One Ron Paul Thread to Rule Them All, one thread to find him

[Ravineworld]

But... doesn't anyone see an issue with this?
The Federal Reserve is a private bank, in control of America's monetary supply, can print money anytime it wants, and no one even knows what goes on?
It can meet and make deals with foreign companies and governments without the permission or oversight of the government?
And if something goes wrong, the taxpayers have to bailout the banks because they're "too big to fail", and yet the average citizen is not?

Is that how it is?
Just trying to get a sense of what's going on.

Way to go. You just figured out why "too big to fail" is just another word for corrupt, corporate welfare-abusing, freaks who are too big to exist.

[Farnhamia]

But... doesn't anyone see an issue with this?
The Federal Reserve is a private bank, in control of America's monetary supply, can print money anytime it wants, and no one even knows what goes on?
It can meet and make deals with foreign companies and governments without the permission or oversight of the government?
And if something goes wrong, the taxpayers have to bailout the banks because they're "too big to fail", and yet the average citizen is not?

Is that how it is?
Just trying to get a sense of what's going on.

Way to go. You just figured out why "too big to fail" is just another word for corrupt, corporate welfare-abusing, freaks who are too big to exist.

Except, you know, the Federal Reserve banks are not private and cannot print money. And while I'm not certain because I haven't looked, I would seriously doubt that "deals with foreign companies and governments" do not get made without government permission or oversight. Other than that, yeah, spot on. Did you like the little subject change from the Fed to bail-outs?

[Ravineworld]

Ron Paul ought to run as a libertarian or constitutionalist. Do a lot of money bombs and attack both obama and the republicans. He could win on that.

[Death Metal]

Ron Paul ought to run as a libertarian or constitutionalist. Do a lot of money bombs and attack both obama and the republicans. He could win on that.

Ron Paul would only win in Bizarro World.

Saddest thing is, even in Bizarro world his policies wouldn't work. They only work in Ron Paul's heavily edited Sims 3 game where nobody is in the least bit greedy or selfish.

What's that?

I'm just getting word now, even in that fantasy world, Ron Paul's policies still bring economic and social ruin.

[Wikkiwallana]

Ron Paul ought to run as a libertarian or constitutionalist. Do a lot of money bombs and attack both obama and the republicans. He could win on that.

Given that he isn't either one of those things…

Although admittedly he's no more of a constitution rewriter than the "Constitution" Party.

[Augarundus]

True, though you can't deny that Beckites and Paulites are just the same apples but from slightly different trees.

:sigh:

<--- supports Ron Paul (sort of).
<--- is not a conspiracy theorist
<--- is an atheist

... anyways, if Paul doesn't win the Republican nomination (and then go off to win the presidency and create an anarchocapitalist world without executive orders/congressional action- only through the might of libertarian public discourse... and, of course, this is how things are looking at the moment, what with his huge victory in South Carolina), he ought to run as a third party candidate to screw the Republicans over and get Obama reelected; hopefully that would piss off the Republicans to radicalize (support another constitutionalist in 2016) or break up as a party (rise of the American Libertarians?).

[Revolutopia]

hopefully that would piss off the Republicans to radicalize (support another constitutionalist in 2016) or break up as a party (rise of the American Libertarians?).

Wait what Republican candidate is a constitutionalist? Saying that a quick glace reveals that all 4 major candidates still left don't give two shits about the constitution when it conflicts with their ideals.

[Death Metal]

To call Ron Paul a constitutionalist is like calling Taco Bell authentic Mexican food.

If anything, he's an Articles Of Confederationist.

[Yootwopia]

True, though you can't deny that Beckites and Paulites are just the same apples but from slightly different trees.

:sigh:

<--- supports Ron Paul (sort of).
<--- is not a conspiracy theorist
<--- is an atheist

... anyways, if Paul doesn't win the Republican nomination (and then go off to win the presidency and create an anarchocapitalist world without executive orders/congressional action- only through the might of libertarian public discourse... and, of course, this is how things are looking at the moment, what with his huge victory in South Carolina), he ought to run as a third party candidate to screw the Republicans over and get Obama reelected; hopefully that would piss off the Republicans to radicalize (support another constitutionalist in 2016) or break up as a party (rise of the American Libertarians?).

Yeah people do tend to love those who have massively nad obviously pissed on their chips in the past...

[Ravineworld]

To call Ron Paul a constitutionalist is like calling Taco Bell authentic Mexican food.

If anything, he's an Articles Of Confederationist.

Not really. The guy believes in following the constitution as he interprets it, which is constitutionalism. He is more of a right wing libertarian though.

[Death Metal]

To call Ron Paul a constitutionalist is like calling Taco Bell authentic Mexican food.

If anything, he's an Articles Of Confederationist.

Not really. The guy believes in following the constitution as he interprets it, which is constitutionalism. He is more of a right wing libertarian though.

Even when he completely ignores the Constitution by wanting to overturn a Supreme Court decision?

[Farnhamia]

Not really. The guy believes in following the constitution as he interprets it, which is constitutionalism. He is more of a right wing libertarian though.

Even when he completely ignores the Constitution by wanting to overturn a Supreme Court decision?

Wanting to overturn a Supreme Court decision is not ignoring the Constitution. I'd like the Citizens United decision overturned, frankly. What Ron Paul wants is to forbid the Supreme Court to rule on certain matters.

[Revolutopia]

To call Ron Paul a constitutionalist is like calling Taco Bell authentic Mexican food.

If anything, he's an Articles Of Confederationist.

Not really. The guy believes in following the constitution as he interprets it, which is constitutionalism. He is more of a right wing libertarian though.

That is a pretty loose definition of constitutionalism, saying I doubt there are many people pushing for legislation that they think is unconstitutional. Therefore, almost everyone is following the constitution as they interprets it meaning everyone is a constitutionalist.

[Wikkiwallana]

To call Ron Paul a constitutionalist is like calling Taco Bell authentic Mexican food.

If anything, he's an Articles Of Confederationist.

Not really. The guy believes in following the constitution as he interprets it, which is constitutionalism. He is more of a right wing libertarian though.

Given that he "interprets" it by ignoring everything that tells him he's wrong, up to and including very plain text in the document itself, that's not Constitutionalism, thats denial.

Edit: and that's when he's not saying that he's doing something he believes violates the constitution.

[Ravineworld]

Ron Paul ought to run as a libertarian or constitutionalist. Do a lot of money bombs and attack both obama and the republicans. He could win on that.

Ron Paul would only win in Bizarro World.

Saddest thing is, even in Bizarro world his policies wouldn't work. They only work in Ron Paul's heavily edited Sims 3 game where nobody is in the least bit greedy or selfish.

What's that?

I'm just getting word now, even in that fantasy world, Ron Paul's policies still bring economic and social ruin.

What? Ron Paul would only win in a world that wants liberty. I know very few who don't want liberty, but you seem to disagree with liberty more often than not

[Wikkiwallana]

Ron Paul would only win in Bizarro World.

Saddest thing is, even in Bizarro world his policies wouldn't work. They only work in Ron Paul's heavily edited Sims 3 game where nobody is in the least bit greedy or selfish.

What's that?

I'm just getting word now, even in that fantasy world, Ron Paul's policies still bring economic and social ruin.

What? Ron Paul would only win in a world that wants liberty. I know very few who don't want liberty, but you seem to disagree with liberty more often than not

Correction, in a world that wants liberty and is easily flim-flamed into believing Ron Paul represents liberty.

I thank God that the second condition has so far not proven true of this world.

[Xsyne]

Ron Paul would only win in Bizarro World.

Saddest thing is, even in Bizarro world his policies wouldn't work. They only work in Ron Paul's heavily edited Sims 3 game where nobody is in the least bit greedy or selfish.

What's that?

I'm just getting word now, even in that fantasy world, Ron Paul's policies still bring economic and social ruin.

What? Ron Paul would only win in a world that wants liberty. I know very few who don't want liberty, but you seem to disagree with liberty more often than not

A world that wanted liberty wouldn't elect a man who voted for a bill that gives the President the power to do just about anything he wants as long as he claims it's related in some way to the "war on terror".

[Farnhamia]

What? Ron Paul would only win in a world that wants liberty. I know very few who don't want liberty, but you seem to disagree with liberty more often than not

A world that wanted liberty wouldn't elect a man who voted for a bill that gives the President the power to do just about anything he wants as long as he claims it's related in some way to the "war on terror".

He did that to show people how bad it could get. When he's president he'll repeal that bill personally. *nod*

[Revolutopia]

What? Ron Paul would only win in a world that wants liberty. I know very few who don't want liberty, but you seem to disagree with liberty more often than not

A world that wanted liberty wouldn't elect a man who voted for a bill that gives the President the power to do just about anything he wants as long as he claims it's related in some way to the "war on terror".

Might I ask what bill was that?

[Death Metal]

Authorized Use of Military Force act of 2001

[Death Metal]

What? Ron Paul would only win in a world that wants corporate tyranny.

Fixed for realism.

I want liberty. That's exactly why I despise Ron Paul and his ideas.

[Wikkiwallana]

What? Ron Paul would only win in a world that wants corporate tyranny.

Fixed for realism.

I want liberty. That's exactly why I despise Ron Paul and his ideas.

Ron Pauls positions seem more in line with Christian theocracy than corporate oligarchy. At least, from everything I've seen of them. Seasoned with an unhealthy dose of "free market always knows best", true, but the wants of his religion seem to take precedence over his drive to deregulate.

[New Conglomerate]

Fixed for realism.

I want liberty. That's exactly why I despise Ron Paul and his ideas.

Ron Pauls positions seem more in line with Christian theocracy than corporate oligarchy. At least, from everything I've seen of them. Seasoned with an unhealthy dose of "free market always knows best", true, but the wants of his religion seem to take precedence over his drive to deregulate.

He apparently has a lot of support among Christian Reconstructionists (grass-roots Dominionists who recognize that any attempt to impose Republic of Gilead-esque theocracy from the top down will fail).

[Wikkiwallana]

Ron Pauls positions seem more in line with Christian theocracy than corporate oligarchy. At least, from everything I've seen of them. Seasoned with an unhealthy dose of "free market always knows best", true, but the wants of his religion seem to take precedence over his drive to deregulate.

He apparently has a lot of support among Christian Reconstructionists (grass-roots Dominionists who recognize that any attempt to impose Republic of Gilead-esque theocracy from the top down will fail).

Based on his sponsored legislation, he does seem to the the man for them.

[New Conglomerate]

He apparently has a lot of support among Christian Reconstructionists (grass-roots Dominionists who recognize that any attempt to impose Republic of Gilead-esque theocracy from the top down will fail).

Based on his sponsored legislation, he does seem to the the man for them.

Definitely. Why college kids like the guy so much I will never know.