It was a complete disaster.

LOL

Yeah, Iraq is a disaster because we implemented a lassaize fair economy over there.
 
Those 'crackpots' are the ones driving his fundraising and 'grass roots' organization. You are either delusional or spinning. Someone posted the candidate's official response, which was to the effect, "We won't let the haters define us, we won't respond." In essence, never mind our backers, we need their money.


I would not characterize his online contributors, as crackpots. I think he's got tens of thousands of online contributors, most of who I assume the best about. People with an opinion, and people who are participating in our democratic process.

The crackpost and neonazis are a fringe. But, as socretease stated earlier, the neoconfederate support of ron paul, and his history of not forcefully rejecting it, is a cause of concern. For me, anyway.
 
LOL

Yeah, Iraq is a disaster because we implemented a lassaize fair economy over there.

A good article, on how the wet dreams of the Bush lassaize faire economists, went sour in iraq.


But Bremer's economic engineering had only just begun. In September, to entice foreign investors to come to Iraq, he enacted a radical set of laws unprecedented in their generosity to multinational corporations. There was Order 37, which lowered Iraq's corporate tax rate from roughly 40 percent to a flat 15 percent. There was Order 39, which allowed foreign companies to own 100 percent of Iraqi assets outside of the natural-resource sector. Even better, investors could take 100 percent of the profits they made in Iraq out of the country; they would not be required to reinvest and they would not be taxed. Under Order 39, they could sign leases and contracts that would last for forty years. Order 40 welcomed foreign banks to Iraq under the same favorable terms. All that remained of Saddam Hussein's economic policies was a law restricting trade unions and collective bargaining.

(Hmmmmmm.........)

If these policies sound familiar, it's because they are the same ones multinationals around the world lobby for from national governments and in international trade agreements. But while these reforms are only ever enacted in part, or in fits and starts, Bremer delivered them all, all at once. Overnight, Iraq went from being the most isolated country in the world to being, on paper, its widest-open market.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/09/0080197

the war certainly was a major contributor to the destruction of the iraqi economy. I never said anything to the contrary. But, the wholesale dismantling of the iraq civil service and state institutions, contributed to a downward spiral of social services, like water, sewage, electricity, etc.
 
Last edited:
I would not characterize his online contributors, as crackpots. I think he's got tens of thousands of online contributors, most of who I assume the best about. People with an opinion, and people who are participating in our democratic process.

The crackpost and neonazis are a fringe. But, as socretease stated earlier, the neoconfederate support of ron paul, and his history of not forcefully rejecting it, is a cause of concern. For me, anyway.

All the candidates are inundated with problematic contributors. The wise among them identify those and return. Sometimes they are missed, but when 'brought to light' they return, with comment of why. It's happened to all. Ron Paul is the exception. If he repudiated one of the supporters I mentioned, they would all back off, then where would he be, financially and grass roots?
 
Stormfront Supports Ron Paul

I'm a white woman, but can not agree with this woman:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/yafeVz8eP0U&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/yafeVz8eP0U&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/

She speaks eloquently for Ron Paul and White Nationalists! :clink:
 
You're shadow boxing against a phantom problem.

Outside of the fringe libertarian movement, nobody thinks the federal government is going to eliminate social security, medicare, the national weather service, or the environmental protection agency.

Huh? Did I mention eliminating any of those? You can count on the fact that SS will get a major overhaul. There is no avoiding it.

Not even Con republicans think that. Well, they might wish it, but they can't publically announce it.

Hence, the goal of the Bush cons is to turn tax money that was formerly run by public agencies and subject to public oversight, over to private contractors with limited to no accountability. That's the goal. This is well known. Its not a secret. They simply can't announce their intention is to dismantle the New Deal wholesale. They would be thrown out of office in droves. The shrinking of public functions, and turning them over to private entities is the trojan horse strategy that has been written about many times, by many people. Its been written about by conservatives, who admit this is their plan. I'm not alone is saying this, though you might like to think I am.

Whatever... I don't read conservatives. I know you, bac and the other Paul haters LOVE them for their Ron Paul smears, but I have absolutely no interest. If this is there plan to reduce government then they are fucking idiots since it is pretty much the same plan as any other statists to grow government. That is, get as many people as you can addicted to the government teat.

The goal of conservatives aint the goal of libertarians or those that truly hate government.
 
Back
Top