• 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!

Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

the makeout hobo said:
I would like to point out to those Paul supporters that are bitching and moaning about how poorly they get treated because they support Paul... It could be worse. Try being an Obama supporter. I can't even log onto this site without seeing him called a fascist, a commie, an american-hater, you name it. Keep in mind you're not alone here, if anything you have it better than we do.
Click to expand...
It must be truly awful for you.
 
the makeout hobo said:
I would like to point out to those Paul supporters that are bitching and moaning about how poorly they get treated because they support Paul... It could be worse. Try being an Obama supporter. I can't even log onto this site without seeing him called a fascist, a commie, an american-hater, you name it. Keep in mind you're not alone here, if anything you have it better than we do.
Click to expand...

Well, Bush set the bar pretty high in terns of presidents acting against the best interest of the country... Obama's just raising the bar and getting ready to go for it... He's promised 'change' so far most of the 'change' he's proposing would be more welcome in other freedom loving places like; Cuba, China, and North Korea.

Now, are you really in support of the ISSUES Obama stands for, or do you support him because you're a democrat and it's the right thing for the PARTY?
 
Redress said:
I don't care what hairbrained reason Paul votes against things for. I care about results. I am sorry I have offended some people's cult leader, but Paul is a looney on almost every issue. It's not just his votes, it's the bills he has introduced. It's not just the bills he has introduced it's the things he says. Total package is nutcase.
Click to expand...

I do not think you have offended anyone. There are plenty of Ron Paul supporters who consider Obama a "loony." I happen to consider Obama to be misguided in most of his efforts. I guess the difference is that I do not consider people "loony" if they disagree with me or subscribe to other political ideologies. I feel that "loony" denotes mental illness, something neither Obama nor Ron Paul are afflicted by.
 
Last edited:
BmanMcfly said:
Well, Bush set the bar pretty high in terns of presidents acting against the best interest of the country... Obama's just raising the bar and getting ready to go for it... He's promised 'change' so far most of the 'change' he's proposing would be more welcome in other freedom loving places like; Cuba, China, and North Korea.

Now, are you really in support of the ISSUES Obama stands for, or do you support him because you're a democrat and it's the right thing for the PARTY?
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I'm talking about :roll:

And I support Obama for the issues. Hell, I'm a Democrat because of the issues.
 
EgoffTib said:
I do not think you have offended anyone. There are plenty of Ron Paul supporters who consider Obama a "loony." I happen to consider Obama to be misguided in most of his efforts. I guess the difference is that I do not consider people "loony" if they disagree with me or subscribe to other political ideologies. I feel that "loony" denotes mental illness, something neither Obama nor Ron Paul are afflicted by.
Click to expand...

Obama is much more mainstream and moderate on the issues than Ron Paul, who is very far out on the extreme.
 
Last edited:
the makeout hobo said:
This is exactly what I'm talking about :roll:

And I support Obama for the issues. Hell, I'm a Democrat because of the issues.
Click to expand...

This even highlights why it was an incredibly stupid question. Obama is a democrat because of where he stands on issues. I am a democrat because of where I stand on issues. I agree with Obama, since he is a democrat, and that lines him up closely with my personal beliefs.

People need to get over this whole idea that people cannot agree with Obama based on his stance of issues, it's a really stupid, ignorant, and foolish idea.
 
the makeout hobo said:
It's obnoxious. All I'm saying is that everyone gets **** over whom they support. Even the main stream is no difference.
Click to expand...

But when you're backing the winner- the party and the candidate that's actually currently in power- there's no reason to take such obnoxious commentary to heart.
You know it's just sour grapes; the disgruntled mutterings of frightened folks displaced from power, and uncertain whether they'll ever find their way back to relevance again.
 
Well, perhaps his true believers will finally pack in, waving his flags instead of being carried by confused liberals who merely think they like Ron Paul.
 
Redress said:
I don't care what hairbrained reason Paul votes against things for.
Click to expand...

Of course not. Who cares about reasons for doing things?

I care about results. I am sorry I have offended some people's cult leader, but Paul is a looney on almost every issue. It's not just his votes, it's the bills he has introduced. It's not just the bills he has introduced it's the things he says. Total package is nutcase.
Click to expand...

Ron Paul isn't my cult leader. I just like his politics and I think he's a decent guy. If you and some of the other libertarian-haters around here could form a substance-based argument on why Ron Paul's ideas suck instead of tossing around flippant one-liners you might elicit a more constructive response from us fringe exremists.

I mean, do you not see the irony of Obama-supporters reflexively labeling Ron Paul as a cult leader or a crazy?

I wonder what you would say if I came into a thread about Obama and just started regurgitating inane sentiments about the drooling, adulatory sheeple and their "Messiah". I bet that would go over real well with you and Hatuey...
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
Fair enough. Let me rephrase. Can you tell us why the rest of the human species should live by your definition of when life begins?
Click to expand...

This is why it's so hard to take most pro-choice arguments serioulsy. Many of them have a primitive understanding of biology.

There is no debate about when "life" begins because the scientific community has already come to a consensus on what constitutes "life", i.e., the quality which distinguishes living organisms from non-living things. Unborn humans are alive, rocks are not. Pretty simple.
 
the makeout hobo said:
I would like to point out to those Paul supporters that are bitching and moaning about how poorly they get treated because they support Paul... It could be worse. Try being an Obama supporter. I can't even log onto this site without seeing him called a fascist, a commie, an american-hater, you name it. Keep in mind you're not alone here, if anything you have it better than we do.
Click to expand...

I'm not bitching and moaning about how poorly I am treated. I'm identifying and refuting stupid arguments about Ron Paul.
 
Redress said:
Obama is much more mainstream and moderate on the issues than Ron Paul, who is very far out on the extreme.
Click to expand...

No he's not. Ron Paul just has a tendency to speak philosophically about the issues. He outlines the end we should seek and sometimes that "end" contrasts sharply with contemporary circumstances, giving the appearance of extremism.

Ron Paul has often said he understands the need for moderation in policy change. He doesn't want to ax all welfare entitlements immediately; people just think he does. If you could be bothered to learn something about the man instead of skimming a list of things he's voted for and picking out the titles that sound "crazy" this wouldn't be such a terse discussion.
 
1069 said:
But when you're backing the winner- the party and the candidate that's actually currently in power- there's no reason to take such obnoxious commentary to heart.
You know it's just sour grapes; the disgruntled mutterings of frightened folks displaced from power, and uncertain whether they'll ever find their way back to relevance again.
Click to expand...

The last time any libertarians were in power was after the American Revolution.
 
Ethereal said:
The last time any libertarians were in power was after the American Revolution.
Click to expand...


Then they wised up and joined the flat earth society….just kidding. :mrgreen:
 
the makeout hobo said:
This is exactly what I'm talking about :roll:

And I support Obama for the issues. Hell, I'm a Democrat because of the issues.
Click to expand...

Look, in Obama's own words :
"There are people that disagree with me on a partisan basis, that I can't do anything about, and there are those who are opposed because they feel that government should not interfere with their lives... I just happen to disagree."

Care to explain how and why you support the bills Obama has propsed : civilian youth squads, 'reasonable restrictions' on guns like DC (total ban), government takeover of the auto industry, the socialization of medicare, among the other things that he's done...

It's fine to be generally democratic or republican, but don't let it blind you either...
 
BmanMcfly said:
Look, in Obama's own words :
"There are people that disagree with me on a partisan basis, that I can't do anything about, and there are those who are opposed because they feel that government should not interfere with their lives... I just happen to disagree."

Care to explain how and why you support the bills Obama has propsed : civilian youth squads, 'reasonable restrictions' on guns like DC (total ban), government takeover of the auto industry, the socialization of medicare, among the other things that he's done...

It's fine to be generally democratic or republican, but don't let it blind you either...
Click to expand...
Where are these civilian youth squads and why are they sinister? What gun control legislation has Obama proposed or signed? When did Medicare and Medicaide change to be other than at least somewhat socialist?

I think one of us has "drank the koolaid", and it isn't me.

By the way, I support the second amendment, I oppose a pubic option in health care reform, and divided on the auto industry bailout.
 
Redress said:
Where are these civilian youth squads and why are they sinister? What gun control legislation has Obama proposed or signed? When did Medicare and Medicaide change to be other than at least somewhat socialist?

I think one of us has "drank the koolaid", and it isn't me.

By the way, I support the second amendment, I oppose a pubic option in health care reform, and divided on the auto industry bailout.
Click to expand...

The civilian youth squads is the GIVE act, Obama didn't support the DC total ban, Medicare IS a socialist program and was from the beginning, and I forget the other thing the dude said, but yea, you nailed it, total koolaid drinker, and it wasn't you doing the drinking. :rofl
 
jackalope said:
The civilian youth squads is the GIVE act, Obama didn't support the DC total ban, Medicare IS a socialist program and was from the beginning, and I forget the other thing the dude said, but yea, you nailed it, total koolaid drinker, and it wasn't you doing the drinking. :rofl
Click to expand...

This GIVE act? Mandatory Public Service | FactCheck.org

Drinking the koolaid is stupid no matter what side you are on. I really think it is more common on the right, and especially among libertarians, than it is on the left.
 
Redress said:
This GIVE act? Mandatory Public Service | FactCheck.org

Drinking the koolaid is stupid no matter what side you are on. I really think it is more common on the right, and especially among libertarians, than it is on the left.
Click to expand...


Yup, that's known is some circles at the civilian youth squads act :rofl

You're right, koolaid comes in red and blue and purple flavors, it's true.
 
BmanMcfly said:
Look, in Obama's own words :
"There are people that disagree with me on a partisan basis, that I can't do anything about, and there are those who are opposed because they feel that government should not interfere with their lives... I just happen to disagree."

Care to explain how and why you support the bills Obama has propsed : civilian youth squads, 'reasonable restrictions' on guns like DC (total ban), government takeover of the auto industry, the socialization of medicare, among the other things that he's done...

It's fine to be generally democratic or republican, but don't let it blind you either...
Click to expand...

I'll discuss issues if you want to be upfront and honest about what they actually are...


I wonder what you would say if I came into a thread about Obama and just started regurgitating inane sentiments about the drooling, adulatory sheeple and their "Messiah". I bet that would go over real well with you and Hatuey...
Click to expand...

Doesn't this happen in every single thread mentioning Obama?
 
jackalope said:
The civilian youth squads is the GIVE act,
Click to expand...

Yes, not to mention the 5 times that Obama is on film saying that he would like to see a program of mandatory civilian service, rahm emmanuel said that 'citizenship is earned', and has written a book on the subject. The boy scouts are now training with homeland security... I can source that with a mainline article but just search 'boy scoouts homeland security' same goes for the girl scouts.

The GIVE act originally stated "mandatory civilian service for everyone 18-25" but that was changed to something along the lines of 'to create an organization that could plan for a mandatory civilian program'... Although I didn't read the bill as it was passed into law.

Obama didn't support the DC total ban,
Click to expand...

No, but Obama Plays it Safe on Issue of Guns - ABC News
So, bassically he's calling all current laws as being 'reasonable' so, the DC gun ban is also reasonable.

Medicare IS a socialist program and was from the beginning, and I forget the other thing the dude said, but yea, you nailed it, total koolaid drinker, and it wasn't you doing the drinking. :rofl
Click to expand...

Ya, regardless, the Obama care is sketchy... example: the person goes and says he doesn't think his kid should be allowed to die for his condition, the senator replies' that's not in there' then the guy pulls out the bill and section number relevant, the senator then replies 'oh we should change that'

Redress said:
Where are these civilian youth squads and why are they sinister?
Click to expand...

Americorps, citiyear, boy and girl scouts of america... if you want to see the danger of youth squads look no further then nazi germany for the extreme of where it can go... the same programs do exist in places like China, North Korea, and Cuba, among other places... you know, those other freedom loving nations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/us/14explorers.html

What gun control legislation has Obama proposed or signed?
Click to expand...

http://www.rules.house.gov/111/AmndmentsSubmitted/hr2647/hastings82_hr2647_111.pdf
(I don't think it's passed yet, but bassically you could have your right to bear arms rescinded if the atorney general decides that you're associated with a hate group... just to show 1 example of gun laws that Obama or the democrats have proposed.)

When did Medicare and Medicaide change to be other than at least somewhat socialist?
Click to expand...

Ok, the system as it is now is a kind of 'rationing by market' model... where the new system would be a rationing by a board who would decide who gets what procedures and who needs to be triaged.

I think one of us has "drank the koolaid", and it isn't me.

By the way, I support the second amendment, I oppose a pubic option in health care reform, and divided on the auto industry bailout.
Click to expand...

As for the auto industry.. direct government involvement with industries and corporations is one of the definitions used for facism. The 'public-private partnerships'.
 
BmanMcfly said:
Americorps, citiyear, boy and girl scouts of america... if you want to see the danger of youth squads look no further then nazi germany for the extreme of where it can go... the same programs do exist in places like China, North Korea, and Cuba, among other places... you know, those other freedom loving nations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/us/14explorers.html
Yes, we are so much like Nazi Germany...

Can the paranoia, there is zero evidence of anything wrong with this on anything like that scale, and lots of evidence that there is not.



http://www.rules.house.gov/111/AmndmentsSubmitted/hr2647/hastings82_hr2647_111.pdf
(I don't think it's passed yet, but bassically you could have your right to bear arms rescinded if the atorney general decides that you're associated with a hate group... just to show 1 example of gun laws that Obama or the democrats have proposed.)
Click to expand...

So now we have moved past Obama and now it's just any democrat. Way to move those goalposts. Further, as best I can tell(I may be wrong, but don't think so) this amendment may already be voted down, and if not, it will be. Further, it's about recruiting people into the military in "hate groups", not gun control.



Ok, the system as it is now is a kind of 'rationing by market' model... where the new system would be a rationing by a board who would decide who gets what procedures and who needs to be triaged.
Click to expand...

You mean like health insurance?



As for the auto industry.. direct government involvement with industries and corporations is one of the definitions used for facism. The 'public-private partnerships'.
Click to expand...

Useless exaggerated hyperbole is, well, useless.

I repeat, one of us has "drank the koolaid", and it ain't me.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
First off, I voted for Paul in the primaries and I'm proud of it. But some of his supporters are incredibly obnoxious and arrogant. This is a trend I've found to run true with a lot of extreme libertarians. Honestly, radical libertarians are some of the most smug, self assured, pompous, condescending jerks I've ever met. Of course, every movement or candidate has these types of supporters. And yes, with the Ron Paul movement being relatively small, those jerks do stand out more than they normally would.

But, many of us are more than willing to engage in reasonable discussions about Paul, his policies, libertarian thought in general and in practice. I do think many of the more reasonable Ron Paul backers or libertarians are a bit sensative to blanket dismissals by using terms like wingnut or kook or whatever the slur is. Its no different that calling conservatives ignorant backwood rednecks or liberals aloof, latte sipping elitests. It's no different than right wing hacks who call Obama the Messiah or a socialist or Muslim or any other stupid baseless attack. The only difference is we get it from both the left and right (until recently, now the right is at least paying some lip service to libertarian ideals again).

You may find libertarian ideals to be radical, out there, extreme, or diametrically opposed to your core values, that doesn't mean that folks who hold them are idiots, wingnuts, or kooks. People who insist on using those dismissive slurs (like our resident anti-libertarian hack, Hautey) do nothing to add to the debate or discussion. I think there are plenty of reasonable libertarians on this board who just want to be treated with some respect - Etheral, Goshin, Drunken Asparagus, Goldenboy, Ikari, myself and others are more than happy to debate policy in a respectful tone, but I don't think its too much to ask that some basic respect and courtesy be shown our way as well.
 
Redress said:
BmanMcfly said:
Americorps, citiyear, boy and girl scouts of america... if you want to see the danger of youth squads look no further then nazi germany for the extreme of where it can go... the same programs do exist in places like China, North Korea, and Cuba, among other places... you know, those other freedom loving nations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/us/14explorers.html
Yes, we are so much like Nazi Germany...

Can the paranoia, there is zero evidence of anything wrong with this on anything like that scale, and lots of evidence that there is not.
Click to expand...

Lol... no no, of course not... It's just in the new york times that the boy scouts are training to take on disgruntled veterans and gun owners to help homeland security.

Put it this way, in nazi germany the working class was so propagandized that it's no real surprise that many of them had no idea of the horrors that were being perpetrated all around them.

So now we have moved past Obama and now it's just any democrat. Way to move those goalposts. Further, as best I can tell(I may be wrong, but don't think so) this amendment may already be voted down, and if not, it will be. Further, it's about recruiting people into the military in "hate groups", not gun control.
Click to expand...

No, Obama himself only talks about 'reasonable restrictions', citing total bans as 'reasonable'... that's only 1 of the bills that have anti-gun contentions... If I really looked, I could find probably 5-6 others... so, simply, the politician Obama is saying that he supports the second ammendment, but believes in 'reasonable restrictions', so ANY gun restriction law that crosses his desk he will deem 'reasonable' even if it's a total ban. He is very slick... even slicker then Bush, who himself was amazingly slick for how stupid he came across as...

Further, while the INTENT of that bill deals with millitary recruitment, the way it does so is by labelling a wide variety of groups as 'hate-groups' which would tie into the patriot act where these groups could then be called 'domestic terrorists' and as we all know, domestic terrorists in the patriot act have waived their rights under the constitution.

Seriously, especially with all the anti-gun rhetoric coming out of the administration, (ex: rahm emmanuel saying if you're on the 'no fly list' you don't deserve to own a firearm, etc) how can you simply claim that it's not happening... I mean, I do a search for gun bills in hourse and / or senate and there's too many to list.

You mean like health insurance?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's ration by market, if the costs for insurance go up to the point where a person can't afford it, they can be denied treatment.

Instead, through Obama care, a panel would decide how treatments are rationed... and then you'll probably deny rationing when most every section of the bill that I've seen talks about some form of rationing.

Useless exaggerated hyperbole is, well, useless.
Click to expand...

I was just pointing out that by some definitions we are living in a facsist republic at this point.

I repeat, one of us has "drank the koolaid", and it ain't me.
Click to expand...

Drank the kool-aiod??? It's called knowing history, and watching it repeat (ableit at a much slower pace then has been witnessed by previous dictators) itself. I hate to break it to you, but while Obama talks about peace and love, his actions are the opposite. Example : he's called a peace lover when under Obama there are more troops in the mddle east now then when Bush was in power... hell, that'll get denied too... just like it's denied that the whole point of being in afghanistan is for heroin money... 500billion/ year. 2006 was a record year for opium production in afghanistan... in 2007 that record was broken... in 2008 a NEW record was set... in 2009 THAT record was beat 13 TIMES over. ... no point in sourcing it, it either doesn't exist or you'll agree 'oh we gotta protect the opium fields or else the taliban will take over the heroin production' (to paraphrase what the BBC said on the subject about a month or so ago) ... Think about it, do you think back when the afghan war was with Russia... do you think that the russians wanted afghanistan so that they could have access to all the sand and mountainous terrain??? OF COURSE NOT... they were there for the same reason, SMACK.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom