It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

[Serious] Ron Paul Question

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   
What makes Ron republican?

Can someone please enlighten me? (Not living in the states anymore so i admit i lost track with the developments, just recently started to get interest in all that RP threads and debates...and his politics).

As i understand, years ago RP 'was libertarian'....and for me policies like "pulling out all troops" etc. sound very LIBERAL...actually..how more left/liberal can it even get?

How does "pulling out all troops" go together with republican ideals?

Where does this man really stand...i simply have problems seeing him as rep since he HARDLY has a lot in common with what i would consider a rep candidate like Bush ? (With the exception of his focus on INNER politics, less external politics anymore etc..etc..but does this make him a rep despite his radical other ideas?)

Do you see him more as a republican or more as a liberal? Also..if you say he is rep..what makes him not a liberal?


edit on 26-12-2011 by flexy123 because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-12-2011 by flexy123 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


why do you have to be a war monger to be a republican?



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


He is a Libertarian…which IMO makes him extreme right-wing (much farther right than Bush for sure!). When you go extreme left or extreme right the line becomes blurred...

This article kind of discusses the Libertarian view about war.


Libertarianism and war are not compatible. One reason why should be obvious: In war, governments commit legalized mass-murder. In modern warfare especially, war is not just waged among voluntary combatants, but kills, maims, and otherwise harms innocent people. Then, of course, wars must be funded through taxes, which are extracted from U.S. citizens by force — a form of legalized theft, as far as libertarians are concerned. And, historically, the U.S. has used conscription — legalized slavery — to force people to fight and die. In addition, an interventionist foreign policy makes civilians targets for retaliation, so governments indirectly cause more violence against their own people when they become involved in other countries’ affairs. Plus, war is always accompanied by many other new restrictions on liberty, many of which are sold as supposedly temporary wartime measures but then never go away.
link



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


He is still a libertarian, but he is more conservative than the other people running in the GOP. I don't see how waging war is synonymous with left or right. The other people running are more left leaning than Paul. If they were true conservatives they would support ending the war as part of their economic responsibility.

Paul realized the wars aren't necessary and wants to end them because we are wasting billions of dollars on them.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


Well, there's a huge difference between 'liberal' and 'libertarian.'

And Obamas about as liberal as they come and he LOVES war.
so I really don't think its valid anymore to associate war strictly with republicans.
war is more of a Washington thing.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by flexy123


As i understand, years ago RP 'was libertarian'....and for me policies like "pulling out all troops" etc. sound very LIBERAL...actually..how more left/liberal can it even get?
So, by your definition obama is a right winger? He has started more wars than bush and now supports indefinite detention without recourse for American citizens. Liberal?


How does "pulling out all troops" go together with republican ideals?

Where does this man really stand...i simply have problems seeing him as rep since he HARDLY has a lot in common with what i would consider a rep candidate like Bush ? (With the exception of his focus on INNER politics, less external politics anymore etc..etc..but does this make him a rep despite his radical other ideas?)

Do you see him more as a republican or more as a liberal? Also..if you say he is rep..what makes him not a liberal?
Your confusion is understandable since there are very few real republicans left. We have democrat and democrat-lite as our current party choices. Republicans used to be anti-war, fiscal conservative, free market, and pro-Constitution. Not anymore.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


Well , for one thing , Ron Paul ran for Congress from his District in Texas as a Conservative Republican Only because a Conservative Democrat would be an Oximoron . His eventual leaning towards becoming a Libertarian more than likely came after that .



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
So, by your definition obama is a right winger? He has started more wars than bush


Excuse me? What war has Obama started???

I have no idea why Ron Paul is running under the GOP. It doesn't make sense. He's a RINO who is really an extreme Libertarian.


edit on 12/26/2011 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
So, by your definition obama is a right winger? He has started more wars than bush


Excuse me? What war has Obama started???

I have no idea why Ron Paul is running under the GOP. It doesn't make sense. He's a RINO who is really an extreme Libertarian.


edit on 12/26/2011 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)


How about Libya? And without congressional approval!

The House on Friday overwhelmingly rejected a measure giving President Barack Obama the authority to continue the U.S. military operation against Libya, a major repudiation of the commander in chief.
The vote was 295-123, with Obama losing the support of 70 of his Democrats one day after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton made a last-minute plea for the mission.
link



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Paul was a Republican back in the day when the party was supposed to be about smaller government, less taxes and a foreign policy that didn't alienate the US from the rest of the world. Also a party that was supposed to laud the constitution.

He absolved himself of his Republican membership when the party line changed. I think he is trying to breath Republican values back into the party.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
So, by your definition obama is a right winger? He has started more wars than bush


Excuse me? What war has Obama started???

I have no idea why Ron Paul is running under the GOP. It doesn't make sense. He's a RINO who is really an extreme Libertarian.
Libya and Yemen both immediately spring to mind.



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


Ron Paul is very liberal.
Libertarians are very liberal; they are the epitome of liberalism.

Conservatives are even very liberal.

The confusion exists because the actual definition of "liberal" and it's contemporary, pejorative, usage are a false dichotomy.

The reality is, America's political spectrum, despite the outcries of extremism on both sides, is very narrow in the broader sense of political science.

Words have objective meaning...we muddle the waters subjectively.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join