John Stewart on Ron Paul

[SemperFiUSMC]

Fair enough rebuttals and definitely some food for thought. I dislike the "loon reference" simply because "name calling" is a sophomoric debate tactic. I'd like to think that we as a people are capable of taking larger leaps back towards liberty and economic freedom than what you're willing to concede but I'm also sadly inclined to believe you may not be completely wrong on this point.

Thanks for taking the time to answer, I always appreciate well reasoned posts.

Oh and as far as the "homework" I'd say that a position of non intervention doesn't mean he's "Pro Nuclear Iran", I think it mean's he just not directly opposed to it since he doesn't see them as a direct threat to our nations security. I for one am inclined to agree with this position.

I tried to come up with a word that worked better than loon, but I just couldn't. Maybe far outside the American mainstream would be better a better description of some of his policies.

IMHO the most important power contained within our Constitution is the power to protect the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Without the mandate to protect America there is really no need for any United States. A simple treaty among states would be sufficient to conduct commerce. Iran has stated America is the great Satan and seeks its destruction. As a matter of policy, they, or any other nation that stands our enemy by their choice, should not be allowed to possess weapons that can be launched against us. That is not to say we should necessarily launch an attack against them, but as a nation we should use all of our goodwill and all our power to ensure that they cannot launch an attack against us.

Whether you think him a non-interventionist or isolationist (these are definately different terms), Ron Paul displays indifference or ignorance to Iran's threat capabilities. As with many of his other policies his argument is academic and does not represent the real world threats this nation faces. I do not want a warmongering President, however I do want one that recognizes threats to America's existance as such and will do whatever is necessary to eliminate those threats. There is no greater role for our Commander in Chief than to protect the sovereignty of this nation.

 

[rambone]

The fact that he gets no earned media is indicative of the fact that he does nothing and says nothing interesting enough to viewers to deserve earned media. He appeals to a small percentage of Americans, and media outlets aren't going to give him a free pass.

Bulls***. Ron Paul's issues are driving the whole freaking debate. Notice how Newt Gingrich has to talk about auditing the Federal Reserve, and Rick Perry has to make statements about the Fed being "treasonous." That's a Ron Paul issue to the bone. These candidates have to try and sound like Ron Paul to stay relevant, while also attacking him. Notice the questions about drug legalization, about state sovereignty, about non-interventionism. Without Ron Paul, the biggest thing that these losers would be debating would be which country to start a new war with.

Win or lose, Ron Paul has driven real, substantive issues into the debate. And it is laughable to say that he has not "earned" attention because of this. The establishment media wants him discredited because he doesn't fit with the phony Left-Right paradigm that we are all supposed to believe in.

A Republican kicking our military has a better chance of getting ice water in hell than the party's nomination for President.

Well Ron Paul certainly hasn't kicked the military. He spent 5 years serving, in case you didn't know.

If Paul want media attention he should pay for it. They're called political ads for a reason.

Then we can officially stop calling your favorite news network "Fair & Balanced." At last.

And herein lies the rub. The boiling frog analogy works both ways. In order to resecure our freedoms and liberties we are going to have to take incremental steps backwards. It won't happen with an in your face all at once movement.

I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise. Ron Paul is the first step towards a sustainable America. The rest of these Establishment hacks are a step forward for the Welfare-Warfare-Police State.

While I don't agree with them, there are a lot of people that want government to run their lives. You have to coax them out of their comfort zone and make them want to live in our world. You don't do that is huge steps. You do that a little bit at a time.

How many more decades do you presume we can keep pushing the status quo? The country will falter if we keep electing warmongering spendaholics.

Ron Paul is not the second coming. He's a retread with a plan that won't sell who has been on the same message for 25 years. He's John Hostettler. He's been a loon for years. No one except for the 1% of Americans that support him give him any credance. He's a gadfly. That's all.

Its interesting that you would spend so much time desperately discrediting this "gadfly."

his position is hardly isolationism

Saying it doesn't make it so. Allowing Iran nuclear weapons, opposing trade agreements that open foreign markets to our products, and failing to recognize that good and evil that exists outside our borders impacts those within them is isolationist.

Ron Paul advocates trading with everyone. The real isolationists are the ones who think we should continue our 50-year embargo on Cuba. Paul's plan for non-interventionism is just what we need.

The strongest evil we face exists within our borders. The statists need to keep the public frantically looking abroad for the next "Red Terror." Keeping people in fear of the brown boogeymen is the ideal way to continue to expand the domestic Police State and **** more borrowed money away.

So here's a homework assignment. Ron Paul supports Iran in it's quest for nuclear weapons. Why is it in America's national interests for them to achieve their goal?

Kutnupe just addressed this. You should read his post and review the history of U.S. meddling in Iran.

 

[ocsdor]

Ron Paul is a "loon" = "loves licking boots."

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Bulls***. Ron Paul's issues are driving the whole freaking debate. Notice how Newt Gingrich has to talk about auditing the Federal Reserve, and Rick Perry has to make statements about the Fed being "treasonous." That's a Ron Paul issue to the bone. These candidates have to try and sound like Ron Paul to stay relevant, while also attacking him. Notice the questions about drug legalization, about state sovereignty, about non-interventionism. Without Ron Paul, the biggest thing that these losers would be debating would be which country to start a new war with.

Ron Paul's issues have driven away and left him behind in favor of candidates that speak to, not at, the electorate. Gingrich is irrelevant. You'll figure out the difference by your 24th birthday. Maybe.

Win or lose, Ron Paul has driven real, substantive issues into the debate. And it is laughable to say that he has not "earned" attention because of this. The establishment media wants him discredited because he doesn't fit with the phony Left-Right paradigm that we are all supposed to believe in.

First, look up the term earned media. Election cycles need people that set the agenda and the stage. Ron Paul fits that bill. But his is not a serious candidate and has no chance of winning the nomination. The media makes no effort to discredit him - he does just that very well when he speaks. Outside of the Paulbots his message resonates with no one. He's too liberal for conservatives on many issues and too conservative for liberals on the others. He's the Texas version of the Rent's too damn high guy. When you lack a constituency you lack the ability to be elected.

Well Ron Paul certainly hasn't kicked the military. He spent 5 years serving, in case you didn't know.

Meaningless. I can list a whole bunch of people who served in the military but are not supporters of it.

Then we can officially stop calling your favorite news network "Fair & Balanced." At last.

You have no idea what my favorite news network is. And what does it have to do with expecting free advertising?

I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise. Ron Paul is the first step towards a sustainable America. The rest of these Establishment hacks are a step forward for the Welfare-Warfare-Police State.

Simplemindedness. Ron Paul is not a solution. He is a man with ideas, some very good, some very bad. RP = good all others = evil is not the calculus. Would that it were so simple.

How many more decades do you presume we can keep pushing the status quo? The country will falter if we keep electing warmongering spendaholics.

Was there a retort to my supposition in there somewhere? If so I couldn't find it.

Its interesting that you would spend so much time desperately discrediting this "gadfly."

I don't try to discredit anyone. Just detailing the painfully obvious to the hopelessly forelorn.

Ron Paul advocates trading with everyone. The real isolationists are the ones who think we should continue our 50-year embargo on Cuba. Paul's plan for non-interventionism is just what we need.

More misdirection and speaking past the supposition.

The strongest evil we face exists within our borders. The statists need to keep the public frantically looking abroad for the next "Red Terror." Keeping people in fear of the brown boogeymen is the ideal way to continue to expand the domestic Police State and **** more borrowed money away.

Three for three.

Kutnupe just addressed this. You should read his post and review the history of U.S. meddling in Iran.

I don't disagree with Kutnupe but honestly it is cocktail hour trivia. I couldn't give a rat's ass why the Iranians hate us and want us dead. The fact is they are our enemy and have sworn to destroy us. We need a President willing to ensure they don't succeed.

I'll focus on electing Presidents who will protect our interests. You can focus on hating America.

 

[ocsdor]

[/COLOR]
I'll focus on electing Presidents who will protect our interests. You can focus on hating America.

How about you go fight the wars you seem to support so much.

 

[rambone]

I'll focus on electing Presidents who will protect our interests.

Have you chosen a candidate yet?

You can focus on hating America.

Projection...

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

How about you go fight the wars you seem to support so much.

So are you saying expecting sovereignty and protecting yourself = supporting war? What do they teach in school these days?

Have you chosen a candidate yet?


Projection...

Not yet. I don't see anyone I like yet. Once the primaries come around I'll choose the one that best represents me, knowing that perfect doesn't exist.

No, no projection. While I would like some changes I don't spend my time lamenting this nation's status in mom's basement. I cling to God and guns, not Red Bull and xBox. I know that things will ebb and flow. Ying and Yang. I lived through Carter and got Reagan. There will be life after Obama.

 

[Expat]

So are you saying expecting sovereignty and protecting yourself = supporting war? What do they teach in school these days?

How to put condoms on bananas and to feel good about yourself no matter what a loser you are.

Not yet. I don't see anyone I like yet. Once the primaries come around I'll choose the one that best represents me, knowing that perfect doesn't exist.

Same here. No one has really caught my attention so far.

No, no projection. While I would like some changes I don't spend my time lamenting this nation's status in mom's basement. I cling to God and guns, not Red Bull and xBox. I know that things will ebb and flow. Ying and Yang. I lived through Carter and got Reagan. There will be life after Obama.

Hopefully you are right. The populace has become more beholden to big brother since the Carter years. I fear they will be able to wake the takers and get them to the polls.

 

[ocsdor]

 

[ocsdor]

 

[Expat]

Wow, those are some hard hitting images you posted right there.

Whatever happened to all that oil that we took for our benefit in those wars? I still haven't heard of any of it showing up yet. Heck even the big mineral find they turned up, they turned over to the Japanese to mine for them.

 

[rambone]

Not yet. I don't see anyone I like yet. Once the primaries come around I'll choose the one that best represents me, knowing that perfect doesn't exist.

I'll understand if you choose not to admit who you are voting for.

No, no projection. While I would like some changes I don't spend my time lamenting this nation's status in mom's basement. I cling to God and guns, not Red Bull and xBox. I know that things will ebb and flow. Ying and Yang. I lived through Carter and got Reagan. There will be life after Obama.

Son, you cling to bumper sticker slogans and Fox News. Admit it, you hate America.

 

[Expat]

Admit it, you hate America.

Having served his country in the US Marine Corp, I would highly doubt that.

 

[rambone]

Having served his country in the US Marine Corp, I would highly doubt that.

SemperFiUSMC just told me a few posts ago that serving something doesn't mean you support it, as he was insinuating that Ron Paul is "kicking" the same military that he served in.

 

[jsgolfman]

For people who think he is a gadfly, loon and not a viable candidate, you sure spend a lot of time attacking him.

I lived through Carter and Reagan as well, I'd rather break the cycle rather than repeat it, and you can do your own homework.

 

[nawainwright]

Apparently he's more viable than anyone wants to admit

Obama in Close Race Against Romney, Perry, Bachmann, Paul

 

[ocsdor]

SemperFiUSMC just told me a few posts ago that serving something doesn't mean you support it, as he was insinuating that Ron Paul is "kicking" the same military that he served in.

I'd like to add that serving one's country and serving one's gov't are not necessarily the same thing.