DDDDDDDDNNDD8888DDNNNDDDD8DD88D888888888DDDDDDDDDD8$ZZ888DDN NNNNNNDDDDDDDDNNNNNN DDDDDD8DDDNNDDD8DDDDNNNDD888888888888888DDDDO$ZZ88$7ZZ8DDD DDDDDDNNNNNDDDD8DDDD8O NDDDDDD8DDDDNNDD88DDDDNNDD888888888888DDDDDDD8O$7$$$ZZO88D 888DDDDDDNNNNNDD88DDI= NNNNDDDDD8DDDNNND88DDDDNNND888888888888888D8DD88Z$$$ZZ$$$$ ZZZO8888DDDDNNDDDDDZ++ NNNNNDDDD888DDDNNDDDDDDDDNNDD88888888888888888D8ZZ$ZZZZOOO O8DDD88888DDDDDDDDD7?+ NNNNNNDDD888DDDDDNNDDDDD8D$DDD8888888888888888877ZOOO$ZOOD DDDD8888888DDDD88D8?++ NNNNNNNNDDDDDD8DDDZDNDD88O7ONNDDD8888888888D8DI$OOOOZZZO8D 888DDD888888D8DDDD$==+ DNNNNNNNNNDDDDD88887$8DDDI$ZDNNNDDD888D88ZOO8$OODDDDOOZOD8 888888888888888DD8?=== DDDD8NNDNNDDDDD8888DZI7ZO$$$ZNNNNNO7III77I77I77$I8DDDOZZD8 88888888888888O88Z==~~ DDDD7ONNNDDDDDDDD88DD87I7$$$$$8$II??I????I??I7I777$7OD8ZD8 8888888DD8888888OI=:~~ $O8ZI78MNNDDDDDDDD888D87II7$$7I???++?II$77I7III7$Z7$$Z8DDD D888888888888OO8Z?:,:: II$Z77$8NNNNDDDDDDDD8DZI7$$$I??++?=I7??I????I7II777$$ZOZDD DD88888888D88OO8$+::,: D7I777$$ZDNNNNDDDDDDD8I7$ZZ7?III=?I???????IIIIII777$$ZZ8ZD DDD8888888D88OOOI=:::: DO??II7$7IIZDMNNDDDDDIZ8DDIIII??IIIII???????I?II7777$Z$ZOZ Z8DDD88888888O8O?=~,,, DII7$7I777ZZ$ZDNNNND8DDDD8I+?I?I??????????????II7777$$$$$O Z$ZDDDD8DD88888Z+==~,, 77ZO8D$I78DDNNNNNNNNNNDDDII=+I???????+????????II7777$$$$7$ Z7$O8DDDDD88888$====~: NNDDDDN8I$DDDDNNNNNNNNNDNI+=????????+??+++?????III777$ZZ$7 I77$88DD88888D8?=====~ NNNNDDDDD7888DDDNNNNNNNNDI+=?+?????++++++????????II77$$Z$Z I77IOD88888888O+====== NNNNNDDDDDO88DDDDNNNNNNND?+=??????+==++?+?????????I77$$Z$$ 7II7Z8D88OOOO8$======= DDNNNNDDDDDNNDDD8DDNNNNN7??++???++++++??????+????II7$$$$Z$ 7?$$NDDD8OOO8OZ7??+=== DDDNNNNNDDDDDNDD88DDDNNDII+++???+?+++++???????I?III777$$Z$ $$Z$DDDD88OOOOOOOOZ$$7 DDDDDNNNNNDDDDDNDD8D8NND$I?+???????++??++?????+?IIII7$$$$$ 7$Z$8D8DNNNNDDOZOOOOOO NNDDDDNNNNNDDDDDDNDDDD7I+7I??I?7$ZZZII?++???+???7ZZZOOOZ$Z $Z$O888DNNNNND8OOOOOZZ DNNDDDDDNNNNDDDDDDNDD87++III+?I7$I+?+I?++?????I7ZZZZ888OZZ ZZ$D888DNNNNND8OOO88OZ DDDO8DDDDDZONNDDDDDDDD7+=?I????I++??I7I$I?+?7$Z7???II7$$ZZ ZZZ$ODDNNNNNN8OOOOOOOO DDDDZIODDDI7NNNDDDDDD$++?7++??+?$IIOOI7II++?7$OO?+$D$$$7$Z ZZ$Z$DDDNNNND888OOOOOO DDDDD8?I$III8DNNNDDDDD7+7?+?????++??II?I???I7ZZ7IIII7$$$$$ $$7OONNNNNNND88OOOOOOO DDDDDDDZ?I7I7DDNNNDDD8D?I7+?????++??+???+??I$7$$IIIII7$$$$ $Z7$NNDNNNNNDOOOOOOOOO NDDDDDDD$?IIII$8NNNNDDD++I?+??+++=+?????I?I7$$$77IIII7$$$Z 7O$8DDNNNNNND88OOOOOOO DDNDDDDD?I77I??+IONNDDDD+++?I?++=:+?I???IIII$Z$$77IIII7$$7 7$7DDDDNNNNNND888OOOOO DDDNDDDI7$ZO$?I7$$$$DNDD+?++I??++?I7$??II?II7$Z$$Z7??77$$$ Z$DDNDDDNNNNNDDD88OOOO 8DDDDDDNDDDD88?I8NNNDDND8I7ZI????7OI??????II7$Z$7ZZ777$$$7 77DDDNNNNNNND88888888O 8D88DDNDDDDDDDD8?ONNNNDNDDDD????Z?+??????I7$$$$$$ZO$7$$$$7 $NNDDDDNNNNND888888888 D888DDDDNNNNDD8DDODNNNNNNNND???+7I77?I??IIIIII7$$$77Z7$$$D DDDNNDD8NNNNDD8OO8OO88 DDDD8DDDDNNNNDDD888DDDDNNNNNII??=???+O==I7II7$ZZOZ$ZI7$$88 DDDDDNNNNNNNDOOOOOOOOO NDDDD888DDDNNNDD8888DDDDDNNN?I?I???++???I7$7$D8Z$$7I?$$$8D 88DDDDNNNNNDN8OOOOOOOO DDNNDDD8D8DDNNNDDDDD8DDDDDDN??I?I??++??=+?II?7$$$$7?7$$N8D 888DDDDDNNO8NND8OOOOOO NNDDDNDDD88DDDNNNDDD8D888DDN??+???+++?+++???II$$$777$7NDDD DD88D88DDDOZZ88DD88OOO NNNNDDDND888DDDNNNDDD888D8D:?+++???++++++??II7$$$7$$7NDDDD DDDDDDD8888Z$$$?7ODD88 IODNNDDDNNDDDDDDNNNDDD8D8DO,??+++???++??+???777777$7NDDDDD DDDDD8D8D8OZZZZI++=?8D +==?DNNNDDNDDDDDDDNNDDDDD8:.,??+??II?+++???II$7$$$ZD7DDDDD DDDDDDD8DD8Z$$Z7++=:,, =+===78NNNNNDDDDDDDNNDDDD8,,..I+???II??????I77$$Z$+D78DDDD DDDDDDDDD8OZ$ZZ7===~:, ~==+==++$DNNNNNDDDDDDDDDD8,....,+????+?III7$$$$$7=+NDZDNNN DDDDDDDDDDOZ$$ZI=~~::: ~=~~=+=++++ZDNNNDDDDDDDDD8=......I???++?I77$77$===+NNDDODN NNDDDD88DDOZZZZI=~~~:: ~~~~~===+++++$8DDNDDDDDDD8O.... ...I????I?I7$?~~~=+NNNDDDDDDNNNDDDDDOZ$ZZI=~:::~ ~~~~~~===DDNNNNNNNDDDDDDDD87... ....??I??II~::~~=+NNNNNDNNNNNDDNDDN8Z$$Z?~:,::: ~~~=INNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDD88O,.. .....$O$7.,,,::~=+DNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDD$$$ZI:,,,:: ==DNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDD88=.. ....=Z$7$7,,,:~~=+DNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDZ$7=::,,: NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDDDD8$.. .. I7777OOZ,::~~~$DNNNNNNNNDNNNNNNNNNNNDD7+:::: NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDNDDDDDDDDD8O.....,IOZ$7OO88O,~~~=8NNNNNNN NNNNMNNNNNNNNNNNNDD8:, NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDDD8I. . ?ZZ8O$8$8I$$:~~~ZNNNNMNNNNNNNMMNNNNNNNNNNNNNDD NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDNDDDDD8$. =?II~Z88D++===:~~ONNNNNMMNNMMMMMMNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDD8+.~=+~.$8Z8D===~:~~~DNNNNNNM MMMMMMNNNNMNNNNDNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDD87:,::~7ZDZ8D8==~:,:IDNNNNNNN MMMMMNNNNNNMNNNDNNNNNN DNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDNDDDDDDDD8+::~+$$O$O8D8=~~:~+NNNNNNNN NNMMMNNNNNNMMNNNDDNDDN DDNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDDDD=?:~7ZZZZO88DD=~~~+NNNNNNNM NNNMNMMNNNNNMMNNDNNNDD DDDNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDDDD8I~$$$ZZ?O888D7~~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
:: I've been getting Obama supporters handing out posters and buttons and stuff at my train station. My neighborhood is the district that donates the most money to politics in the world, so there's always someone around. Still, I've seen one hillary supporter and the rest have been Obama. I haven't seen any republican supporters, which I found interesting, until yesterday. Taking a lunch break from work(which is where I'm at now...on a f'n saturday!), I noticed two pickup trucks with big Ron Paul '08 signs.
Kinda like a guy whose name is plastered on new letters for years with racially insensitive material on it (whether he wrote it or not)?
Oh please .... one newsletter written by someone else 25 years ago while RP wasn't even in politics cause he was busy delivering poor people of ALL ethnicities babies and often treating them for free ... This is your reason to be against Paul ? .... That's idiotic. :kick: So who's your choice .... Wesley Clark ? What's really funny is ... if it were such a real point , his opponents would have been all over it , but the truth of the matter is they can't find any dirt on Paul .... but you think you have a point ? :notallthere:
did I say that was my reason for being against Paul? Have I ever exclaimed I was against Paul. Show me where. Not believing Paul has a chance in hell doesn't make me against Paul. Not appreciating the Paulaholic zerg does not me I am against Paul. Arguing politics with you on different points here or there does not make me against Paul. Yeah, I think McCain said something that is stupid and I don't trust his judgement on it. By the same token I think that the person writing his newsletter is pretty much a shithead also, but to think that Ron Paul didn't have the oversight to at least read some shit coming out with his name on it doesn't make me feel very good either. The point is, when this came out he stated it was taken out of context, then he claimed it wasn't written by him, then he said that he wouldn't give up the name of the person who wrote it. Whether he believes it or not, those newsletters are attributed to him or people/organizations working in his name in which he had some affiliation to. It is 100 times less offensive that McCain outwardly stating "I Hate Gooks", but it is still there. So where did I say I was against Paul again? Is this some sort of "If you aren't for us then you are against us" bullshit? I thought that shit went out in 2002.
Uhhh let's see ... perpetuating the myth that Ron Paul allowed to be said something that wasn't said by him from 25 years ago in defense of McCain . I guess on planet BMBullshit that means you like him.
2008 campaign chair Kent Snyder first worked for Paul on the 1988 campaign—when U.S. Senator John McCain told him, "You're working for the most honest man in Congress." from wikipedia
To quote Jon Stewart ... American's don't seem to go for that And we wonder why we keep getting fucked over by idiots in the elite club who take more and more rights and freedom from the people with each passing year , while the people let a man that would stop the insanity pass them by . :doh:
I would love to know a 'right' that I've had taken away in my lifetime. It's a great catch phrase for insighting passion for change, but what exactly does it mean? I know it's a silly question, but if someone is going to talk about more and more rights being taken away, I would just like an example of rights that I had 40 years ago that I don't have now. Hell, we all know the issues with the Patriot Act, phone taps, etc. but I just want an example that has affected the rights of citizens that abide by the law.
[SIZE=+2]Paul: Secretive Elite Control America[/SIZE] 02-01-2008 Press TV <script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"></script> Presidential candidate Ron Paul says he traces America's problems to the flawed monetary policy of the wealthy and secretive elite. During a speech at the University of Washington on Thursday, Paul said the Congress and the Federal Reserve will not be able to stem the recession spurred by the home mortgage meltdown. "The most important thing you can do is nothing," said the Texas congressman, who voted against the recent $146 billion economic stimulus package passed by the US House of Representatives. The 10-term Texas congressman maintained that a series of wrong economic decisions by the Bush administration has led to a recession. The government should allow the market to correct itself, Paul added. Although the mainstream media attempts to keep a low profile on the 72-year-old presidential hopeful, he has managed to find a staunch group of supporters who say he has captured their hearts with his 'message of freedom' and constitutionalism. "The Constitution was written for one specific purpose and that was to restrain the government, not to restrain the people," Paul has said.
Nice little speech by Ron Paul's oldest grandson, Mathew . -------- Matthew "Matt" Pyeatt, 27, the oldest grandson of Ron Paul....the Republican presidential candidate from Lake Jackson, TEXAS....will head up a Forum on FREEDOM AND PROSPERITY tonight (Jan.17) at 7PM at the SETZER Student CENTER Ballroom on the Lamar Campus. With two degrees from OU and SHSU in Broadcast Journalism & Electronic Media, Matt has worked as a Staff Writer for CBSNews.com and is also assisting the RON PAUL CAMPAIGN in their Publicity efforts. Matt and his wife, Kym, have one son, Collin. Matt attended Lamar University for 2 years 1996-97, pledging Sigma Phi Epsilon. Among others on the Forum is J.Shane Howard, 36, current Chairman-elect of the Jefferson County Republican Party Committee and Founder of the Young Republican Club at LU five years ago. Thanks to a generous Donation from the local RON PAUL MEETUP GROUP, students and attendees will be provided a FREE snacks with drink at 6:30PM in the Ballroom prior to the Forum presentation <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dzuCSsjdQH4&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dzuCSsjdQH4&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Ron Paul on Bill Moyers .... back in Oct 2002. As always he was right once again ... :clap: PART I <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Itx9ij_9OjU&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Itx9ij_9OjU&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> PART II <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pmq6GstlVrk&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pmq6GstlVrk&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
:bears::bears::bears: Paul draws big Denver crowd <!--subtitle--><!--byline-->By Kirk Mitchell The Denver Post <!--date-->Article Last Updated: 02/02/2008 02:55:02 PM MST Republican presidential hopeful, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, heads for the podium to address a crowd of supporters during a campaign stop in Denver Friday, Feb. 1, 2008. (AP / David Zalubowski) <script language="JavaScript"> if(requestedWidth < 200){ requestedWidth = 200; } </script> <script language="JavaScript"> if(requestedWidth > 0){ document.getElementById('articleViewerGroup').style.width = requestedWidth + "px"; document.getElementById('articleViewerGroup').style.margin = "0px 0px 10px 10px"; } </script> The Republican presidential candidate talks with Lee Cruz, 24, an Air Force reservist, at Giuseppe's Depot Restaurant in Colorado Springs on Feb. 1, 2008. (THE DENVER POST | ANDY CROSS) The alarm in the Colorado Convention Center employee's voice was verging on panic. "That room is packed so tight it's not even funny," he shouted into a radio Friday night as the Segway he was riding hummed and swerved down a wide carpeted hallway. The crowd for Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul was so large it surprised his own organizers. They were forced to hurriedly open partitions to double the size of the ballroom space minutes before Paul's scheduled appearance in the Four Seasons Ballroom. When that wasn't enough hundreds of people stood rimming the hall that sits 1,536. "I'm just totally dumbfounded," Paul said as he began his speech before a raucous sign-waving crowd. "The enthusiasm seems to be growing. Freedom is popular." Many of his supporters boldly predicted he would win more delegates in the state then front runners Sen. John McCain and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney even though Paul has yet to win a majority in any state primary. "He's real strong in Colorado," said Vince Holcomb, 45, a massage therapist from Centennial. "Ron Paul is a lot higher in the polls than the mainstream media publicize." Full-bearded John Wiens, 57, of Loveland, decked out in a Revolutionary War-era fifer's outfit complete with a tri-cornered hat and knickers, played "Yankee Doodle Dandy" on his flute before the Texas Congressman entered the hall. The crowd chanted: "Ron Paul Revolution; Taking back our Constitution." Paul said he is so well-received in Colorado because people in the state share his love of personal liberties, his quest to "return to constitutional principles" and his belief that government needs to be dramatically reduced. "There's no reason why we can't do quite well right here," Paul said during a press conference that preceded his campaign speech. "I would say we're in pretty good shape." Paul, who celebrated his 51st wedding anniversary Friday night, was a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force during the 1960s and has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He has five children, 18 grandchildren and one great grandchild. Paul says he plans to end welfare for illegal aliens and "birthright citizenship." He says he has never voted to increase taxes, is against regulating the Internet and opposes the Iraq war. "We don't have to start a brand new revolution," Paul told the crowd. "All we have to do is restore the original Constitution."
Lots more signs in upstate New York. A huge one right before the tapenzee bridge. Nice real estate there. Ron Paul gets an A for effort in my book, but lower scores on some other critical stuff.
Gotta like this one .... who's the one candidate who's spending proposals saves the taxpayers billions ? Who else ... All the others want to tax and spend us into oblivian. :doh: ============= Monday, February 4, 2008 <!-- Begin .post --> <!-- --> Presidential Candidate Budget Analysis: Ron Paul Lowest, Barack Obama Highest In New Spending <!-- --> Posted by: Eric Ames @ 8:07 AM Ron Paul came in at -$150.1 billion and Barack Obama at $287 billion for new spending proposals in a 2008 Presidential Candidate Budget Analysis put together by the National Taxpayers Union Foundation, representing the lowest and highest numbers, respectively, of all the candidates. These numbers represent new spending programs the candidates are proposing the government take on if they are elected president. Obviously there is quite a difference in spending between the two ends of the spectrum in Paul and Obama, but what where do the rest of the candidates sit? From highest to lowest, Hillary Clinton came in second after Obama, proposing $218.2 billion in new spending. Following Clinton is Mike Huckabee at $54.2 billion, Mitt Romney at $19.5 billion and John McCain at $6.9 billion. The only candidate other than Ron Paul who was proposing an overall spending cut was Rudy Giuliani, at -$1.4 billion; however, he recently dropped out of the race and has endorsed McCain. Each of the Democratic candidates came in with large new spending proposals, largely because of the health care reforms they wish to see enacted. Both Clinton and Obama are proposing to get rid of the Bush tax cuts, which they hope will work toward offsetting their spending increases. Cutting the Bush tax cuts alone, however, will not come close to meeting their spending increases. This means in order for the candidates to enact their policies, they will need to make additional cuts elsewhere, increase tax income or increase the government’s deficit. This same assessment goes for the Republican candidates who are proposing spending increases. None of them are campaigning for increased taxes, though. The big day--Super Tuesday--is tomorrow, so if you happen to reside in one of the more than 20 states holding their primaries tomorrow, get ready to vote. Look over some of our archived posts (January) for more insight into each candidate.
Like I've said before so many times ... how can any informed intelligent American with an ounce of sense not want Paul ? :bears:
From highest to lowest, Hillary Clinton came in second after Obama, proposing $218.2 billion in new spending. Following Clinton is Mike Huckabee at $54.2 billion, Mitt Romney at $19.5 billion and John McCain at $6.9 billion. The only candidate other than Ron Paul who was proposing an overall spending cut was Rudy Giuliani, at -$1.4 billion; however, he recently dropped out of the race and has endorsed McCain. If obama is the highest and Paul was the lowest.. Paul is 150billion but they show McCain at 6.9 billion?
I posted it somewhere earlier in this thread ... suffice it to say , it's complicated and requires fixing our overall system and putting a lot more money in the peoples hands and out of government's wasteful hands. The fairytale known as universal healthcare is impossible in our current economic crisis ... but it sure sounds good to these assholes spouting it at debates doesn't it ? :doh: When you hear it ... realize they're flat out lying to you to get elected ... it cannot work under our current conditions without major cuts in spending AND tax increases. The current National Debt when using the accrual method which is the only one we should EVER use for the country , is in the neighborhood of $60TRILLION thanks to a congress that has looted the SS entitlement funds for years and left it full of IOU's. :doh:
No you're reading it wrong .... it's -$150billion (negative) That means there's a $437,000,000,000.00 split between Ron Paul's and Obama's and a $156.9 split between Paul and McCain. In other words .. Paul's spending plan puts money back in the budget to begin to build a surplus.
whos plan?? surely you arent asking that of paul, hes the only guy whos been critical of the govt printing money out of thin air
Noam Chomsky on Ron Paul: Hello Mr. Chomsky. I’m assuming you know who Ron Paul is. And I’m also assuming you have a general idea about his positions. Here my summary of Mr. Paul’s positions: - He values property rights, and contracts between people (defended by law enforcement and courts). Under all circumstances? Suppose someone facing starvation accepts a contract with General Electric that requires him to work 12 hours a day locked into a factory with no health-safety regulations, no security, no benefits, etc. And the person accepts it because the alternative is that his children will starve. Fortunately, that form of savagery was overcome by democratic politics long ago. Should all of those victories for poor and working people be dismantled, as we enter into a period of private tyranny (with contracts defended by law enforcement)? Not my cup of tea. - He wants to take away the unfair advantage corporations have (via the dismantling of big government) “Dismantling of big government†sounds like a nice phrase. What does it mean? Does it mean that corporations go out of existence, because there will no longer be any guarantee of limited liability? Does it mean that all health, safety, workers rights, etc., go out the window because they were instituted by public pressures implemented through government, the only component of the governing system that is at least to some extent accountable to the public (corporations are unaccountable, apart from generally weak regulatory apparatus)? Does it mean that the economy should collapse, because basic R&D is typically publicly funded — like what we’re now using, computers and the internet? Should we eliminate roads, schools, public transportation, environmental regulation,….? Does it mean that we should be ruled by private tyrannies with no accountability to the general public, while all democratic forms are tossed out the window? Quite a few questions arise. - He defends workers right to organize (so long as owners have the right to argue against it). Rights that are enforced by state police power, as you’ve already mentioned. There are huge differences between workers and owners. Owners can fire and intimidate workers, not conversely. just for starters. Putting them on a par is effectively supporting the rule of owners over workers, with the support of state power — itself largely under owner control, given concentration of resources. - He proposes staying out of the foreign affairs of other nations (unless his home is directly attacked, and must respond to defend it). He is proposing a form of ultranationalism, in which we are concerned solely with our preserving our own wealth and extraordinary advantages, getting out of the UN, rejecting any international prosecution of US criminals (for aggressive war, for example), etc. Apart from being next to meaningless, the idea is morally unacceptable, in my view. I really can’t find differences between your positions and his. There’s a lot more. Take Social Security. If he means what he says literally, then widows, orphans, the disabled who didn’t themselves pay into Social Security should not benefit (or of course those awful illegal aliens). His claims about SS being “broken†are just false. He also wants to dismantle it, by undermining the social bonds on which it is based — the real meaning of offering younger workers other options, instead of having them pay for those who are retired, on the basis of a communal decision based on the principle that we should have concern for others in need. He wants people to be able to run around freely with assault rifles, on the basis of a distorted reading of the Second Amendment (and while we’re at it, why not abolish the whole raft of constitutional provisions and amendments, since they were all enacted in ways he opposes?). So I have these questions: 1) Can you please tell me the differences between your schools of “Libertarianism� There are a few similarities here and there, but his form of libertarianism would be a nightmare, in my opinion — on the dubious assumption that it could even survive for more than a brief period without imploding. 2) Can you please tell me what role “private property†and “ownership†have in your school of “Libertarianism� That would have to be worked out by free communities, and of course it is impossible to respond to what I would prefer in abstraction from circumstances, which make a great deal of difference, obviously. 3) Would you support Ron Paul, if he was the Republican presidential candidate…and Hilary Clinton was his Democratic opponent? No.
Took me a while to find it , but here's the post on Paul's healthcare program ... http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/showpost.php?p=557048&postcount=346 One that would actually work. :bears:
noam chomsky is a left wing libertarian, which through my years of study of such philophy (libertarianism in general, not just left wing) I've found out to be totally useless. left wing libertarians are, for the most part, very ignorant on economic matters. i'm sure robert nozick (who was a much more influential and credible libertarian than nomsky) would agree with most of ron paul's ideas. of course, nozick was an economist.
I read Chomsky's warped view of Ron Paul's politics ... it would not be the first time in the last few years that I lost a lot of respect for Chomsky. I have many issues he purports that I agree with him wholeheartedly , but then I read crap like this and it seems to be a complete contradiction of his beliefs ... At times I think it has more to do with Chomsky being unwilling to share the spotlight with someone like Paul who time and again has been proven 100% right as can be seen over and over by his staunch position on important issues which now prove to be above arguing over unless you want to be seen as an imbecile. When I read something like this post by Chomsky I say ... I couldn't agree more ... ---------------------- "The elections are run by the same industries that sell toothpaste on television. You don’t expect to get information from a television ad. You don’t expect to get information about a candidate from debates, advertisements and the other paraphernalia that goes along with what are called elections here. There’s a lot of fuss on the left about election irregularities, like, you know, the voting machines were tampered with, they didn’t count the votes right, and so on. That’s all accurate and of some importance, but of far more importance is the fact that elections just don’t take place, not in any meaningful sense of the term “election.†And so, it doesn’t matter all that much, if there was some tampering. I suspect that’s why the population doesn’t get much exercised over it. The concern over stolen elections and vote tampering, and so on, is mostly an elite affair. Most of the country didn’t seem to care very much. “OK, so the election was stolen.†I mean, if you’re flipping a coin to select a king or something, it doesn’t matter much if the coin is biased. That seems to be the way most people feel about it. And there’s some justification. In fact, the attitude of the public here towards the political system is very dramatic. I mean, about a third of the population in the United States, according to recent polls, believes that the Bush administration was responsible for 9/11. But they don’t think it’s a problem, like they don’t think that’s anything to worry about it. Yeah, of course, they’re all crooks and gangsters and murderers, tell us something new, you know. It doesn’t have much to do with us. That’s a shocking commentary on the state of American democracy. There’s a lot of talk here about, you know, we have a divided country. We have to unify. We need a unifier, somebody who will bring it back together. Red and blue, and so on. That’s pretty marginal. It is a divided country. It’s divided between public opinion and public policy. A very sharp divide. And on issue after issue, the whole political system is well to the right of the public and public attitudes. And we know a lot about these, because it’s a very well studied topic in the United States." ---------------------- Then I read his opinion of Paul and it would seem he's lost all cognitive reason in favor of someone elses agenda ... Also ... ANYONE that endorsed Kerry ... and apparently now sit's firmly on a fence pole up his ass with this election unwilling or able to make a decision most likely out of fear of being horribly wrong again , while basically deriding Paul .... has got some issues. Finally .... Apparently Chomsky isn't even sure he made those comments , but says basically ... Whatever. The fact that he apparently knows almost nothing about economics doesn't help matters or he'd be screaming for Paul. ------------ Hello Prof. Chomsky, Some comments regarding Republican Presidential Candidate Ron Paul that have been attributed to you are circulating the internet. They are posted on numerous websites, but no one seems to be able to find an official source. I've included them at the bottom of this e-mail. Can you confirm if these are you're statements? I thought they were, but some Ron Paul supporters are saying it's a fake or a hoax. Is it OK if I post your response to this on my website, AnarchismToday.org? Thanks for your time. Response: Write an awful lot of letters, maybe 6-7 hours a day (usually night), so can't be sure, but it looks like a response of mine to questions raised on a Znet forum. Original is presumably there, but I suspect it is the same. I don't know how Znet deals with re-posting, but I'd personally have no objections. Noam Chomsky
