It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker. definition of lib•er•tar•ian

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 04:01 PM

n. 1. a person who believes in the doctrine of the freedom of the will
2. a person who believes in full individual freedom of thought, expression and action
3. a freewheeling rebel who hates wiretaps, loves Ron Paul and is redirecting politics

You know they don't have anything bad to say about Ron Paul as of yet. At least not that Ive heard. They are avoiding him like the plague just because he wants to give our country back to the people. Its sad.


posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 04:20 PM
Yes, it is sad. But most politicians are so out of touch with the rel world that they are the true aliens we need to fear. Most of them seem like they understand what the people want about as much as I would expect the reptilians to.

Ron Paul is a breath of fresh air, and Washington sorely needs clean air.

posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 04:22 PM
So far I think the mainstream media is taking an "ignore it, and it will go away" approach to Dr. Paul, which I think is regrettable. Ron Paul has many glaring flaws as a candidate and I think the media should address those instead of merely ignoring him.

His worst flaws, IMO, are advocation of the following:

1. Abolition of the Department of Energy and Department of Education-doing so will abolish uniform, nationwide standards for energy and education-not good.

2. A US withdrawal from NATO and the UN. This will do the United States far more harm than good by making Americans looking like a bunch of scofflaws who don't care what the rest of the world thinks, especially after eight years of GWB thumbing his nose at the rest of the world.

3. A protectionist-inspired withdrawal from the WTO, NAFTA, and CAFTA, despite the fact that Paul claims to be in support of free trade.

4. A return to the gold standard, despite the fact that many, if not all, of the financial panics of the late 19th and early 20th centuries were caused by it and despite the fact that a gold standard would prohibit us from rapidly raising funds in the event of a national emergency or world war.

Ron Paul is flat wrong for America.

posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 04:40 PM

Originally posted by Jim_Kraken

Ron Paul is flat wrong for America.

Yea, you're probably right. Afterall, the current system is working SO well.


posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 04:54 PM
reply to post by jtma508

Where have you ever seen me defending Bush? What the hell does the job Bush is doing have to do with the job Paul would do?

posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 04:58 PM
I just seems like its not American to be pro American anymore. If the Clinton's had such bright ideas we would have seen them when Bill was president. If she takes office it will be more of the same. Obama is just not President material IMHO on many levels. These are people that the media are following to be the front runners and they suck so badly. Ron Paul is by far better for the American people than those two candidates.

They are going to put whoever they want in office really. I mean whats the point anymore? Sure I still vote but in the back of my mind I feel like I'm just going through the motions to make myself feel better. People need to take a look at Ron Paul and then look at the other candidates and then where we are as a country. Its a no brainier if you ask me.

posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 05:05 PM
reply to post by Digital_Reality

All of the candidates are horrible in their own little ways and I probably won't even vote for that reason, but Paul is one of the worst if not the worst for the reasons that I've previously mentioned. The other candidates will not enact the misguided "reforms" that Paul will at least try to which would probably wreck our country.

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 09:23 PM
Well saying that you support freedom and then calling for the withdrawl of US troops from Iraq is an oxymoron . What Libertarians fail to grasp is that some times are regulations are needed to preserve freedom the very thing they stand. For example in order to preserve economic freedoms there has to be regulations in place to prevent monopolies . Sure there are some places governments shouldn't go such as the bedroom and deciding who can get marry.

The other problem with the Libertarian ideology is that by its nature it doesn't allow for a moderate stance or third way like Blair and Clinton were for left wing politics.

new topics

top topics


log in