The Secret Behind the Promise: A Libertarian Dictatorship

Originally posted by syrinx high priest

is this a joke ?

this proves the point of the the thread tbh. these campaign promises could never be kept, and the worst part is he knows it

Dont you know, everyone will bow to the power of Ron Paul! The fact that Obama saved the taxpayers $40. in his lack of a budget this year, doesn't seem to bother the Ron Paul people. Everyone loves Ron Paul, in their little world and once he is President everything will be AOK!!!! I still have not heard any body explain to me all of the points I raise in my OP. I am waiting...but I won't hold my breath.

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

Until you have something constructive to say about my questions or my posts, please stop telling me how wrong I am or that I am voting for the wrong person. I've made up my mind and your not going to change it.

Ummm, didn't you just contradict yourself here?

You don't really want answers, constructive or otherwise, and pretending that you can be swayed by constructive answers is merely a ploy that allows you to continue bashing Paul's supporters and Paul's statements, which you generally spin and take out of context to suit your goal.

But it does give us a better idea of why you're so charmed by Romney, it takes one flip flopper who says whatever he thinks might sway the present crowd to really appreciate another flip flopper who uses the exact same tactic.

Sorry, looks like it ain't workin'.

How about instead of "taking things out of context" you bring things into context and respond to the various points I have made in my OP instead of automatically going after me, because you do not agree with the post. If you don't agree, let's debate!

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

Until you have something constructive to say about my questions or my posts, please stop telling me how wrong I am or that I am voting for the wrong person. I've made up my mind and your not going to change it.

Ummm, didn't you just contradict yourself here?

You don't really want answers, constructive or otherwise, and pretending that you can be swayed by constructive answers is merely a ploy that allows you to continue bashing Paul's supporters and Paul's statements, which you generally spin and take out of context to suit your goal.

But it does give us a better idea of why you're so charmed by Romney, it takes one flip flopper who says whatever he thinks might sway the present crowd to really appreciate another flip flopper who uses the exact same tactic.

Sorry, looks like it ain't workin'.

How about instead of "taking things out of context" you bring things into context and respond to the various points I have made in my OP instead of automatically going after me, because you do not agree with the post. If you don't agree, let's debate!

Your questions have been responded to and debated ad nauseum in however many almost duplicate threads you have started over the past several weeks bashing Ron Paul. Patience is not my strong suit, but its pretty obvious that the pressure being put on Romney by Paul's rising delegate count is also raising the panic level. I am not going after you, I am responding to you.

But I will tell you that I had been calling for an end to the fed for almost three decades before I ever heard Ron Paul speak and yes we could wish for a better speaker, even he admits that, but his ideas and plans are all that might yet save this country from everlasting ruin brought to us in living technicolor by the too big to fail financiers and MIC who always benefit so handsomely from war.

Ron Paul has consistently stated that he is only one figure in the liberty movement, working to spread its ideas and gain support for the libertarian and constitutional message. Electing Ron Paul would mean that a large portion of America has woken up to the republicans=democrats. It is then up to the people to support others like Ron Paul, for governor, sheriff, senator, congressman and the like. This may sound like it couldnt happen however if Ron Paul is elected that means his message has spread and therefore the people will work to clean house.

So people say if Ron is elected he couldnt make a difference because he has to work with the Senate and Congress to make a difference. They fail to realize the importance of the election itself, which would essentially be a real third party type candidate elected for the first time (not counting early times with older parties). The media is always asking Paul if he wants to EITHER win the election OR spread his message, they fail to see that its the spreading of the message which can get him and others like him elected.

Everyone knows Ron Paul is popular with the college crowd, the old Republican ideas are beginning to die out as those in the older generations pass on and the younger move up their twenties and closer to positions of government power. The libertarian movement is growing each year and I believe it will continue to do so, making a change, if not by mass change of mind brought by movements, over the slow changing of generations passing.
But if not now who knows what we'll have for a country in ten years.

Edit: You have a problem with Ron Paul supporters? Dont even get me started on the imbeciles pushing Romney. Everytime I tell them theyre electing Bush 3 they have nothing else to say, because they know its true, but anything to beat Obama!

Originally posted by frazzle

Your questions have been responded to and debated ad nauseum in however many almost duplicate threads you have started over the past several weeks bashing Ron Paul. Patience is not my strong suit, but its pretty obvious that the pressure being put on Romney by Paul's rising delegate count is also raising the panic level. I am not going after you, I am responding to you.

But I will tell you that I had been calling for an end to the fed for almost three decades before I ever heard Ron Paul speak and yes we could wish for a better speaker, even he admits that, but his ideas and plans are all that might yet save this country from everlasting ruin brought to us in living technicolor by the too big to fail financiers and MIC who always benefit so handsomely from war.

Not really there has been no rational debate and/or answers to my questions. People just yelled at me, tell me to research the real issues, point me to his website, or tell me to shut up vote for Ron Paul and you'll see he'll do good things. You are trying, but your posts are still littered with insults and wishful thinking.

so until you do point out something in my OP with which you have an issue, and with which you would like to debate, please stop posting here and spreading your nonsense here. Obviously, my questions have not been answered satisfactorily because otherwise, I would stop asking these questions... But alas you people have failed horribly and in Ron Paul's name. He has even said that his supporters lift him up on a pedestal and he finds it silly. But he respects their right of freedom of speech!

reply to post by jjf3rd77

the only way that Ron Paul-style libertarianism could ever be implemented through the establishment is through some sort of dictatorship.

So an ideal popular enough to get a man elected as president, would somehow not be popular enough to win other people with those views seats in congress and senate? That doesn't seem all that logical to me. I would imagine a Paul presidency would be followed by others with the same views being elected into other offices.

Also it would appear that you are saying that the executive branch and all of the government agencies under its direct control cannot be altered by the head of the executive branch? As President, Ron Paul would have direct control over the policies of the:

Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Department of Commerce (DOC)
Department of Defense (DOD)
Department of Education (ED)
Department of Energy (DOE)
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Department of Labor (DOL)
Department of State (DOS)
Department of the Interior (DOI)
Department of the Treasury
Department of Transportation (DOT)
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

A Dictatorship hardly seems necessary. I applaud your determination and willingness to speak your mind but I find it hard to believe that Ron Paul as president could not get anything accomplished without some sort of "dictatorship" did you ignore how he would be the head of so many executive agencies that wield nearly all of the federal power?

As far as your problem with Ron Paul supporters... Perhaps if you didn't take every possible opportunity to insult them you might find your discussions with them a bit more palatable. I realize that some of his supporters act the fool or are insulting as well, but so do supporters of any candidate. This is not exclusive to Ron Paul supporters. Just my friendly advice, I don't imagine you will take it.

Originally posted by sageofmonticello
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

the only way that Ron Paul-style libertarianism could ever be implemented through the establishment is through some sort of dictatorship.

So an ideal popular enough to get a man elected as president, would somehow not be popular enough to win other people with those views seats in congress and senate? That doesn't seem all that logical to me.

Also it would appear that you are saying that the executive branch and all of the government agencies under its direct control cannot be altered by the head of the executive branch? As President Ron Paul would have direct control over the policies of the:

Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Department of Commerce (DOC)
Department of Defense (DOD)
Department of Education (ED)
Department of Energy (DOE)
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Department of Labor (DOL)
Department of State (DOS)
Department of the Interior (DOI)
Department of the Treasury
Department of Transportation (DOT)
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

A Dictatorship hardly seems necessary. I applaud your determination and willingness to speak your mind but I find it hard to believe that Ron Paul as president could nto get anything accomplished with out some sort of dictatorship seeing how he would be the head of so many executive agencies.

As far as your problem with Ron Paul supporters... Perhaps if you didn't take every possible opportunity to insult them you might find your discussions with them a bit more palatable. I realize that some of his supporters act the same way but so do supporters of any candidate. Just my friendly advice, I don't imagine you will take it.

I only insulted RP supporters when they deserved it. So are you saying that, Ron Paul will end all of those agencies leaving millions of people without jobs??? If Ron Paul honestly got in the White House, how would TPTB be for him? Your logic makes no sense haha. But let's play your game, sure if Ron Paul did get in the White House, some conservatives will be swayed to agree with him, but as I mentioned in my OP. The liberals will never go along with any of it!

reply to post by jjf3rd77


You are trying, but your posts are still littered with insults and wishful thinking.

Insults? Thin skin much?

"so until you do point out something in my OP with which you have an issue, and with which you would like to debate, please stop posting here and spreading your nonsense here. Obviously, my questions have not been answered satisfactorily because otherwise, I would stop asking these questions..."

Why bother? You've already said nothing will change your mind. So go ahead and vote for Romney if he's your choice. You might want to take a hint from the official GOP, though, to vote early and vote often, just to make sure you don't get "cheated".

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

Why bother? You've already said nothing will change your mind.

I would just like my questions answered. Is that too much to ask for from people who idolize this man? If the only thing you can respond with is why bother answering my questions. then maybe, you should re-analyze your viewpoints.

reply to post by jjf3rd77


I don't idolize anyone, however I do recognise what I believe to be good ideas when I hear them. And I do recognise when someone puts their life on the line to speak those good ideas.

As for the departments listed previously and the possibility that some of them would be shut down, don't you think the states will pick up the gauntlet and regulate their own territories? I kind of imagine they'd be hiring some of the recently laid off federal workers, most of whom already live in various states. And that would be constitutional. Problem with that?

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

As for the departments listed previously and the possibility that some of them would be shut down, don't you think the states will pick up the gauntlet and regulate their own territories? I kind of imagine they'd be hiring some of the recently laid off federal workers, most of whom already live in various states. And that would be constitutional. Problem with that?

See that's wishful thinking. You don't know so you just assume. I mean, look what happened in Mass with RomneyCare. That state was entirely liberal and Romney couldn't strike down, that law. Because then he would be going against the wants of the people there. Do you see my point at how sometimes states will vote the complete opposite of what you think they should? Then, what's Ron Paul going to do. Some states are very liberal and want all this huge government. That's not going with the people there...

reply to post by jjf3rd77

So are you saying that, Ron Paul will end all of those agencies leaving millions of people without jobs???

No, I am not saying that. You wondered how Ron Paul could get anything done, your conclusion was that he would have to have a dictatorship to accomplish his goals. I presented you with evidence that the President is in control of multiple federal agencies that hold the majority of federal power.

Since you are now asking (by way of false inference) I have no idea if Ron Paul would shut down all of the agencies or not. I know he has only stated that he would like to close down a few of them such as the department of education. Honestly, I don't care about the jobs of government workers, the government is too big (as you have said) and you can't shrink the government without loosing a few agencies and letting some people go.

Personally I feel like government workers should be ashamed of themselves. Since when has public service been a career path? We are not supposed to have vast amounts of the public employed by the government. The government has too many employees and they are employed at the detriment of the public. Do you want to shrink government or not? You can't shrink government and protect government jobs at the same time.

If Ron Paul honestly got in the White House, how would TPTB be for him? Your logic makes no sense haha. But let's play your game, sure if Ron Paul did get in the White House, some conservatives will be swayed to agree with him, but as I mentioned in my OP.

Who cares if TPTB are for him or not? How does that have anything to do with people of like minds seeking and being elected to public office? I am not playing any game? I simply addressed your OP and showed you how a dictatorship would not be necessary as the executive has plenty of power on their own.

The liberals will never go along with any of it!

As I mentioned, If Ron Paul was popular enough to be elected president, it stands to reason that people with similar views would be popular enough to gain a majority in the house and/or senate. At that point what does it matter if the liberals go along with it or not?

I have addressed your OP and shown you how a dictatorship is obviously unnecessary. You can choose to accept that fact or not. I have little motivation to sit here and argue with you. Accept the facts or don't, I won't be loosing any sleep over it. Good Day.

reply to post by jjf3rd77


That's the beauty of it, those choices would be up to the states and the people in them. Wow, just like our founding fathers envisioned. You are fighting against a very strong current and I'll admit that real change is scary for a lot of people, so I'm sure many are fearful of what the future would bring under a Paul presidency. But we pretty much know what we'll get under Romney ~ more of the same #### we're already getting.

Besides, where is your sense of adventure? You wanna keep living in that shrinking square box they built around you with stupid laws and regulations? Its all paper. Break free!!! Live!!

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

Besides, where is your sense of adventure? You wanna keep living in that shrinking square box they built around you with stupid laws and regulations? Its all paper. Break free!!! Live!!

I do live! I find it really shocking that the most suspicious people on the internet do not raise the very question I am raising in regards to Ron Paul. They do it to everything else from Iran, to the littlest regulations that nobody has ever heard of before. That's what I love about ATS, what I don't like about ATS is the devotion to Ron Paul on here and how for some reason nobody questions the man!

reply to post by jjf3rd77


I do understand how hard it would be to take on a titan like the fed reserve; However, I did show 3 other ways to start it off without using E.O.s as I believe he wont use them but I have been mistaken before. I dont think I have and I wont insult you for your opinions. That being said can we say that has been answered and we move on to another point?

Also on a side note if he did enforce 11110, we might soon find out if kennedy was assassinated for it.



Also on another side note there were at least 5(some say 7) half-black presidents before obama.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

Besides, where is your sense of adventure? You wanna keep living in that shrinking square box they built around you with stupid laws and regulations? Its all paper. Break free!!! Live!!

I do live! I find it really shocking that the most suspicious people on the internet do not raise the very question I am raising in regards to Ron Paul. They do it to everything else from Iran, to the littlest regulations that nobody has ever heard of before. That's what I love about ATS, what I don't like about ATS is the devotion to Ron Paul on here and how for some reason nobody questions the man!

If you think you live like a free man (or woman) then you apparently have nothing in common with the roughly 16 American servicemen who take their own lives every month because they cannot continue fighting illegal, immoral, unjust wars that leave thousands of civilians dead and have nothing to do with keeping you or me or their families safe. And apperently you cannot relate with the parents of soldiers who come home in body bags and those parents are left wondering what the he!! their kid died for.

You must also have nothing in common with workers who have approximately 30% of their earnings heisted from their paychecks to be spent by people who obviously do NOT represent them.

You must not fly much either, or maybe you consider getting felt up by jack booted thugs whenever you wish to "freely" travel, living the high life.

I could go on for pages, maybe a book, but you get the drift. So yeah, I have plenty of questions, they're just not the ones you wish I was asking.

That title made me lol really hard... libertarian dictatorship?

Hey let's make some more weenies... communo-capitalism! Anarchist totalitarian regime!

reply to post by jjf3rd77

I think you're asking very important questions, but I don't think you can really get an answer to all of them here. I will probably vote for Ron Paul (if he runs) in November. I do not agree with everything Ron Paul says or does. So I can only speak for myself as to why I will vote for Ron Paul. By the way, is there a possibility that he will get into office and change his tune entirely? Of course, we've seen that with Obama. Some of things I agree with:

1. He is very vocal about bringing home the troops. We don't need to be in the business of nation building. IMO the wars we've entered into have not been for the benefit or security of the American people. Can he do it? Yes as commander in chief.
2. Audit the Federal Reserve. He has stated he wants a full and complete audit of the federal reserve. I agree with this. Yes, he wrote a book called end the fed, but can he do it? No. It would take a constitutional amendment. I think if there was transparency with the Fed business, I believe people would want to end the Fed.
3. He wants to stop presidential signing statements.
4. He wants the government to respect civil liberties and get rid of the TSA. I agree.
5. Get rid of the war on terror and the war on drugs. I agree completely.
6. Reduce the size of the Federal government.
7. Keep medicare and social secuirty as a promise made to seniors. I agree.
8. Protecting gun rights. I agree.
9. Securing our borders to stop illegal immigration. I agree.
10. End birthright citizenship. I agree. If you are here illegally your children born here should not get automatic citizenship.
11. Encourage lawful immigration. We should be seeking the best and brightest of the world to become American citizens.

Things I don't agree with:
1. Going to the gold standard. I don't think there is enough gold to do that and even if there were, there are risks that unscrupulous people can manipulate the price of gold to the detriment of society and to manipulate the currency. What are the alternatives? I don't know. Silver? Maybe, because it is more abundant and harder to manipulate by cornering the market, but it can be done. I honestly don't know. But why have asset backed currency? Because it takes the power of manipulating the value of the dollar away from the private Federal Reserve. The last statement is an argument that most liberals will deny because the President appoints the Fed Chariman. But listen to Alan Greenspan the longest serving Fed Chairman. No government entity can counterman
2. Repealing Roe v. Wade Can he do it? No. It would have to be a law passed by congress for him to sign. IMO, it goes against the libertarian philosophy, if you assume that the mother's rights out weigh those of an unborn fetus. Personally, I do believe it is a woman's right to choose.
3. Getting rid of income and capital gains taxes entirely. He talks about instituting a flat tax on condition. But this really favors the wealthy more than anyone else. Can he do it? Not without congress.
4. No immigration amnesty. I believe that if a child has lived here all their lives that SOME path to citizenship should be allowed. Given that it was not their choice to move here and this is the only country they have known, but only if there is no juvenile or adult criminal record. But parents absolutely not.
5. The free market will fix everything. I don't believe it.


Things I just don't know if he's right or wrong about:
1. Getting rid of Departments of Education, Commerce, Energy, Interior and Housing and Urban Development
2. Repealing the healthcare bill.
3. Allowing opt out of Social Security.
4. He doesn't seem to have much to say about outsourcing/off shoring of jobs by corporations. I believe this is a big problem and contributing to the destruction of the economy and society. We certainly should not give any incentives for companies that keep laying off here and hiring somewhere else.

Bottom line. I've seen the Federal government grow in size and power over the half century I've lived here. When I was young, it seemed there was a purpose for the Federal government and the good out weighed the bad. Now, I'm doubting that it can be fixed without a major overhaul. The corporate control of government is so entrenched that you have to start taking power away from the Federal government. Which Obama and Romney will not do. They are business as usual candidates. Ron Paul will definitely try to get an overhaul. Are there risks? Absolutely! Will there be pain? Absolutely. Life has risks. We can't rely on the Federal government to "protect" us. They can't. We as individuals have to start taking responsibility. I think Americans have become very passive about their freedom. This is dangerous. We must be active in protecting our freedom.

reply to post by BravoBull


I may not share all of your concerns, but that post was as clear and concise as anything I've seen on ATS.

Very well done!