Let's Play Another Game
By Erick Posted in 2008 — Comments (42) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
One of these is a martian and one is running for President of the United States. Can you guess who is who?
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Edwards Rebuked — Comments (3) »
Let's Play Another Game 42 Comments (0 topical, 42 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Ron Paul is a breath of fresh air in our stale GWB run party right now. We lost in 2006 because of Bush's disastrous foreign policy(read as Iraq) and we're continuing to hemmorage GOP support as evidenced in the latest approval ratings for Bush.
Well, I figured it was the fastest way to get Ron Paul supporters here and get them fired up about Calvert ;)
As soon as I hear anything from GOP leaders that Paul will replace him and not some other ethically challenged Californian.
Its the right thing to do, whether I request it or not. I'm willing to be their leader if they want me to be, but I thought that was their job.
I dont want a bone, I want them to have the ability to figure out the right thing to do and then do it.
the Libertarian Party will never make a wave in US National politics. They just sit around and dream up really good ideas (some of them are good ideas), mention them, and hope that "everyone" will see the rightness of their position and fall into line.
Case in point. Ron Paul. He's been in Congress how long? He's authored what legislation? He's done exactly what to proactively get his ideas and policies implemented?
Oh yeah, nothing but chatter. Which is nothing.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Most of it nevers gets out of committee, for some reason. :)
He authored two different declarations of war, one for Afghanistan, one for Iraq. Neither reached the floor. Both seem like things that Republicans should support. Pretty much no brainers, both constitutionally and militarily.
He has also proactively voted no on virtually all (if not all) spending bills. And tax increases. And pay increases. And anything else that congress tried to do that wasnt specified as a congressional power in the constitution.
so eloquently. The guy has been in Congress for forever and has done nothing. Zip. Nada. Bupkis.
He votes against pay increases while simultaneously doing nothing to earn his salary. The guy is a real package.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Paul has sponsored (not co-sponsored) 30 bills this term. Thats about 8 a month.
Some of the more interesting:
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to ensure that Members have a reasonable amount of time to read legislation that will be voted upon.
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the 1993 increase in taxes on Social Security benefits.
To amend title II of the Social Security Act and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to protect the integrity and confidentiality of Social Security account numbers issued under such title, to prohibit the establishment in the Federal Government of any uniform national identifying number, and to prohibit Federal agencies from imposing standards for identification of individuals on other agencies or persons.
etc...
If we only had many more like Ron Paul who were willing to use the Constitution for their smell test, his ideas and policies could be implemented. Instead, so many are beholden to money, popular opinion, and how to get re-elected. Ron Paul is one of the few last great hopes for the GOP.
How are they going to figure out what the "right thing to do" is, if you don't tell them? If you don't, they continue with business as usual and assume it's OK.
And I, for one wouldn't mind Ron Paul on appropriations, but I don't want him anywhere NEAR 1600 Pennsylvania Ave....
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
I know whats right, you know whats right, moe knows whats right, how fricking hard can it be to figure out?
Is it that hard to figure out that putting ethically challenged big spenders on appropriations is a bad idea? Do we really need to tell them this? If they are that thick, why are we voting them into office?
I will call and tell anyone who will listen that Ron Paul would be better on Appropriations than Ken Calvert. Im just assuming anyone dumb enough not to know that isnt all that open to outside ideas anyway.
based on seniority, geographic location and other political considerations. It rarely includes evaluation of the member's ethics. Unfortunately, sometimes doing things "like we've always done them" blinds people deciding if it's the right thing to do.
THAT'S why you sometimes have to push people to do the right thing.
I agree with you in principal, the congress critters "should" be able to figure it out for themselves. But in the real world, things don't always work the way they should....
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper
No it doesnt. Read some Mises (I recommend "Socialism"). Even in theory, it looks horrible.
Most socialists read the crap that makes Socialism look like Robin Hood, taking from the rich and giving to the poor. All our needs will be provided, everyone will own everything equally and all our ills will be cured at no cost to us and we'll live long happy lives. That's what I mean by "it looks nice on paper".
I probably don't have to explain it to YOU, but in reality, socialism is a brutal system. At its best it provides disincentives for people to work or produce new things and will ruin an economy. There will be shortages of basic goods and a disconnect between need and availability. At its worst it creates oppressive dictatorships that lead to lost freedom, murder, starvation, mass purges, etc.
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
Instead of Paul's suggested 1 on 1 debate on foreign policy with Rudy, they could do a 2 issue debate, foreign policy and abortion. Then Paul gets to rip Rudy up on two issues.
Rudy could do a 1 on 1 debate with me on an issue of my choice, since I have just as much chance as Paul does at ever being President.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
in his hat. He's getting his signals crossed with Rosie and her conspiracy theories.
====
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." -- James Madison
I agree, is this really necessary? Its this kind of stuff that is the hallmark of Liberals. When they disagree with someone they just name call, conservatives are people of substance who don't stoop to such tactics.
While you may disagree with Ron Paul on his Iraq policy, he is the only one running who actually believes in the limits of the constitution and would actually rein in federal taxing and spending. If your only reply to him is to equate his looks to Marvin the Martian then me thinks you should switch parties because it is clear that you have taken up their MO.
Everytime I see Romney, I think of this Dilbert (I couldnt find a link to the actual strip unfortunately):
Pointy-Haired Boss: Dilbert, I'd like you to meet Ben, our new fast-track manager.
Dilbert: Hi.
Pointy-Haired Boss: Ben has no real experience but he's very tall, so we know he'll go far.
Ben: I also have executive-style hair.
Pointy-Haired Boss: We think it will turn silver.
Ron Paul's economic policy combined with Tancredo's immigration funding and Lieberman's war policy would create a pretty good candidate.
He takes a principled and very consistent stand or Iraq and now he's compared to a Martian? Nice.
Paul came in 2nd in Fox's online poll last night and first in MSNBC's after the debate at the Reagan Library. So let me ask the question, just who is being fictional here?
that this "poll" is more American Idol than Gallup? I mean, a few dedicated Paul supported could just keep texting vote after vote.
Vote Sanjaya Paul!
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
I bet you there's a lot of historical figures who are principled, consistent, and repulsive. Be glad Erick didn't go overboard and compare Rep. Paul with one of them.
Run like Reagan!
...that some of the GOP faithful will morph into senseless "Democrat" tactics rather than discuss and debate the real issues that Ron Paul brings to the table.
Ron Paul is just one of those LoonMagnets™. A person that just pulls a whole species of loons out of the woodwork.
It's a rather strange phenomenon to observe.
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
when he talks about the "North American Union?"
Ron Paul was one of the driving forces saying President Bush and other globalists had a plan to merge the US, Canada, and Mexico. That's right -- no more good ole USA -- at least according to Congressman Paul.
Wonder if his performance last night will damped this talk among some groups of conservatives?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52684
By those damn frog like things and gold farmers.
*It would be called NorAth no ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
stirring up things.
Very Good Captscarlett!
No one has still answered my question about why Ron Paul supports our efforts in Afganastan when it was Reagan who helped create the power vaccum that lead to the rise of the Taliban and OBL to build terror camps there.
Please answer; it was our foreign policy after all.
“Political Correctness” is just short for “Capitulation to Extortion.”
hmmm... I think even a Bugs Bunny character would realize was a disaster and utter waste this neo-con nation building project in Iraq has been. Congrats to Ron Paul for telling it like it is.