Statistics: Posted by DaleX99s — February 1st, 2012, 11:26 am
]]>
]]>
more words
Everything is trying to kill everyone. Got it.
Statistics: Posted by Eadwulf — January 14th, 2012, 3:36 pm
]]>
Romney is basically Obama as far as policies are concerned, and he's also another corrupt crony capitalist. We do not need that jackass in the White House.
I think we should legalize quite a bit more. I'm fairly sure you're talking about drugs, so I'll just point out that making it illegal doesn't make the problem go away. Rather, it simply pushes it into the underground economy and wastes tax dollars trying to fight something that doesn't even need to be beaten. Let people decide what they do with themselves and stop advocating a nanny state. One of the things I love about libertarianism is that liberty also means responsibility, and people sure as hell need to be held accountable.
If libertarians were in charge, you wouldn't even have an EPA or Department of Education throwing around needless bureaucracy and politicizing nationwide systems. The goal of the government is to control, not to help. That needs to change.
Statistics: Posted by Snake1235 — January 14th, 2012, 10:58 am
]]>
Romney is basically Obama as far as policies are concerned, and he's also another corrupt crony capitalist. We do not need that jackass in the White House.
I think we should legalize quite a bit more. I'm fairly sure you're talking about drugs, so I'll just point out that making it illegal doesn't make the problem go away. Rather, it simply pushes it into the underground economy and wastes tax dollars trying to fight something that doesn't even need to be beaten. Let people decide what they do with themselves and stop advocating a nanny state. One of the things I love about libertarianism is that liberty also means responsibility, and people sure as hell need to be held accountable.
If libertarians were in charge, you wouldn't even have an EPA or Department of Education throwing around needless bureaucracy and politicizing nationwide systems. The goal of the government is to control, not to help. That needs to change.
Statistics: Posted by Snake1235 — January 14th, 2012, 10:58 am
]]>
Like this was built because the world is a peaceful place?
Oh yea that's in the UK..
Statistics: Posted by Znath — January 14th, 2012, 1:49 am
]]>
]]>
Quote:
So, who would you like to see? The statists who will make more horrible policy just because they can get something done easily? That's not a smart way to vote.
If we're going the neighborhood route.
China and Russia really aren't our "friends" we do business, we work together on things. But we've had a few fistfights cut each other a few times.. nothing too deadly but you know they could kill us if we didn't sleep with a shotgun.
The thing is that there are reasons we have bases in Germany, Kuwait, Japan.
If there were no bases in Germany That leaves all of East Europe open, furthermore this base has air access to the middle east. This leads to Kuwait, one our bases in the middle east.. wonder why we'd need a base in one of the most hostile regions in the world?
If there was no base in Japan, there wouldn't be a South Korea. It would all be Totalitarian wasteland.
The thing is, we don't live in a neighborhood full of hermits. We live in a neighborhood with a few psychos that DO want to bash our windows in and slash our necks in our sleep.
And a few of them have tried it recently. That kind of clues me in that these bases have uses and it would be idiotic, not just unreasonable to want to shut them down. That's what I call a self-destructive foreign policy.
I think the appeal of Ron Paul is how his policies echo the frustration an anger people have with big bloated government. Yes, we need to streamline our fat ass government. But not at the expense of our security.
It's like selling your doors and locks in a neighborhood with rapists and murderers when all you needed to do is turn the heat down two degrees and stop eating out every day.
I'm ok with SOME of his domestic policies... not particularly his libertarian 'legalize everything' spiel
But I can't vote for 1/2 of a president. He needs to be good economically, foreign, and domestic and energy.
Or at least good enough in each area that one of those areas isn't setting us up for disaster.
This is a reason I certainly can't vote for Obama. His energy policy is as self-destructive to our economy as shutting our bases down abroad is. It's a feat of sheer ignorance. His domestic policy has been detrimental to the economy, and his foreign policy is fairly backwards. I know he'd sooner close our bases too if he had the chance, but luckily most of our senate have the brains to realize we do need bases.
Where I'm not 100% convinced Romney is very right-wing. I know he'll fund our military and have even a slight chance of slimming down the government unlike Obama... so where it's not a home run, it's better than what we've got.
Ron Paul's foreign policy is just too destructive to the foreign relations we've made over the past 50 years that it would set us back so irreparably I believe soundly it would result in the deaths of millions. eg. South Korea, Isreal, Japan maybe. That's assuming he got 'his way' of shutting bases down to save money.
If you want to save money. We've got 200 years worth of energy that's 5 times cheaper than natural gas. We've just stuck our whiney noses in the air and let the EPA strangle the nations energy to get it out. Cheap energy = Prosperity. Eventually the nation will need to wake up and realize we don't have enough money to subsidize wastes of time like solar, wind, and natural gas (which they try to say is cheap, but it's got nothing on coal)
You wanna save money? Cut the EPA. It's out of control and wrecking the economy.
Statistics: Posted by Znath — January 14th, 2012, 12:20 am
]]>
Worry more about the idiots in Congress.
Statistics: Posted by Burks — January 13th, 2012, 1:14 pm
]]>
]]>
Statistics: Posted by Snake1235 — January 10th, 2012, 9:50 am
]]>
bartoron Statistics: Posted by bartoron — January 10th, 2012, 8:40 am
]]>
Oh, there I go advocating things like personal responsibility and accountability again.
All of this just reminds me that I really want to leave the UK during the next general election...
Statistics: Posted by Eadwulf — January 10th, 2012, 2:15 am
]]>
I don't care for Ron Paul. His foreign policy in particular.
The whole isolationism, lets cut our military to nothing, legalize everything...
I know he could never get 99% of what he says passed and that's the problem.
He'd never get to shut down all the bases around the world.
We're not going to legalize all drugs or whatever.
But he has the most self-destructive foreign policy I've ever seen. This is counting Joe Biden randomly insulting nations or the Obama apology tour.
[youtube]6kf6CjcJBeM[/youtube]
So, who would you like to see? The statists who will make more horrible policy just because they can get something done easily? That's not a smart way to vote.
Statistics: Posted by Snake1235 — January 10th, 2012, 2:08 am
]]>
I know he could never get 99% of what he says passed and that's the problem.
He'd never get to shut down all the bases around the world.
We're not going to legalize all drugs or whatever.
But he has the most self-destructive foreign policy I've ever seen. This is counting Joe Biden randomly insulting nations or the Obama apology tour.
Statistics: Posted by Znath — January 9th, 2012, 11:24 pm
]]>
Eadwulf wrote:
Well, at least you're extremely well-informed as to how a constitutional republic is supposed to function.
That's the point. The federal government has been deviating from the Constitution over and over again. Some of us are sick of it.
How exactly would you suggest the federal government better abide by the Constitution?
bartoron Statistics: Posted by bartoron — January 9th, 2012, 5:40 pm
]]>
Well, at least you're extremely well-informed as to how a constitutional republic is supposed to function.
That's the point. The federal government has been deviating from the Constitution over and over again. Some of us are sick of it.
Statistics: Posted by Snake1235 — January 9th, 2012, 5:23 pm
]]>
]]>
Eadwulf wrote:
Because in a republic, the head of state is the only individual that warrants this much attention from voters.
The head of state is the only individual that warrants this much attention when he's the only person who a significant percentage of people are eligible to vote for. There are a lot of scumbags in Congress, but to devote anywhere near this much attention to 535 people who all play fairly minor roles by themselves would be impossible.
bartoron Statistics: Posted by bartoron — January 9th, 2012, 3:53 pm
]]>
"Lol Fox"
Actually, Fox Business is typically regarded as the closest thing the Libertarians have to a dedicated news channel. At least by those on r/Libertarian and r/ronpaul. So anybody that says "Lol Fox" when they see Fox Business is probably uninformed. That said, that video is truly the Plain Truth. The plain, sad truth. MSNBC has tried at every possible time to trash Ron Paul on bull
reasons. While Fox and CBS have just outright ignored his existence. It's pathetic.Statistics: Posted by Animal — January 9th, 2012, 3:27 pm
]]>