Thread: Paul in 2012?

The thread title makes me think of "Palin in 2012?"

That's why he has no chance.

Originally Posted by dirtpoorchris

1) Ya I don't want that either and now that I think about it, it is the ONLY thing I disagree with Paul on. I think the world is going to hate us soon and we should start being nice the UN.
2) Not familiar with him wanting to end birthright citizenship. Sounds scary though.
3) NAFTA is a very, very bad idea. It will only make jobs in America while the freeway is being built. After that good luck. All your jobs R belong to us.
4) His proposal to eliminate income tax. Why not try it for 1 freaking year? You don't have to do everything at once. But if he says he knows a route to success why not let him try? We can let someone create magical self-replicating money but not this?
5) Yessss... With our debt surpassing the world GDP bringing a heavy hand to overspending and inept departments.
6) Does the stimulus sketch you out?
7) Yep... Ron Paul is an evil racist. We should not listen to any of his good views. He was probably even behind "Obama the Magic Negro".

4) Trying the elimination of the income tax for one year would be costly just in terms of the transition. It is not something we can afford to play with at this point.
5) Eliminating departments like FEMA is a terrible idea. Can you imagine the humanitarian crisis in the event of a disaster? Now some heavy oversight...I would be all for.
6) YES
7) Sarcasm is not going to deflect from the fact that racist tripe was being printed in his newsletter.

Originally Posted by Defensor

Appealing to the mob is not a legitimate debate tactic.

If you think they are bad ideas, you're going to have to explain why.


What, you made the assertions, back them up. Don't be lazy, explain why you think those are all "bad ideas."

I don't care enough. Someone asked me what parts of his platform I disagreed with. I listed them. It's truly not worth it.

Originally Posted by Goldenboy219

On what level??? Domestic, economic, international, etc??? I am not the one making the claims, so why do i have to interpret possible premises?

True... But, why the **** even bother posting??? To be condescending?

Someone asked, I answered.

I had the UN debate with Haut, and it turned into, "your ****ing stupid if you think leaving the UN is a sane idea". Of course, that a bit of a dramatization, but you get the point right?

Well, that's a pretty fair position.

Three of you who are openly criticizing something on the merit of your opinion alone. I find that ironic, being that you are a student of the law... Quite frankly, i expected more from you.

Sorry to let you down.

Originally Posted by chris

.

First, thank you for your response.

1) Ya I don't want that either and now that I think about it, it is the ONLY thing I disagree with Paul on. I think the world is going to hate us soon and we should start being nice the UN.

Agreed.

2) Not familiar with him wanting to end birthright citizenship. Sounds scary though.

He wants to amend the 14th Amendment to do so. I think that's a radical and unnecessary change that is simply designed to pander to xenophobes.

3) NAFTA is a very, very bad idea. It will only make jobs in America while the freeway is being built. After that good luck. All your jobs R belong to us.

There is no "freeway." This is common language used by conspiracy theorists. I'm perplexed as to how people can truly argue that free trade is a bad thing. Yes, it means that some low end manufacturing jobs will leave the country. Guess what - we should be moving toward a high end society anyways. If people are pissed off because they lost their $12 an hour job at the welding plant, they should go get an education and some more important skills and get themselves a $20 an hour job designing the things that are being welded in Mexico.

4) His proposal to eliminate income tax. Why not try it for 1 freaking year? You don't have to do everything at once. But if he says he knows a route to success why not let him try? We can let someone create magical self-replicating money but not this?

Because what the **** would you do for that year? We have a deficit that's bad enough already - why add $1T to the debt needlessly as a "trial run"?

5) Yessss... With our debt surpassing the world GDP bringing a heavy hand to overspending and inept departments.

For the fourth time, our debt is not surpassing the world GDP. Christ. If you people want to claim the economic high ground, learn the most basic terminology and facts.

6) Does the stimulus sketch you out?

Yes, but not in the same way as his "survival report."

7) Yep... Ron Paul is an evil racist. We should not listen to any of his good views. He was probably even behind "Obama the Magic Negro".

Ok.

To those who are hailing RP as the truly educated and smartest among us, explain:

The Daily Background [Video] Ron Paul: Just another Texas Republican who doesn’t believe in evolution

he's also manage to jam an abused notion of anti-abortion views into his "libertarian" view system.

Originally Posted by jallman

4) Trying the elimination of the income tax for one year would be costly just in terms of the transition. It is not something we can afford to play with at this point.

I think the best approach to this would be a gradual elimination.

Politicians use the tax code to play class warfare and to give special benefits to their friends.

Originally Posted by jallman

5) Eliminating departments like FEMA is a terrible idea. Can you imagine the humanitarian crisis in the event of a disaster? Now some heavy oversight...I would be all for.

Again I think a gradual elimination is the best approach.

Give everyone the heads up that it is their job to take care of themselves.

Originally Posted by jallman

I'm not shying away. I just don't feel the need to continually point out the obvious flaws in his more extreme views.

I'll take Paul's extreme views over Obama's extreme views or even Bush's extreme views. There are some things which aren't manageable, but there are a lot of things in terms of oversight and caution which I think would do us well to pay heed to.

Originally Posted by Defensor

More lame attacks since you have no argument against Paul's actual positions.

Last I checked, Paul was never running for scientist-in-chief.

And Hitler wasn't running for Secretary of Jew Relations, so what's the problem!?