No one's said it yet, so I will........ Ron Paul!

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,099
Reaction score
8,848
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
i don't think a candidate as aggressive on overturning roe vs wade, abolishing social security, welfare and public education stands a chance.

it's fun to watch him run, but he's nowhere near enough in the mainstream to mount an effective campaign.
 

karo.ambrose

._.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
5,094
Reaction score
1,404
Location
cbus
He's been surprising everyone though, even himself. He asked his supporters to donate $500,000 for the last week of the quarter, and they in return gave $1,200,000. Even if he doesn't win the republican nomination, he is definitely going to turn debates into real debates instead of painfully scripted rhetoric. Like, instead of the candidates debating about how long our troops should stay in Iraq, he debates the fundamental question of preemptive war. What a rock star!
 

InfinityGoddess

Goddess of Infinity
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Messages
5,378
Reaction score
288
Location
New Jersey
Website
infinitygoddess.net
He's still not my kind of guy. Anti-abortion, anti-regulation, anti-tax on the wealthy. Nope.

Pity that his only one high scoring point is the Iraq War.
 

karo.ambrose

._.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
5,094
Reaction score
1,404
Location
cbus
Another thing, I'm willing to put money that he WILL win the republican nomination. Seriously. The pro-war republicans are divided amongst over a handful of candidates and there is only one anti-war republican, so he's got that whole crowd to himself. Plus he's drawing in a huge influx of independents and democrats (I was a democrat before I heard of Ron Paul). His numbers suggest that he's at 3-4%, but the straw polls show that he has very passionate followers who will vote for him in droves. He's been winning or placing in the top 3 all across the country. I also believe that the official polling numbers are skewed because they reflect landline phone numbers only. An uncounted number of Paul supporters (me included) use a cell phone only, so I would never be a part of these polling reports.
 

karo.ambrose

._.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
5,094
Reaction score
1,404
Location
cbus
He's still not my kind of guy. Anti-abortion, anti-regulation, anti-tax on the wealthy. Nope.

Pity that his only one high scoring point is the Iraq War.

Ron Paul is against abortion in principle, but he doesn't believe it's the federal governments right to interfere one way or the other. He wants to relenquish power back to the states.

From his website:
I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn.

And I think "anti-tax on the wealthy" is a bit misleading. He's anti-tax. He believes (but don't quote me, since I can't say everything verbatim) that the more taxes government accrues, the more power the government has to dictate our lives. And as the saying goes: "power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

As for the anti-regulation thing, that really isn't my area of expertise. Maybe someone else could help me out on that one.
 

InfinityGoddess

Goddess of Infinity
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Messages
5,378
Reaction score
288
Location
New Jersey
Website
infinitygoddess.net
Ron Paul is against abortion in principle, but he doesn't believe it's the federal governments right to interfere one way or the other. He wants to relenquish power back to the states.

From his website:
I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn.


Sorry, but that doesn't make it any better. I believe in the rights of all women to obtain an abortion if they want it at any time, regardless of where they live. No state or federal interference with that right, whatsoever. I like Roe the way it is, and I want the national Freedom of Choice Act to be passed. I know for a fact that there are states with "trigger laws" that will come into effect should Roe be overturned, either by the current SCOTUS, or proposals like Paul's. It's inhumane and cruel to force women to go underground for abortions. Absolutely not.

And I think "anti-tax on the wealthy" is a bit misleading. He's anti-tax. He believes (but don't quote me, since I can't say everything verbatim) that the more taxes government accrues, the more power the government has to dictate our lives. And as the saying goes: "power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Actually, the Cato Institute would disagree with him on that. We need taxes to run a government. Unfortunately.

As for the anti-regulation thing, that really isn't my area of expertise. Maybe someone else could help me out on that one.

Anti-regulation means pro-let-corporations-do-whatever-the-hell-they-want-with-impunity. I prefer the robber barons to be restrained, thank you.
 

Bartholomew

Comic guy
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Kansas! Again.
Ron Paul has a huge internet following. But this is impossible to quantify. How many of them will actually go vote? What states are they in? What counties?

I suspect he's more of a hopeful for the election AFTER this one than for this election.

Still, I like (a good portion of) his politics.
 

Bartholomew

Comic guy
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Kansas! Again.
Just because they are successful does not make them robber barons, Bart.

Here's a definition:
http://www.answers.com/topic/robber-baron

You'll note even the definition dates the term.

questionable stock-market operations and exploitation of labor.

You're right. They both fit the definition.

But let's just say I agree with you completely. I'd really hate to see this thread turn into a long argument about whether or not the term "robber-baron" is appropriate.

Anyway, I suspect the term was used here to be more poetic than literate. God forbid that happen here of all places.
 

Opty

Banned
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
4,448
Reaction score
918
Location
Canada
Actually, neither one of them fit the definition at all.

But, it's cute that you're clinging so tightly to your misunderstanding of the term.
 

Bartholomew

Comic guy
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Kansas! Again.
Actually, neither one of them fit the definition at all.

But, it's cute that you're clinging so tightly to your misunderstanding of the term.

Connotation is everything. Everyone seems to understand what "Robber Baron" meant in the sentence. Therefore, I will assume that you'd rather pick at minutiae and engage in childish taunting than have any sort of conversation.
 

Joe270

Banned
Joined
Jan 3, 2007
Messages
5,735
Reaction score
3,485
Location
Vegas, baby
Bart, I get where you're coming from, but don't think the poster we've skewered gets what you do.
 

Opty

Banned
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
4,448
Reaction score
918
Location
Canada
Connotation is everything. Everyone seems to understand what "Robber Baron" meant in the sentence. Therefore, I will assume that you'd rather pick at minutiae and engage in childish taunting than have any sort of conversation.

You, of all people, are accusing someone else of being childish?

kettleblacksilver.jpg
 

Andrew

Most of the rules gotta go...
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 23, 2005
Messages
792
Reaction score
64
Location
Alabama
Wouldn't a bit of libertarianism be a breath of fresh air for this country? Ah but to dream of the fine escape!
 

Bartholomew

Comic guy
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Kansas! Again.
Bart, I get where you're coming from, but don't think the poster we've skewered gets what you do.

She disagrees with you. She used the term Robber-Baron in a sense that is pretty much 100% understandable. She used it to color a certain group of people in a fashion that she wants to portray them. Were it me, I'd debate her on some point other than her word choice.
 

Joe270

Banned
Joined
Jan 3, 2007
Messages
5,735
Reaction score
3,485
Location
Vegas, baby
Go for it, Bart. I've tried. Many others. Now it's your turn. Keep some aspirin handy.
 

AndiB

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
325
Reaction score
48
Location
I'm a child of the corn
First of all Ron Paul isn't opposed to tax in general. He's opposed to personal income taxes. BTW there is no legal basis for having them in this country it is one of those things that is enforced by the might of the law rather than the rule of the law.

Goddess what kind of incentive do we as a nation offer people to succeed when we levy higher taxes on those that do than any other group? In fact, the poor earn more from earned income tax credits than they actually pay for taxes so they certainly aren't contributing to the money that is used to assist the government. The wealthy can actually afford tax attorneys that save them millions in taxes each year which once again leaves the middle class bearing the brunt of the tax burden (personal income tax) for the nation.

Ron Paul did say that while he would prefer to abolish taxes all together he would support the fair tax, which is based on spending rather than income and the poor are extended a credit each month to help 'level' the spending pool.

Personally, I am opposed to the government regulating anything to do with our bodies. That includes government sponsored health care as much as government sponsored or banned abortion. I don't think the government should have the right to that kind of information or oversight when it comes to our bodies and Ron Paul is trying to make it a state issue rather than a federal government issue. Many issues that the federal government claims authority over should be within the pervue of states rights according to the way our government was established. He seeks to return to that and this is something that I find incredible and inspiring in a politician.

Whether you like him or not he is the only candidate I've seen that is a strict constitutionalist even though all of them aspire to take an office that is supposed to defend and uphold the constitution. I would much rather have someone in that office that believes in the document than one who merely pays lip service.