Diogenes wrote: You do know that Ron Paul is widely believed to be Anti-Semitic?
By whom, Romneyites?
Oh geeze, who's not saying it? Ace of Spades, Hot Air, Doug Ross, Instapundit... I can't think of a website that hasn't mentioned his anti-semitic behavior. I can assure you that Ace of Ace of Spades is no Romney supporter.
Anti-Semitic-ism aside, Ron Paul is just another Ross Perot in my opinion.
I follow the matter closely and Paul has associated with some dodgy characters. He has a burr in his saddle about Israel.
OTOH Ross Perot did not run in the Republican primaries.
I just voted for Ron and he is getting about 9% of the vote. Votes the Republicans will need to win in Nov. I intend to vote (without enthusiasm) for what ever mope the Rs put up.
Why did I vote for Ron? To let the Rs know that libertarians are important for the coming election.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Well for me it was Paul or Gingrich that could have even been worth a second thought.
I would definitely never vote for Romney or Santorum. They are both to stupid. One is a cultist, the other a religious nutbag. Both have views that belong into the middle ages.
Skipjack wrote:Well for me it was Paul or Gingrich that could have even been worth a second thought.
I would definitely never vote for Romney or Santorum. They are both to stupid. One is a cultist, the other a religious nutbag. Both have views that belong into the middle ages.
My impression of you is that you hyperventilate when the word "religion" is mentioned. I don't like any of the candidates, but I have little concern regarding their religious beliefs.
What I really can't stand is Proselytizing atheists.
What's worse than a religious nut? An ANTI-Religion nut!
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
Skipjack wrote:Well for me it was Paul or Gingrich that could have even been worth a second thought.
I would definitely never vote for Romney or Santorum. They are both to stupid. One is a cultist, the other a religious nutbag. Both have views that belong into the middle ages.
My impression of you is that you hyperventilate when the word "religion" is mentioned. I don't like any of the candidates, but I have little concern regarding their religious beliefs.
What I really can't stand is Proselytizing atheists.
What's worse than a religious nut? An ANTI-Religion nut!
I come down on both sides of the question.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
All the newsletter content is really ad hominem. His name is on them, but not his signature.
And really I don't give a single care about what a man didn't say two decades ago. His current stance on Israel is ACTUALLY documented, and the only one that matters, they have nukes and they don't need our help. The same goes for most of his other well documented views; they are spot on.
Transparency for the Fed and competing currencies, end income tax and reinstate tariffs or sales tax, legalize drugs and pardon felons with only non-violent drug charges, end all the wars, and save money by moving foreign bases to domestic soil, cut 1 trillion $ from the budget next year, the list goes on and on...
MSimon wrote: I follow the matter closely and Paul has associated with some dodgy characters. He has a burr in his saddle about Israel.
Dodgy characters... oh goody. Who?
"Burr about Isreal". And some ijits equate that with anti-semitism. Ah well, what can you do. Ijits will be ijits.
It might very well be anti-semitism.
I didn't vote for Ron Paul. I voted for the most libertarian candidate in the field. Well anyway. I'm happy to see the libertarians stick it to Gingrich.
The only change in American military posture I'd make is to end Drug Prohibition. Once we see how that falls out we can look to make other possible changes.
You might want to look up George F. Kennan and containment to find out more about the policy we have been living under since '48. About 64 years and no world wars or nukes set off in anger. Has it outlived its usefulness? Maybe. But it is basically a policy of peace through superior fire power. The only kind that is ever possible in a world where despots still rule.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
MSimon wrote: I follow the matter closely and Paul has associated with some dodgy characters. He has a burr in his saddle about Israel.
Dodgy characters... oh goody. Who?
"Burr about Isreal". And some ijits equate that with anti-semitism. Ah well, what can you do. Ijits will be ijits.
It might very well be anti-semitism.
I didn't vote for Ron Paul. I voted for the most libertarian candidate in the field. Well anyway. I'm happy to see the libertarians stick it to Gingrich.
The only change in American military posture I'd make is to end Drug Prohibition. Once we see how that falls out we can look to make other possible changes.
You might want to look up George F. Kennan and containment to find out more about the policy we have been living under since '48. About 64 years and no world wars or nukes set off in anger. Has it outlived its usefulness? Maybe. But it is basically a policy of peace through superior fire power. The only kind that is ever possible in a world where despots still rule.
What is this? A Crack in your certainty that ending the drug war will solve all of our problems?
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
My impression of you is that you hyperventilate when the word "religion" is mentioned. I don't like any of the candidates, but I have little concern regarding their religious beliefs.
What I really can't stand is Proselytizing atheists.
Awe come on, this is comparably tame to the way atheists are being rallied against by the theists.
My impression of you is that you hyperventilate when the word "religion" is mentioned. I don't like any of the candidates, but I have little concern regarding their religious beliefs.
What I really can't stand is Proselytizing atheists.
Awe come on, this is comparably tame to the way atheists are being rallied against by the theists.
The difference is, society can get along just fine without the atheists, but not without the believers. (At least it has not been demonstrated to my satisfaction that civil society can exist without a foundation based on religious morals teaching.)
This business is very like the Drug War issue, with the exception that society is actually trying this experiment (throwing out religious moral foundations) currently, and has not yet committed to trying the legalized drugs experiment.
We will eventually find out one way or the other, but of course in the meantime, Europe is going to become fanatically Islamic.
You can't beat a powerful belief with a non-belief.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
We will eventually find out one way or the other, but of course in the meantime, Europe is going to become fanatically Islamic.
Which is also a problematic religion.
I love it when those supporting religion make it clear that they love religious freedom as long as their own religion is concerned...
You know I have no problem with people as long as they dont try to press their believes on me via politics. You know that your president swears on the bible... to uphold the consitution. He does not swear on the constitution to uphold the bible...
I can't let that one pass without noting that verse is accompanied by one commanding masters to treat their slaves decently. Today the equivalent would be doing an honest job your employer. Slavery was a fact of the times, and calling for abolishing it would have been a distraction.
We will eventually find out one way or the other, but of course in the meantime, Europe is going to become fanatically Islamic.
Which is also a problematic religion.
I love it when those supporting religion make it clear that they love religious freedom as long as their own religion is concerned...
You know I have no problem with people as long as they dont try to press their believes on me via politics. You know that your president swears on the bible... to uphold the consitution. He does not swear on the constitution to uphold the bible...
And yet it was religious fanatics who ended slavery. The Constitution allowed it.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
