• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Ron Paul Insane?

Is Ron Paul Insane?


  • Total voters
    98
I mispoke. No unneccessary foreign entanglements.

Okay, but keep in mind that everyone has a different idea of what is necessary.

What, exactly, do you think will happen if we withdraw from the UN and NATO? I'm not even saying I agree with Paul on either issue, I'm just wondering what specific objections you have.

"Ron Paul wants to withdraw from the UN and NATO!!!"

...Is not a substantive criticism.

UN because as a powerful nation, we have a responsibility to have a say in world affairs. I don't particularly like the setup of the organization, but it's something that has the potential to make decisions to influence the whole world, and we're too big to pretend we aren't part of the whole world.
NATO because of strength in numbers. Washington may have warned against alliances, but that was before there were people who hates us merely for existing.

You've answered nothing. What type of interference are you talking about? Be specific.
Yes, military (should other options like diplomacy not work). But I also said that we should not do it alone, but rather only when most of the world is on our side.

"He just takes them too far."

...Is not a substantive criticism.
It's not supposed to be, I'm just explaining why I personally disagree with many of his policies.
 
Okay, but keep in mind that everyone has a different idea of what is necessary.

And their idea of necessary would be wrong if they advocated military interventionism where it doesn't directly concern our country.

UN because as a powerful nation, we have a responsibility to have a say in world affairs. I don't particularly like the setup of the organization, but it's something that has the potential to make decisions to influence the whole world, and we're too big to pretend we aren't part of the whole world.

You've failed to elaborate on how the UN itself creates or permits any of these perceived benefits.

NATO because of strength in numbers. Washington may have warned against alliances, but that was before there were people who hates us merely for existing.

Fair enough. At least it's a reason.

Yes, military (should other options like diplomacy not work).

So, you have no problem sending American troops to their deaths in order to mediate a conflict which does not concern them? No doubt you'll be picking up a rifle?

But I also said that we should not do it alone, but rather only when most of the world is on our side.

So, we have to do the "right thing" but only when it's popular?

It's not supposed to be, I'm just explaining why I personally disagree with many of his policies.

That's fine. But if your position is meant to be taken seriously I would highly recommend that you incorporate substance into it.
 
Is necroing a 3 year old thread insane?
 
I wonder if all the hippies will vote for Ron Paul
 
Is necroing a 3 year old thread insane?

May be but this one is 2 years old. :2razz:

Besides, it may be interesting for someone to see one's post in 2 years time. ;)
 
I wonder if all the hippies will vote for Ron Paul

college kids these days are different from those of the 60s. Back then you had counter-culture, bleeding-heart libs, hippies, and the anti-war movement. Today, (at least given my own college experiences), it's hip to be libertarian, and Ron Paul is the hottest politician around on campuses.

I don't think he's insane though. I probably wouldn't vote for him unless the competition was miserable, but he is not a crazy person. He is an honorable man and an honest politician, which is more than you can say for a lot of other people.
 
Last edited:
Ron Paul is sane. Everybody else is crazy and needs electroshock therapy.
 
I wouldn't say Ron Paul is insane, at least not in the sense that he seems he could be diagnosed with anything in the DSM.

However, I would say that his views are highly unrealistic and naive.
 
to label Ron Paul insane would make a person either an asshole, or an idiot.

people can disagree with each other on all kinds of issues without the level of bigotry required to label the opposition as insane. no question that Ron Paul's vision for America is way different then most other peoples, but it is hardly an insane vision.
 
Ron Paul isn't insane. His generalized views aren't insane. The way he at least seems to present his method of getting to those views, in relation to how modern politics typically works, could be considered insane though I wouldn't describe it as that exactly myself.
 
According to some, Ron Paul is apparently insane. In fact, in this month alone I have heard at least three people refer to him or his policies (although they frequently fail to specificy which ones) as crazy. So, my question to you is, "Is Ron Paul insane?" If so, what has he done to lead you to such a moronic and preposterous conclusion? Moreover, what specific policies of his do you find to be insane and why? Please, refrain from citing his policies as you remember them, instead, quote him directly and progress logically from there.

I don't know but I guess if three people you know said he or his policies were crazy then it's clearly time to put him away. Someone is obviously crazy.
 
According to some, Ron Paul is apparently insane. In fact, in this month alone I have heard at least three people refer to him or his policies (although they frequently fail to specificy which ones) as crazy. So, my question to you is, "Is Ron Paul insane?" If so, what has he done to lead you to such a moronic and preposterous conclusion? Moreover, what specific policies of his do you find to be insane and why? Please, refrain from citing his policies as you remember them, instead, quote him directly and progress logically from there.

Ron Paul has always argued for openness and an audit of the Federal Reserve and that has made him powerful enemies. The Federal Reserve chicanery needs to be investigated.
 
Ron Paul
Great foreign policy
Terrible economic policy
Favorite of conspiracy theorists.
 
I don't know if I would say Ron Paul is insane, but he has certainly built his power base by appealing to a certain sense of paranoia.
 
Not at all, but some insane people follow him.
 
I don't know if I would say Ron Paul is insane, but he has certainly built his power base by appealing to a certain sense of paranoia.

Well, not without reason. :roll:
The gentleman is just trying to comply with and follow the supreme law of the US - the Constitution. Is it his fault that some people don't think so?
 
I like how some liberals in this thread are so blind to party lines that they seem to think policing the world is a good thing and can't see Ron Paul for his great ideas and policies. He is a very polarizing figure, but I agree with him more than most Republicans, that is to say, I totally 100% agree with half of what he says, and the other half while may not be crazy is misguided and much of it would require the entire world to "go along with it" such as his financial views specifically on the Federal Reserve. That's the thing, is much of what Paul stands for would be stripped down and/or nothing would ever get done if he were President. Much of his own party is against his policies, although I do think he could probably get more bi-partisan support on several issues than any president in recent memory.
 
I voted yes. If he wasn't mentally unstable, I'd probably support him.
A breakdown of what he says when he talks:
25% I really like what he says
25% I may not be totally on board, but I'd somewhat agree
25% I have no idea what he's trying to say
25% I think he's mentally unstable and having a hard time trying to appear human
 
If Ron Paul is insane, sanity is very overrated. I didn't hear many "sane" politicians warning about the housing bubble, economic recession, and blowback from our foreign policy. No, only Paul was alerting the public, and he was labeled insane for it too.
 
I like how some liberals in this thread are so blind to party lines that they seem to think policing the world is a good thing and can't see Ron Paul for his great ideas and policies. He is a very polarizing figure, but I agree with him more than most Republicans, that is to say, I totally 100% agree with half of what he says, and the other half while may not be crazy is misguided and much of it would require the entire world to "go along with it" such as his financial views specifically on the Federal Reserve. That's the thing, is much of what Paul stands for would be stripped down and/or nothing would ever get done if he were President. Much of his own party is against his policies, although I do think he could probably get more bi-partisan support on several issues than any president in recent memory.

also known as agreeing with 50% of what he says.
 
Last edited:
No, I do not think he is insane, and I don't think he even comes close to fitting the definition of being clinically insane.

I probably share most people's views of Paul: many of his ideas are outside the mainstream, and he's probably not a viable Presidential candidate.

I DO find him to be generally intellectually honest and consistent, even if I disagree with most of his views.

His fans, on the other hand...
 
college kids these days are different from those of the 60s. Back then you had counter-culture, bleeding-heart libs, hippies, and the anti-war movement. Today, (at least given my own college experiences), it's hip to be libertarian, and Ron Paul is the hottest politician around on campuses.

I don't think he's insane though. I probably wouldn't vote for him unless the competition was miserable, but he is not a crazy person. He is an honorable man and an honest politician, which is more than you can say for a lot of other people.

I'd say it's more hip to be known as social libertarians and economic progressives than it is to be libertarian.
 
Back
Top Bottom