Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Craigsnedeker

Media Blackout on Ron Paul?

Recommended Posts

He may be one of the more sane of the bunch, but he's still got some whacky views... plus Bush taught me to never vote for a 6-day creationist.

Oh I'm not voting for him, but you've got Bachmann who is under the impression she can be a quality president even though she hasn't passed a single piece of legislation since her first day in office and the fact she listens to everything her husband says and obeys him. Plus she is constantly getting his historical facts wrong, I'm seriously doubting she has any grip on reality. Perry has spent the last couple of weeks denouncing evolution, climate change and homosexuals and I'm pretty sure is trying to figure out how his state can preform more executions. Romney is a white President Obama whether he wants to agree or not. Sarah Palin doesn't know if she is running or not but she'll make comments anyway from her snowmobile. Its a whacky, whacky field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What wacky views?

Ending the wars? Personal freedom? Craaazy :P

The problem is that Mr. Paul's view of personal freedom is solely negative. He never takes into account positive liberties. For instance, libertarians such as Mr. Paul would say a young, single mother who sells her body as a prostitute to make ends meet is free. I would say she is very constrained by the social structure and by the market economy. She has no ability to access her full human potential, and is a slave to her basic need to survive. She is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JAG
The problem is that Mr. Paul's view of personal freedom is solely negative. He never takes into account positive liberties. For instance, libertarians such as Mr. Paul would say a young, single mother who sells her body as a prostitute to make ends meet is free. I would say she is very constrained by the social structure and by the market economy. She has no ability to access her full human potential, and is a slave to her basic need to survive. She is not free.

In a free market society she has every opportunity at her disposal; from waitressing to retail to accounting to architecture to entrepreneurship.

That's not what he is running on though. His primary concern is the economy, secondary concern is the warmongering we've been doing. Interestingly enough, they are related. I reject your notion that his social liberties are "negative." He constantly talks about how by defending liberty across the board he defends one's right to religion, freedom of expression, etc. Basically everything the constitution allows for. Whether a person chooses to use their liberty to become a prostitute or to solve cancer is up to them.

- James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He may be one of the more sane of the bunch, but he's still got some whacky views... plus Bush taught me to never vote for a 6-day creationist.

I guess you'll have to list them. Whether that candidate is or is not a 6-day Creationist shouldn't be a primary factor in prohibiting you from voting for a candidate. I'm sure you were more or less joking. Ron Paul is quite honestly the only candidate with a strong consistent voting record. His views and policies are solid as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In a free market society she has every opportunity at her disposal; from waitressing to retail to accounting to architecture to entrepreneurship.

That is a naive and utterly false view of how market societies operate. Social mobility is lower in the land of the free than it is in the "socialist" Europe [source]. Being able to pull yourself up by your bootstraps is a lie. She would have to get a college education to become an accountant and statistically, going to college is correlated with higher levels of income. I honestly cannot understand how anyone who claims to be a Christian is not an economic progressive. The Catholic Church follows Jesus' teachings. When he says blessed are the poor, the Catholics believe that. American Protestants, on the other hand, essentially worship a system that is based solely upon greed, which is something Jesus spoke strongly against.

That's not what he is running on though. His primary concern is the economy, secondary concern is the warmongering we've been doing. Interestingly enough, they are related. I reject your notion that his social liberties are "negative." He constantly talks about how by defending liberty across the board he defends one's right to religion, freedom of expression, etc. Basically everything the constitution allows for. Whether a person chooses to use their liberty to become a prostitute or to solve cancer is up to them.

- James

Do a wikipedia search on the definition of positive liberty and get back to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JAG

[That is a naive and utterly false view of how market societies operate. Social mobility is lower in the land of the free than it is in the "socialist" Europe [source]. Being able to pull yourself up by your bootstraps is a lie. She would have to get a college education to become an accountant and statistically, going to college is correlated with higher levels of income.

Dang, it's both naive AND utterly false? Someone blogs on the internet often.

It's not a lie though. Anyone can go to college. I couldn't afford to go on my own, but that didn't stop me - I took out loans. You can get scholarships pretty easily too now days - good grades in high school (which is currently free) + a good ACT score (I took that test 4 times to get the grade needed to get an extra scholarship) = much cheaper college.

I am an entrepreneur, so you really can't persuade me into thinking people can't create their own businesses. Nor could you persuade me it takes a college degree to be successful. Finally, you can't persuade me that not just anyone can waitress - I just ate at Waffle House, it doesn't take a high education, nor a large income, to serve there.

I honestly cannot understand how anyone who claims to be a Christian is not an economic progressive. The Catholic Church follows Jesus' teachings. When he says blessed are the poor, the Catholics believe that. American Protestants, on the other hand, essentially worship a system that is based solely upon greed, which is something Jesus spoke strongly against.

Well, I am a Christian Democrat and yes, I'm pretty darn fiscally liberal. Yet, the opposite end of the spectrum works just fine - some would argue even better. The main persuasive evidence I needed to fall in line with Ron Paul was a 5 hour discussion with an economics major.

- James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Catholic Church follows Jesus' teachings. When he says blessed are the poor, the Catholics believe that.

I'm not saying I don't agree with this, but I don't think you'll find Catholics who would say, "Yes, I want the government to tax me endlessly and give the money who they deem worthy." I think it's a much more Catholic outlook to give your own money away in a more privately charitable way. Although, I guess what I'm trying to say is most Catholics would rather see their money go to bureaucrats in the Archdioceses who will determine how to use it then to the Congress/State Legislator who will determine how to use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dang, it's both naive AND utterly false? Someone blogs on the internet often.

It's not a lie though. Anyone can go to college. I couldn't afford to go on my own, but that didn't stop me - I took out loans. You can get scholarships pretty easily too now days - good grades in high school (which is currently free) + a good ACT score (I took that test 4 times to get the grade needed to get an extra scholarship) = much cheaper college.

I am an entrepreneur, so you really can't persuade me into thinking people can't create their own businesses. Nor could you persuade me it takes a college degree to be successful. Finally, you can't persuade me that not just anyone can waitress - I just ate at Waffle House, it doesn't take a high education, nor a large income, to serve there.

Well, I am a Christian Democrat and yes, I'm pretty darn fiscally liberal. Yet, the opposite end of the spectrum works just fine - some would argue even better. The main persuasive evidence I needed to fall in line with Ron Paul was a 5 hour discussion with an economics major.

- James

James you live in quite an idealistic world. You're a white kid from middle america, you had it a whole lot easier than a black kid from the ghetto of mississippi. I'm not saying its impossible for said kid to get ahead, but its very hard or at least harder than you had it. If you start out life with an unfair advantage you'll go through life the same way. You'll hear about success stories from time to time, sure, the old rags to riches stories but they are few and far between. It doesn't take a college degree to be successful but on average college graduates earn anywhere from $400,000 - $1,000,000 dollars more than non-college graduates over their life time. Creating your own business is very risky in this economic environment, most people don't even have the capital to start and sustain it ...

The waitress at waffle house is lucky to make 300-400 dollars a week, its all in tips; she probably pays rent, and the gas to go to and from work and we're not even taking into account other monthly expenses; college is simply out of the question for most people in that position. Plus being a waiter/waitress sucks, long hours, **** pay, and the working environment is terrible. Also, sure you can take out loans but then you're stuck paying those back most of your life, and no guarantee of a job after getting your degree.

---------- Post added at 09:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:26 PM ----------

I'm not saying I don't agree with this, but I don't think you'll find Catholics who would say, "Yes, I want the government to tax me endlessly and give the money who they deem worthy." I think it's a much more Catholic outlook to give your own money away in a more privately charitable way. Although, I guess what I'm trying to say is most Catholics would rather see their money go to bureaucrats in the Archdioceses who will determine how to use it then to the Congress/State Legislator who will determine how to use it.

Catholics are constantly donating their time, and money. My school/church had a soup kitchen for the poor, as well as weekly donations to help those who were having a hard time. Plus I could remember if a family need helping paying for something we'd have a drive for them and donate as much as we could to them. Catholics don't ignore the poor or think its okay to be poor, I think most of us took the "Blessed are the poor" as just that ... they may be poor but they are still blessed, we should not ignore them or belittle them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catholics are constantly donating their time, and money. My school/church had a soup kitchen for the poor, as well as weekly donations to help those who were having a hard time. Plus I could remember if a family need helping paying for something we'd have a drive for them and donate as much as we could to them. Catholics don't ignore the poor or think its okay to be poor, I think most of us took the "Blessed are the poor" as just that ... they may be poor but they are still blessed, we should not ignore them or belittle them.

... von, why did you quote my post and talk as if I'm not Catholic? I know very well about the charitable branch of the Catholic Church. I've worked for Catholic Charities and other organizations for a long time. I was simply making a point that the whole donation to the poor thing does not necessarily indicate a preference for the government to be doing it. I would much rather intrust my money to the Archdioceses where I know it's going to good use then to my Legislators where I am not quite as sure.

And I think you misunderstand the whole "blessed are the poor thing." The Catholic Church teaches strongly that social justice should be pursued in every area in ones life, but she also points out that people who are born into lower socioeconomic status are blessed in the fact that they are given more suffering. Suffering is the main way in which sanctification takes place, and it unites us with the cross in a special way that only misfortune and hardship can. Suffering is, has been, and will always be a very positive thing in the Catholic Church.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... von, why did you quote my post and talk as if I'm not Catholic? I know very well about the charitable branch of the Catholic Church. I've worked for Catholic Charities and other organizations for a long time. I was simply making a point that the whole donation to the poor thing does not necessarily indicate a preference for the government to be doing it. I would much rather intrust my money to the Archdioceses where I know it's going to good use then to my Legislators where I am not quite as sure.

And I think you misunderstand the whole "blessed are the poor thing." The Catholic Church teaches strongly that social justice should be pursued in every area in ones life, but she also points out that people who are born into lower socioeconomic status are blessed in the fact that they are given more suffering. Suffering is the main way in which sanctification takes place, and it unites us with the cross in a special way that only misfortune and hardship can. Suffering is, has been, and will always be a very positive thing in the Catholic Church.

Because I was agreeing with you? ... people are so sensitive on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because I was agreeing with you? ... people are so sensitive on here.

I'm sorry, your post didn't give that tone. People on here tend to be really thick, and 99% of the time when someone quotes you they're disagreeing with you. You didn't really say otherwise, so I mistook your post. My bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jag is the perfect example of confusing the tree for the forest. It's like conservatives who think that a cold day somehow disproves global warming. Or my dad who thinks that because he did well financially during the early 1980's that there was no recession. I will be more than willing to shut up and recant if you can show me macro-statistics showing the massive droves of people who were born poor attaining the American Dream. Unfortunately, this is a country of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess you'll have to list them. Whether that candidate is or is not a 6-day Creationist shouldn't be a primary factor in prohibiting you from voting for a candidate. I'm sure you were more or less joking. Ron Paul is quite honestly the only candidate with a strong consistent voting record. His views and policies are solid as well.

I was joking... mostly. I still have to question one's judgment if they're in a position of policy making and simultaneously disregard science. It wouldn't necessarily make or break my vote, but it wouldn't help either.

Oh I'm not voting for him, but you've got Bachmann who is under the impression she can be a quality president even though she hasn't passed a single piece of legislation since her first day in office and the fact she listens to everything her husband says and obeys him. Plus she is constantly getting his historical facts wrong, I'm seriously doubting she has any grip on reality. Perry has spent the last couple of weeks denouncing evolution, climate change and homosexuals and I'm pretty sure is trying to figure out how his state can preform more executions. Romney is a white President Obama whether he wants to agree or not. Sarah Palin doesn't know if she is running or not but she'll make comments anyway from her snowmobile. Its a whacky, whacky field.

Oh my, if these candidates were my only options (in an odd world where we have multi-way elections with only one party) I'd definitely vote Ron Paul.

Right now though, the only republican candidate I'd consider voting for is John Huntsman. He strikes me as a decent guy, and by far the most reasonable of the republican candidates. Too bad he's so far behind... I guess he's too rational and moderate for today's right-wing voters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was joking... mostly. I still have to question one's judgment if they're in a position of policy making and simultaneously disregard science. It wouldn't necessarily make or break my vote, but it wouldn't help either.

Oh my, if these candidates were my only options (in an odd world where we have multi-way elections with only one party) I'd definitely vote Ron Paul.

Right now though, the only republican candidate I'd consider voting for is John Huntsman. He strikes me as a decent guy, and by far the most reasonable of the republican candidates. Too bad he's so far behind... I guess he's too rational and moderate for today's right-wing voters.

Huntsman is awesome in the field, but like you said he is so far behind and he lacks the funds to boost ahead. I'm going to vote for Obama again, so the republican party isn't really a big issue for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JAG
Jag is the perfect example of confusing the tree for the forest. It's like conservatives who think that a cold day somehow disproves global warming. Or my dad who thinks that because he did well financially during the early 1980's that there was no recession. I will be more than willing to shut up and recant if you can show me macro-statistics showing the massive droves of people who were born poor attaining the American Dream. Unfortunately, this is a country of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.

Try every German descendant (like me) in America. Better yet, ask the hispanic that purchased my house in cash 10 years ago. The entire hispanic community in Nashville is a phenomenal example of a group of people willing to work their butts off to take advantage of the American system.

In the mean time, since this thread is about Ron Paul - watch this entire video and check out his wisdom with economics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5nGCpzel6o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jag is the perfect example of confusing the tree for the forest. It's like conservatives who think that a cold day somehow disproves global warming. Or my dad who thinks that because he did well financially during the early 1980's that there was no recession. I will be more than willing to shut up and recant if you can show me macro-statistics showing the massive droves of people who were born poor attaining the American Dream. Unfortunately, this is a country of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.

Just out of curiosity, haven't most decedents of the Irish, Italian, German, Polish, etc who came over from Europe in the 1900s become middle to upper class?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just out of curiosity, haven't most decedents of the Irish, Italian, German, Polish, etc who came over from Europe in the 1900s become middle to upper class?

That was then, this is now ... the American Dream bubble burst a long time ago. The rich got richer, the poor got poorer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Try every German descendant (like me) in America. Better yet, ask the hispanic that purchased my house in cash 10 years ago. The entire hispanic community in Nashville is a phenomenal example of a group of people willing to work their butts off to take advantage of the American system.

Blah, blah, blah, more anecdotal evidence.

In the mean time, since this thread is about Ron Paul - watch this entire video and check out his wisdom with economics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5nGCpzel6o

Ron Paul is an economic moron. The video you linked to is essentially saying that because Ron Paul predicted the financial crisis that he is right. Well, Paul Krugman predicted the financial crisis as well as Nouriel Roubini. However, Krugman and Roubini actually have a plan to correct the problem (more regulation), whereas Ron Paul's war cry of deregulation will simply exacerbate the problem. It's like saying the house is on fire and then hitting it with a flamethrower. Austrian economics is the intellectual equivalent of flat earth theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just out of curiosity, haven't most decedents of the Irish, Italian, German, Polish, etc who came over from Europe in the 1900s become middle to upper class?

Perhaps. My argument, however, was that poor children typically grow up to be poor and do not have nearly the same chances that rich children do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps. My argument, however, was that poor children typically grow up to be poor and do not have nearly the same chances that rich children do.

Would you not qualify these people as poor? I mean, I know I'm appealing to antidote, but I know for a fact that my ancestors were coal miners when they first came to America. Most of them were not rich, and yet their grandchildren rose to go to college and other such things.

That was then, this is now ... the American Dream bubble burst a long time ago. The rich got richer, the poor got poorer.

So what happened to burst the American Dream bubble? The fact that in order to make money you have to be highly specialized in a field? Or do you think it was other reasons? I'm just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JAG
Blah, blah, blah, more anecdotal evidence.

Something that is true is objectively true. Merely because you're too proud to take it into account doesn't disqualify it. In this country anyone can do anything, it doesn't matter how poor you start out. If you work hard and show integrity you will be successful.

Ron Paul is an economic moron. The video you linked to is essentially saying that because Ron Paul predicted the financial crisis that he is right. Well, Paul Krugman predicted the financial crisis as well as Nouriel Roubini. However, Krugman and Roubini actually have a plan to correct the problem (more regulation), whereas Ron Paul's war cry of deregulation will simply exacerbate the problem. It's like saying the house is on fire and then hitting it with a flamethrower. Austrian economics is the intellectual equivalent of flat earth theory.

You wouldn't happen to have been a member of RichardDawkins.net would you?

Neither of those two men are running for president.

I started to write why deregulation wouldn't exacerbate the problem, but help it. Instead, I'd rather hear your reasons as to why deregulation would make it worse.

- James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would you not qualify these people as poor? I mean, I know I'm appealing to antidote, but I know for a fact that my ancestors were coal miners when they first came to America. Most of them were not rich, and yet their grandchildren rose to go to college and other such things.

So what happened to burst the American Dream bubble? The fact that in order to make money you have to be highly specialized in a field? Or do you think it was other reasons? I'm just curious.

A combination of causes really ... prices inflated, minimum wage stayed low (if you listen to some of the presidential candidates they want to lower it even more.) Public education in some areas of the country got worse, teachers weren't teaching students well, predominantly in low class areas (ghettos, urban areas) so most kids started off with an unfair advantage. The job market fizzled, taxes went up, and the fact we've shipped many of the jobs that made that early generation middle class/high middle class, overseas. Our country is losing its foothole in the world, nearly every category we've fallen behind. The American Dream bubble burst, and now people (mostly politicians) are beating a dead horse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why can't there be a media blackout on all politicians? that woudl be nice

Amen brother! Heck, why can't there be a media blackout on politics all together?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×