Would YOU vote for RON PAUL

This highlights the malaise in US politics – people are supporting a candidate but in the hope that his many destructive ideas will not be passed or be blocked by Congress.

But what if they do pass - what happens then do these people go ‘OPPS’ when they’re fighting to death over a tin of beans in a burnt out Wal-Mart?

 

onion

And in what way do you think Ron’s ideas would? There are many detailed criticisms of them that would seem to indicate that they could very easily make thinks worse? Have you got a reply to those criticisms beyond blind faith?

But many are hoping the same Congress will have the intellectual sense, sound judgement and foresight to block Ron’s more destructive ideas?

 

Bob

Can you be more specific because every one I’ve looked at so far when actually examined has turned out to be bad? Just saying something is ‘good’ does not mean it is. See below on ‘foreign wars’.

But as I’ve said all the ideas of right wing libertarianswhen actually examined have turned out to be bad? Criticism that no right wing libertarian seems able to address.

Can you explain in more detail why you think that? As I’ve repeatedly explained (often in detail) when actually examined they turn out to be negative and would seem to lead to an adverse effect on many Americans (while favouring a few).

I prefer knowledge to blind chance, and what knowledge I’ve gained from many discussions and much research is that no right wing libertarian should be given a chance at power.

 

Bob

Right wing libertarian policies in this area would make many Americans lives at the lower and lower middle class levels more difficult while vastly increasing the wealth power and influence of a few.

I’ll explain –

Right wing libertarians want a non interventionists foreign policy and to cut military spending. Now that is also the idea of many on the left, but this right wing approach is based in their ‘small’ government low tax ideology. The left would reallocate any money saved and put it into things like education, training, welfare programmes and healthcare, but those things are disliked even hated by right wing libertarians (and be cut by them as well) and so instead any money clawed back would be given in tax cuts that would mainly favour wealth.

If military personnel was cut by half if would mean basically that some one million people would lose their job. Many of those would have dependents, partners, children and relatives, also many businesses and services would be affected by this lose of income.

In many European countries which have smaller military budgets there are welfare systems in place to help people with education, training, healthcare and pensions. In the more militarised US many in the lower levels of society have traditionally looked to the military for such cover (educational scholarships, vocational training, dental and medical care and for many a pension and a rise in social status). In a right wing libertarian US not only would that military avenue to benefits shrink but so would the few state benefits available.

Many Americans would be a lot worse off while wealth would gain in power and influence.

Is that what you want?

This is not hidden you only have to actually look at right wing libertarian ideas to see what it would actually mean, but I think many just see the headline ‘End Foreign Wars’ and go yeah - but they don’t read the small print.

 

Monkey Boy, Bob, TheOnionMan, Dude, Tazer, YoMama, Drkunk, PsychedelicBudda, givejonadollar…. to mention just a few that have appeared in this thread

Oh come on someone - can none of you actually address the criticisms levelled at right wing libertarianisms?

It seems to me that trying to debate about right wing libertarianism is like fighting a hydra, one head disappears without answering only for another to pop up making the exact same assertions, presenting the same arguments or shouting the same slogans and then when I and others criticise those views that head disappears without addressing them and another head pops up making the exact same prejudiced assertions, presenting the same tired arguments or shouting the same stock slogans and once more I and others show the flaws in them and yes once more that head disappears only to be replaced with another…and so on and so on…

Come on people, I think it must have dawned on even the thickest skinned by now that right wing libertarianism is a dead end, a shiny car with no engine, a con game that only the most unquestioning, gullible or blinkered would continue to follow.

 

Yes, only big brother can save us.

 

OH YES thank you Rat, I can always count on you to give the bog standard right wing reply to any criticism – try and smear the critics by implying they want to bring in ‘big brother’.

Thing is that George Orwell was a left-winger and was just - like those attacking your right wing libertarian beliefs - only warning about the dangers of bad ideologies.

 

based on his chance to actual become a candidate, Id say no- -although he comes off as a kind of a wacky guy, some of his ideas aren't bad and should be looked at- and some (like enviormental issues) dont seem like they have been thought out- -but>>

I haven't got a hoarse in the race yet- - so we,ll see what happens over the next 10 months or so

 

Jack

Ok I’m still trying to find anything good with right wing libertarianism – can you tell me the things you fill are Ron Pauls good ideas?

 

I voted for Obama last election. I'd vote for Paul before I vote for Obama again, but that's not saying much.

 

Well, can you address exactly which policies of Ron Paul that you disagree with, instead of just characterizing him as a 'right-wing libertarian'? Then maybe we can respond to those. All the candidates in this race are individuals-no two are alike. Give us some concrete examples of Ron Paul's policies that you disagree with.

 

I hope Ron Paul doesn't make it. So many people on the internet are gonna be pissed!

 

Balbus,
I admit Im not a big fan and not up on all his plans- but some of his ideas sound OK-some unreasonable

Paul believes that increased representation of state interests at the federal level encourages greater sharing of power between state and federal government, and that greater state participation serves as a check against a powerful federal government.

State interest would keep the power of the Feds in check*
--------------------
Believes that the Veterans Administration should not be building more hospitals, and that VA hospitals should instead be phased out. He believes that government should pay to treat veterans in private hospitals, arguing they will get better care more cost-effectively.-
-This is a good idea- -Ive seen enuff VA hospitals and the care that vets get is disgraceful**

 

Since he's a Republican, my concern is that once he held office, he'd too often compromise with mainstream Republican sentiments, and the end result would be a continued war on drugs, continued expansion of military budget and commitments and so forth but with drastic cuts in social programs including social security. Libertarians who fool around with Republicans tend to just further the cause of so-called libertarian Republicans such as Glenn Beck in the end.

 

Another question I'd like to throw out at Balbus or anyone else that's against Ron Paul is this: if Ron Paul isn't the best candidate that the Republicans are fielding, then who is? Newt Gingrich? Mitt Romney? All the other Repub candidates this year besides Ron Paul are just Reagan-style neocons. Are would you prefer Obama to be re-elected?

It's interesting that most people that are against Ron Paul on this thread aren't Americans. I'd think that foreigners would be glad to see Ron Paul elected, given his anti-war record and his belief that the US should stay out of other countries' affairs. Maybe they'd rather have another Reagan neocon that'll start a few more wars.

 

The republicans don't have anybody worth voting for......

 

Voting is irrelevant. Ron Paul, Obama, Bush. Different names but they are all part of the same team.

The way Ron Paul is being hyped, i wouldn't be surprised if he gets the title of anti-christ by the end of the republican primaries.

 

I would certainly prefer Obama to any Republican, even including the ones that are not running.

 

I urge ALL conservatives to vote for Ron Paul.

We would love to have him oppose us (Obama campaign) in the fall.

 

That would be an extremely interesting election.