Love PEACE? Become a "Blue Republican"
VINNY GOOMBA
Posts: 1,818
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robin-koe ... tml?page=2
Let the records show that VINNY GOOMBA had this idea on 7/6/11 in the "question for Ron Paul supporters" thread! Actually, I think I mentioned it in an earlier thread a month ago, but can't remember which.
Anyway, this is a great read, aimed at truly principled liberals and democrats who care about peace and civil liberties.
Let the records show that VINNY GOOMBA had this idea on 7/6/11 in the "question for Ron Paul supporters" thread! Actually, I think I mentioned it in an earlier thread a month ago, but can't remember which.
Anyway, this is a great read, aimed at truly principled liberals and democrats who care about peace and civil liberties. Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Or maybe I'll just keep voting third party
there is only one way for conditions for change to occur in america and it is full blown revolution ... it's not going to happen via the political or democratic process ... obama's heart and integrity are in the right place, he was also modest enough to bring in the best people for the different issues but that was no match for the corporatization of gov't nor the weakness of it's democracy ...
Some of it is what he will do, some of it is what he won't do. I'll let the man explain it himself. A Ron Paul victory in a presidential election would be an idealogical revolution.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=685
sorry ... the constitution has been shat on pretty much from the moment it was born ... obviously, if one could do what they think they could do - we might see some change ... but how is he going to do this when the power is in the hands of the corporations and wall street? ... he is gonna walk into the same walls obama has ...
I think you might be missing the point of this thread here. Regardless of whether or not any of the points you point out are acheivable if Ron Paul is elected president, we will still be better off if he is the Republican candidate. He is in a much better position to keep Obama more honest when it comes to civil liberties and constitutional issues during the debates than any other Republican candidate. If Obama is reelected, so be it. At the very least there will be a public record of his stance on some of the issues that Ron Paul would bring to the table during the presidential debates.
I think the point is to not worry so much about what libertarians would like to accomplish, but to use the opportunity that is currently availalbe to us. If you are a Democrat and really care about civil liberties, this is an excellent opportunity to help push those issues to the forefront by becoming a "blue republican" for one year and doing your best to elect Ron Paul in the primaries. I believe that this is the only way to currently achieve the best and most honest and educated debate on civil liberties we can on a grand scale.
That's it Sludge. :thumbup:
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
i think you guys are missing my point ... i have no problems with what libertarians want ... i may not support it but it's fine by me ... my question for the Ron Paul supporters is simply how they think he will accomplish anything if he was elected president which is what all these folks want ...
even before that - i would like to know how Ron Paul is going to make way in a party that is about as corrupt and counter to the constitution and civil liberties as it gets ... no one seems to be able to answer ... i'd love kucinich to be president of the US but it isn't hard to know that even if ever made it - he would still encounter the same problems as Obama ...
Paul would probably not be able to accomplish everything, but he would certainly expose the problems he talks about on a national stage and would definitely be able to solve the military interventionism that is the current policy of every other president...The first step in fixing any problem is identifying it...and for too long administrations and legislators have been able to get away with hiding and ignoring the real problems while getting people to focus on things like social security and abortion...Paul would identify and work to fix problems within the government to hopefully begin a process that will take years to fix...It isn't about fixing every problem in the first year...it is more about sending a message to the establishment and the, as you put it, corporatized government that the people have woken up and are seeing the status quo for what it is and will not be blind to it anymore.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
i don't think he would be able to ... the military interventionism as you put it has become part and parcel of US existence ... i don't see how he can upend the military industrial complex ... although i would say he's got a much better shot at it than obama ... but still, the higher up the ladder one gets politically, the harder it will be for him/her to enact positive change ... i just don't see how he can fight that power especially with a weak democracy ...
polaris_x is exactly right and it's sad that it's the truth of this once great nation
polaris,the people of this country are to stupid to uprise and the smart ones that are couldn't be fucked to waste time and energy trying to get the stupid ones join in. though i will say anything is possible if a dumbass redneck can get into office.
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
president = puppet ... that is why gwb could be president and sarah palin could run for vp ...
Godfather.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/fisk/fisk19.html
"The media, neoconservatives and some Democrats just don't understand why Ron Paul's supporters are so excited, dedicated and diverse. At the most recent PBS debate in Baltimore, the camera panned to catch the first African-American female fighter pilot in U.S. history applauding enthusiastically when Dr. Paul suggested we should bring the troops home from Iraq and every other country they currently occupy. Neoconservative bloggers are aghast at Ron Paul's increasing success as are the neoconservative gatekeepers. This is a truly satisfying result since it was the neoconservative hijacking of the Republican Party which has helped to further decimate our once-great Republic."
http://www.john-wright.net/2007/10/11/r ... tial-race/
"I’m getting more and more excited about libertarian candidate for the Republican nomination for President Ron Paul. I’ve always liked Paul. He’s a steadfast devotee to the principles of liberty, and yet running as a Republican, not a candidate of the Libertarian Party.
All the signs are good: he’s bringing in millions of campaign dollars (which means the right kind of people are supporting him) and his reception has been great at campaign stops. Not only that, but he’s a genuinely likable guy with an understated manner and a penchant for making sense (as libertarians do). Reason magazine’s David Weigel has written an article on what sets Ron Paul apart from other conservatives:"
If both Bush's were such puppets (I agree all presidents are) why is it everybody here is so fast blame the world problems on them alone ?
Godfather.
at least bush sr wasn't a moron ... his son on the other hand ... similar to how you blame obama for everything ... people do the same if it's someone else ... i've always maintained that guys like rumsfield, cheney et al should be in jail ...
the thing with bush jr was that he openly and willingly lied to the american people and world in order to engage his country in a war for profiteering ... i'm not really sure i can think of a worst thing to do as a president ...
I don't really blame obama for anything other than the lack of balls to do what needs to be done,he has no back bone but a great runner I have to admit his campaign for president was great but it seems to have ended there.
Godfather.
but it goes back to what i'm saying ... president has no power ... obama's hands are tied ... it's not a matter of having balls ... he's got no power because his power lies in the democracy ... and that is the citizenry ... because the citizenry is weak ... so is he ...
it seems to me that Regan and Bush had the cajonies to do the things they thought best....or what they wanted and not that they were the right things (maybe not) but they both knew the way to make it happen
and thats what people expect from a president someone tough enough to fight or what ever it takes to minipulate the puppet strings that hold them and deliver on their promices and this is why the rep party will win the 2012 election,I think the people are fed up with a soft handed president.
btw can you explain citizenry,it's the first time I have heard that word.
Godfather.
doing what the controlling powers of gov't want is NOT having cajones ... reagan catered to the christian right that holds significant influence ... bush catered more to defense contractors and oil companies ... they did nothing good for the country and yet you (supposedly as a non-partisan) want to reward them for the decisions they made despite the obvious consequences?
citizenry refers to the citizens ... the people who vote in a democracy ...
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I wasn't rewarding them at all I was just saying how I see it ,so it sounds like it's all about the friends you make or the pockets you fill on if you can make thing's happen as president or not.
and thanks for answering my question
Godfather.
yeah ... but the conservatives have done a great job of demonizing carter and paint him as a weak president ... but because the citizenry is weak - it's easily done ...