Republican Nomination?

Originally posted by inimalist
This is where I feel libertarianism falls apart. Much like communism, it assumes very specific things about the nature of humans, society, and behaviour. For instance, the assumption that people always have a choice (other than what colour to represent) is one, the idea that everyone is capable of "taking care" of themselves is another.

Why would ending the war on drugs fix any inner city problems? If anything, it will make the people who kill each other for drug money more willing to kill each other for other forms of illegal funds. It will do nothing to fix use or addiction issues, nor will it fix the issues that drive people to drug use in the first place. Drug addiction is a symptom.

What sort of Libertarian economic fix are you talking about. I think you may have some misconceptions about these poor neighborhoods. In many, employment left, there are no jobs for people to have. This is compounded with poor education and lack of realistic role models. Companies, by following the simple rules of free market capitalism, left these areas for more profit.

I don't care if someone wants to use drugs. Furthermore, I don't care if some uses drugs and gets an addiction. It is not different than someone getting an addiction to food. It is not my problem. Nor should it be the governments.

Libertarians usually follow the Austrian school of economics.

Originally posted by Devil King
As I said before, he won't last long. The governmental bureaucracy is a self-sustaining entity.

Originally posted by Robtard
[B]Of course you do...

Not much of a point, as the chance of RP winning the Republican nomination is all but zero. Not saying it can't happen as an absolute; just don't cut yourself when he doesn't win it.

Originally posted by Bardock42
On a different note, apparently there are three people already here who are like "Well, what he says is awesome....but I wouldn't vote for him cause he can't get it"

I just saw this... I never said or implied that, Bardock-Ass. I did say that I agree with some of his views; that's a far cry from what you're implying.

Originally posted by BigRed

What are you basing that on? Those scientific polls?

Logical deduction... the chances of him winning the Republican Nomination are slim at best; I could be wrong, but don't kill yourself when you have to vote for another Republican or Hillary.

Edit: Or Nader, he's running again, right?

Originally posted by BigRed
He's lasted in Congress for seventeen years. People assume the government (irregardless of how corrupt and mismanged or inept) can't be fixed or changed. That is a misconception. It can be changed. If all the people that keep saying it can't be changed, actually believed it could be, it would indeed change.

It is a misconception on your part that I said the government can't be changed. But the changes he has proposed upset a lot of people in the government. And what I have said is that he doesn't have the political power to do it. 17 years as a congressman is a lot different than 4 years as President. And to accomplish what he wants in the 4 years he'd have, he'd have to garner the support of a large number of people in government; people that won't support someone who might dismantle the department for which they work.

And I appreciate the attitude of yourself and Bardock, that addresses the American people getting up off their asses. But, that's also where I can see teh point of view of those who say they wouldn't waste their vote. The American people don't want to get off their asses. For example, there are hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on all teh campaignes going on, and then compare that to the pitiful number of Americans who actually vote in a presidential election. Put those figures up against the voter turn out in a non-presidential election, and it's even worse!

If the government is going to change for the better, it won't be done through legitimate means, as I've said. It'll be done by the same back room methods that have lead to the current state of our government.

Originally posted by BigRed
It is no secret that the Media in general is biased. It is controlled by a few rich people that get to decide what comes on and what doesn't. The idea of objectivity is hard to find in mainstream media.

Okay.

If the government is going to change, it will change when the American people get fed up with the situation and finally decide to do something.

If they elect a Romney, Huckabee, Obama or Hilary; you can bet after four years of them; I'm sure they'll be fed up.

Originally posted by BigRed
If the government is going to change, it will change when the American people get fed up with the situation and finally decide to do something.

If they elect a Romney, Huckabee, Obama or Hilary; you can bet after four years of them; I'm sure they'll be fed up.

And they aren't fed up enough now to elect Paul?

Originally posted by Devil King
And they aren't fed up enough now to elect Paul?

That is what makes his campaign amazing. It is all grassroots efforts to get his message out.

Plus, there are still people harping on the neoconservative view of the world and will take a while to come around.

Purely speculation of course.

Originally posted by BigRed
That is what makes his campaign amazing. It is all grassroots efforts to get his message out.

A grassroots effort, supported by a large number of people who will loose their government benefits and perks, should he be elected?

Dropping a line on a 5 minute TV interview about doing away with the IRS is going to be applauded by just about anyone who gets a paycheck, rich or poor.

What this grassroots effort needs to do is spread the reality of what he wants to do, not just the pedal-stomping sound bites.

I'm sorry, but I simply do not support the idea that crossing a state line should be like going into a different country.

Originally posted by Devil King
A gressroots effort, supported by a large number of people who will loose their government benefits and perks, should he be elected?

Dropping a line on a 5 minute TV interview about doing away with the IRS is going to be applauded by just about anyone who gets a paycheck, rich or poor.

What this grassroots effort needs to do is spread the reality of what he wants to do, not just the pedal-stomping sound bites.

Well Huckabee wants to eliminate the IRS. He certainly doesn't have the rabid support RP has. (Probably because RP wants to replace it with nothing whereas Huckabee wants a fair tax to replace it I believe).

The grassroots is supported by people that are fans of our Constitution, freedom/liberty and our rights. They don't want a bigger government. They don't want the same government. They want a much smaller government. To me, it just seems logical that the smaller the government is, the better.

Originally posted by BigRed
The grassroots is supported by people that are fans of our Constitution, freedom/liberty and our rights. They don't want a bigger government. They don't want the same government. They want a much smaller government. To me, it just seems logical that the smaller the government is, the better.

Grassroots are the people. But, I feel the "people" aren't thinking it through. 17 years as a conressman from Texas, a state that still thinks it shold be it's own country, isn't that big a deal to me...nor is it a suprise.

I'm all for getting rid of government bureaucracy. But I do not support the idea that dismantling the federal government is a good thing for a nation in our position in the year 2008! I do not find the idea that a US citizens rights can change from state to state a beneficial one.

Originally posted by Devil King
Grassroots are the people. But, I feel the "people" aren't thinking it through. 17 years as a conressman from Texas, a state that still thinks it shold be it's own country, isn't that big a deal to me...nor is it a suprise.

I'm all for getting rid of government bureaucracy. But I do not support the idea that dismantling the federal government is a good thing for a nation in our position in the year 2008!

Who is better? And why?

Think of America as clock, a large battered clock that's been dipped in salt water for the last 8+ years, now RP wants to open that clock up and tear out all the cogs, though some not necessary and some are outdated, he wants to tear them all out and attempt tp replace those cogs with sprockets, which may or may not work.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Who is better? And why?

Maybe someone who thinks that rights should be national, and not some one who thinks that abortion, marriage, taxes, criminal actions, penalties, trade and civil rights should be based on the hugely varied demographics of the particular state in which a US citizen finds themself.

Originally posted by Devil King
Maybe someone who thinks that rights should be national, and not some one who thinks that abortion, marriage, taxes, criminal actions, penalties, trade and civil rights should be based on the hugely varied demographics of the particular state in which a US citizen finds themself.

America could be like the ancient Greeks and their city-states.

Originally posted by Devil King
Maybe someone who thinks that rights should be national, and not some one who thinks that abortion, marriage, taxes, criminal actions, penalties, trade and civil rights should be based on the hugely varied demographics of the particular state in which a US citizen finds themself.

Yeah, I agree, such a someone would be better. Which candidate of either party is better?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah, I agree, such a someone would be better. Which candidate of either party is better?

I'm supporting a Biden/Kucinich ticket.

Not for me. One of the better democrats but still suckage.

He wants more public schools, less freedom in them, is one of those Global Warming Weirdos, wants to raise taxes and wants to reconstruct Iraq in the image he favours.

What do you like about him?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Not for me. One of the better democrats but still suckage.

He wants more public schools, less freedom in them, is one of those Global Warming Weirdos, wants to raise taxes and wants to reconstruct Iraq in the image he favours.

What do you like about him?

Was that a test to see if I knew which "he" you were talking about?

Originally posted by Devil King
Was that a test to see if I knew which "he" you were talking about?

Hahaha, no, I focused on Biden, I figure you meant him as front runner. Isn't vice president basically the dick job of all?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Not for me. One of the better democrats but still suckage.

He wants more public schools, less freedom in them, is one of those Global Warming Weirdos, wants to raise taxes and wants to reconstruct Iraq in the image he favours.

What do you like about him?

I like Biden's ideas on Iraq. The fact that he realizes we can't just pull out and toss our hands in the air already places him in a more realistic mindset that Paul. There's nothing wrong with listening to the Iraqis while writing up our plans for their country.

And there's nothing wrong with more public schools, as long as they're on par with private institutions, which is his stance. (besides, as a child of private catholic education, I have seen teh glaring differences between the quality of private/public education...many of which have more to do with the student and less to do with the school) And freedoms in public schools doesn't equate to personal freedom in the every day world. I appreciate the standards of uniformity used by my private school. But those standards didn't equate to lack of freedoms that I should have had...which I did. What kind of freedoms do you think he'd like to do away with? Perhaps the one freedom public schools had that we didn't was the freedom to leave campus at lunch. The problem is that in a lot of schools, most of the kds don't come back. I know you're in Germany, but don't you think that the falling standards in public education are part of the problem?

Global warming is a problem. And not just because of the environmental changes (which may or may not be the result of humans) but also because we are dumping mercury into the water and poisioning the oceans to the point that their acid levels are rising. (this is where I like Kucinich more than Biden)

It isn't a matter of raising taxes, it's a matter of using the money more appropriately. And this is where I have issues with EVERY candidate. We raise enough money in taxes every year to fund these beneficial programs. The problem is waste.