The Consistent Inconsistencies of Libertarians and Ron Paul, page 4

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times

reply posted on 20-8-2012 @ 04:28 AM by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by manna2
reply to post by jjf3rd77

hmmmm, did you know that when it was made illegal in 1943??, the day before it was the 2'nd most prescribed legal substance by the medical community?...solely for the benefit of health and healing?

nahhhh, you wouldn't know that..you are a moderate....lol

You bring the weakest args to the table. I am certain you are an agent provacateur.

I truly did not know that, but then 1943 was well before they found out what MaryJane does to short term memory(and your refridgerator

)

reply posted on 20-8-2012 @ 01:35 PM by ThirdEyeofHorus

reply to post by Openeye

That being said, the constitution is a 200+ year old document that actually holds little true significance in the modern world.

You are actually in the company of a lot of globalists when saying such things, and specifically this administration, as they are shredding our beloved Constitution faster than any other admin. The very dirt you are standing on is millions of years old and I wonder how insignificant you think that is.

Ever hear of Plato's Republic? Do you think it is insignificant?

The Republic (Greek: Πολιτεία, Politeia) is a Socratic dialogue written by Plato around 380 BC concerning the definition of justice and the order and character of the just city-state and the just man.[1] The dramatic date of the dialogue has been much debated and though it must take place some time during the Peloponnesian War, "there would be jarring anachronisms if any of the candidate specific dates between 432 and 404 were assigned".[2] It is Plato's best-known work and has proven to be one of the most intellectually and historically influential works of philosophy and political theory.

Democracy
As this socioeconomic divide grows, so do tensions between social classes. From the conflicts arising out of such tensions, democracy replaces the oligarchy preceding it. The poor overthrow the inexperienced oligarchs and soon grant liberties and freedoms to citizens. A visually appealing demagogue is soon lifted up to protect the interests of the lower class. However, with too much freedom, the people become drunk, and tyranny takes over.

thanks for listening

reply posted on 20-8-2012 @ 01:40 PM by ThirdEyeofHorus

reply to post by jjf3rd77

Yeah and Conservatives believe that the laws that they pass will help others not harm them

I would say that overall, the liberals also believe that laws they pass are for the "common good", even if it's incredibly misguided.
Jonah Goldberg's book "Liberal Fascism" explains how Progressives actually are very totalitarian even while they think they are doing it for our own good. In other words, when they pass laws that tell us how to eat, drink, and what not to smoke, they believe they are justified in forcing restaurants to have special calorie counting guides on their menus.(not saying I agree with them of course), But their focus is always on the common good and not the individual worth.

reply posted on 20-8-2012 @ 01:47 PM by interupt42

reply to post by METACOMET

I believe the OP is beginning to realize that the GOP picked the wrong candidate and the Candidate that is going to cost the GOP the most voters within its own base is the Mittens.

Last election:
McCain = (Anyone but Obama)
Ron Paul = (Anyone but Obama) + (Ron Paul Supporters)
= ObamC@p WIN

This election:
Mitt Romney = (Anyone but Obama)
Ron Paul = (Anyone but Obama) + (Ron Paul Supporters)^2
= ObamC@p WIN

I think he is trying his best to convert the RP supporters to Mitt Romneyiacs or at least get the RP supporters from publishing Romneys voting records and stance on the issues.

edit on 20-8-2012 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 22-8-2012 @ 04:55 PM by John_Rodger_Cornman

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by Praetorius

That just means he talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk. Giving the same speeches for thirty years is a bit boring. He only panders to his selective cult and never tries to think about how other people might see him, or what other voters want.

"He is just spreading his message." That's it!

But I tell you that message is very inconsistent.
edit on 6-8-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)