Community | July 02, 2010 | 300 comments

Ron Paul - “Obama Is Not A Socialist; He’s a Corporatist! Republicans Are Too!”

shanklinmike
Ron Paul points out the corporatism in the two party (one party) system, including but not limited to the military industrial complex and the medical industrial complex.

http://www.peacefreedomprosperity.com/?p=3666
  1. groups:
    Community,   Not News,   Modern Majic,   Anarchists on Current,   2 more
  2. tags:
    News News and Politics Politics Not News 21 more
  3.     
    |

300 comments // Ron Paul - “Obama Is Not A Socialist; He’s a Corporatist! Republicans Are Too!” // Video

  • iamaman
  • iamaman
  • ScottyT
  • iamaman
  • iamaman
  • iamaman
    • 0
      iamaman  
    • Image
    • From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

      This article is semi-protected until February 17, 2011 to prevent violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy.

      Ron Paul

      "Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Texas's 14th district Incumbent Assumed office January 3, 1997 Preceded by Greg Laughlin
      Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Texas's 22nd district
      In office January 3, 1979 – January 3, 1985 Preceded by Robert Gammage
      Succeeded by Tom DeLay In office April 3, 1976 – January 3, 1977 preceded by Robert R. Casey Succeeded by Robert Gammage

      Born August 20, 1935 (1935-08-20) (age 74) Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
      Political party Republican (1976–1988) Libertarian (1988) Republican (1988–present)

      Ronald Ernest "Ron" Paul (born August 20, 1935) is an American physician and REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN for the 14th congressional district of Texas. Paul is a member of the Liberty Caucus of Republican congressmen which aims to limit the size and scope of the federal government,[2] and serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the Joint Economic Committee, and the Committee on Financial Services, where he has been an outspoken critic of American foreign and monetary policy. He has gained notoriety for his right-libertarian positions on many political issues, often clashing with both Republican and Democratic Party leaders. Paul has run for President of the United States twice, first in 1988 as the nominee of the Libertarian Party and again in 2008 as a candidate for the Republican nomination."

      HE IS A NEO-CON! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-conservative

      "Neoconservatism is a right-wing political philosophy that emerged in the United States of America, and which supports using American economic and military power to bring liberalism, democracy, and human rights to other countries.[1][2][3] Consequently the term is chiefly applicable to certain Americans and their strong supporters. In economics, unlike paleoconservatives and libertarians, neoconservatives are generally comfortable with a welfare state; and, while rhetorically supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes.[4]

      The term neoconservative was used at one time as a criticism against proponents of American modern liberalism who had "moved to the right".[5][6] Michael Harrington, a democratic socialist, coined the current sense of the term neoconservative in a 1973 Dissent magazine article concerning welfare policy.[7] According to E. J. Dionne, the nascent neoconservatives were driven by "the notion that liberalism" had failed and "no longer knew what it was talking about."[8] The term "neoconservative" was the subject of increased media coverage during the presidency of George W. Bush.[9][10] with particular focus on a perceived neoconservative influence on American foreign policy, as part of the Bush Doctrine.[11] The term neocon is often used as pejorative in this context."

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
    • 0
      iamaman  
    • Image
    • from "Letters To A New President" (July 2008) By Senator Robert C. Byrd (1917-2010)

      Pg. 95 (4th paragraph)

      "WAR IS PEACE. FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH."

      "It was as if ABC had suddenly cut into "This Week" with the film version of 1984, starring John Hurt as Winston Smith, and we were suddenly listening to Big Brother adjusting the party line everyday, and expecting the cowed masses to go along. Not in America, Mr. Bush.
      The nation can and does demand more of its leaders, and you, new President, must do your part to help win back trust. It will be harder to gain the confidence of the American people than it was for the confidence to be drowned in a river of falsehoods. I do not think that we as a nation can afford any more of that. It will not always be easy for you to meet challenging circumstances with the truth. But there is inspiration in the scriptures: 'So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, if you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples. and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.' "

      from merriem-websters

      Main Entry: 2cow
      Function: transitive verb
      Etymology: probably of Scandinavian origin; akin to Dan kue to subdue
      Date: 1581

      : to destroy the resolve or courage of ; also : to bring to a state or an action by intimidation —used with into
      synonyms see intimidate

      — cowed·ly \ˈkau̇(-ə)d-lē\ adverb

      — cowed·ly \ˈkau̇(-ə)d-lē\ adverb

      http://byrd.senate.gov/

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
    • 0
      iamaman  
    • http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Ron_Paul_Energy_+_Oil.htm

      Ron Paul on Energy & Oil
      Republican Representative (TX-14); previously Libertarian for President

      Big Oil profits ok; Big Oil subsidies are not
      Q: Bush’s energy bill provided billions of dollars in tax breaks & subsidies to the oil companies with the goal of boosting domestic production at a time of record profits. Do you support that?

      A: I don’t think the profits is the issue. The profits are okay if they’re legitimately earned in a free market. What I object to are subsidies to big corporations when we subsidize them and give them R&D money. I don’t think that should be that way. They should take it out of the funds that they earn.
      Source: 2007 GOP debate at Saint Anselm College Jun 3, 2007

      Voted NO on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies.
      Creating Long-term Energy Alternatives for the Nation (CLEAN) Act

      * Title I: Ending Subsidies for Big Oil Act--denying a deduction for income attributable to domestic production of oil, natural gas, or their related primary products.
      * Title II: Royalty Relief for American Consumers Act--to incorporate specified price thresholds for royalties on oil & gas leases in the Gulf of Mexico.
      * Title III: Strategic Energy Efficiency And Renewables Reserve--makes the Reserve available to accelerate the use of clean domestic renewable energy resources and alternative fuels.

      Proponents support voting YES because:

      This legislation seeks to end the unwarranted tax breaks & subsidies which have been lavished on Big Oil over the last several years, at a time of record prices at the gas pump and record oil industry profits. Big Oil is hitting the American taxpayer not once, not twice, but three times. They are hitting them at the pump, they are hitting them through the Tax Code, and they are hitting them with royalty holidays put into oil in 1995 and again in 2005.

      It is time to vote for the integrity of America's resources, to vote for the end of corporate welfare, to vote for a new era in the management of our public energy resources.

      RON PAUL IS A HYPOCRITE

      hypocrite

      Main Entry: hyp·o·crite
      Pronunciation: \ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit\
      Function: noun
      Etymology: Middle English ypocrite, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin hypocrita, from Greek hypokritēs actor, hypocrite, from hypokrinesthai
      Date: 13th century

      1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
      2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

      — hypocrite adjective

    • 1 year ago
  • shanklinmike
  • shanklinmike
  • telcod
    • -2
      telcod  
    • The idea of america the beautiful does not help to address the fundamental questions before us. Neither does a grammar school notion of capitalism which is reflected in the rantings on Current, but also in the crap the so called experts spew (remember Greenspan's expert predictions?). He did admit he was only wrong 20% of the time. An unacceptable rate for a McDonald's employee. Suffer for your sanity, if you try and make sense out of the normally available "information," you will most certainly remain lost. This, despite the false assumption that you are making progress.

    • 1 year ago
  • jubal
  • flyingkick
    • +3
      flyingkick  
    • OK, here's the thing- Ron Paul has a refreshingly truthful outlook towards the war and somewhat towards the economy.
      But he would never get anything done as president.
      Everything he would want to do would be blocked by congress, because it would be screwing up their money system.
      I don't think he'd be any more effective than Obama is now.

    • 1 year ago
  • shanklinmike
  • Andrew_Douglas
  • Omnomynous
  • ScottyT
  • iamaman
  • ScottyT
  • shanklinmike
  • Einsam_Data_Old
  • ScottyT
  • Einsam_Data_Old
  • ScottyT
    • +2
      ScottyT  
    • Einsam_Data_Old:

      Perhaps it is you who is in need of some understanding.

      I am not operating under some sort of insane delusion when I assert that individual freedom and self-ownership are fundamentally important for human existence.

      Nor am I pleasuring my ego when I wish to discuss alternatives to a blatantly corrupt governmental system.

      Not once have I professed an ideology of hate, racial intolerance or defamation.

      Not once have I resorted to the use of ad hominems or red herrings in my arguments.

      Not once have I threatened another user on this thread with violence or insult.

      ...and yet I am wrong?

    • 1 year ago
  • Einsam_Data_Old
  • shanklinmike
    • +2
      shanklinmike  
    • Einsam_Data_Old:

      Great facts.... (sarcasm)

      We're not the ones pointing the guns at people....YOU ARE. You're the one breaking natural law, not us. You are the one using threats of violence and force on peaceful people.

      What you are doing is wrong, Freedom is not wrong.

    • 1 year ago
  • afloyd60
    • +5
      afloyd60  
    • Einsam_Data_Old:

      i've noticed a pattern with some of the most ardent anti-libertarians on this site. they constantly deflect from the original topic or current post and usually end up resorting to childish ridicule, name calling, or charges of racism when they are unable to defend their own supposed philosophy in relation to libertarian ideals. freedom stands on it's own merits.

      people fought for thousands of years for freedom. and then over many years it was gradually taken from us. ("Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny." ~Thomas Jefferson ---- ol' TJ knows what's up) the very meaning of the word freedom was perverted and distorted, and then used to destroy it. people were led to believe that a return to the old ways, a return to slavery/serfdom/servitude was our salvation, all under the guise of freedom and wrapped in the flag. freedom made this country great. the loss of freedom is why this country is in decline. freedom is a good thing. i will continue to embrace the philosophy of liberty and condemn the ancient ways of servitude. i own my own life. take your tyranny elsewhere.

    • 1 year ago
  • Einsam_Data_Old
  • ScottyT
  • afloyd60
  • flyingkick
  • jubal
  • afloyd60
    • 0
      afloyd60  
    • jubal:

      wow, thanks jubal. i always look forward to your posts as well. more often than not i find myself clicking the little up arrow on your comments. take care and happy independence day!

    • 1 year ago
  • robertstr
  • MoonLoon
    • +1
      MoonLoon  
    • Obama is a politician? Well fool me! I expected him to shed his political nature and step up to be a leader, that was my expectations for the elected leader of all American people. Yet, he has fallen short of my expectations, because he still seems to be enthralled with the power of politics. My non-solicitated advice to him is, step up and be a leader of the best nation on the planet. Be proud of our principles and stop apologising to the World, for our shortcomings. Our Nation is still heads and shoulders above most of the Countries that Obama seems driven to suck up to!

    • 1 year ago
  • kennymotown
  • ScottyT
  • kennymotown
  • ScottyT
    • +3
      ScottyT  
    • kennymotown:

      It's a good video--very catchy. I certainly agree with the author's views of the business cycle. However, what is missing from it is one culprit--the central banks. You see, it is central banking institutions that lay they foundation for financiers to accumulate all the wealth while the rest of us keep trying to pass Go and collect our $200 (sorry, but the Monopoly analogy is a good one).

      Central banks, like the Federal Reserve, make this possible. They're the ones who manipulate the money supply, give sweetheart deals to financiers, and facilitate malinvestment. They are the true source of credit bubbles, and they're the reason why we're in the shape we're in today. While Marx may call this Capitalism, we libertarians call that cronyism or corporatism. It is not a level playing field, and there will be no such field if central banks and their financier cronies are allowed to continuously manipulate money supplies and interest rates.

      There will always be market economies. People that try to control them only create black (or grey) markets. Because this is so, it is only just that people should have the right to sound money in order to spend, or invest, the way they choose.

      The author mentioned F.A. Hayek, but did not give a good explanation of his ideas. If you're interested, check out the Ludwig von Mises institute (http://mises.org/about.aspx) to learn more about the Austrian School of economics.

      It's not perfect, but nothing is. All we can really hope is that the proverbial game isn't rigged.

    • 1 year ago
  • kennymotown
    • +3
      kennymotown  
    • ScottyT:

      Nicely said scottyt, I appreciate your comment. I think we probably will see a blend of ideas coming from this mess and the Banksters are truly the criminals in this whole mess.
      I am extremely pissed that only Bernie Madoff is the only one found guilty so far. Many people down the food chain are dying as a result of this run away un-checked capitalism. People are killing themselves at record numbers with drinking and drugging and the root of their own demise is not in the fact that they are mentally deficient but have been led to believe they are losers in the capitalism game. I think the commons can be something everyone can get behind and help bring us all together leaving nobody behind.

    • 1 year ago
  • ScottyT
  • kennymotown
    • +1
      kennymotown  
    • ScottyT:

      I love that Carlin bit, the man taught me a lot. You see I have always been a comedian, and only in my later years have I become very serious with a flair for comedy. I really like the part about the American dream because you have to be asleep to believe it. I like Ron Paul for saying what he says cause it makes sense but the belief's he has as not paying attention to the commons and the people that fall through the cracks is insane. Together we shall over come, and people only believing in themselves is more of the same crap that has gotten us into this mess in the first place. scottyt it is real easy for a man to become a pig but it takes a heart to help his fellow man.

    • 1 year ago
  • ScottyT
    • +3
      ScottyT  
    • kennymotown:

      I couldn't agree with you more with regards to the fact that any pig can make money and that it takes a person with real heart to help his fellow man. Moreover, I don't enjoy reading peoples' comments that people are homeless or hurting because they're lazy or incompetent. You're right in your assertion that that's just more of the same shit that has got us to the brink of economic ruin.

      Nothing breaks my heart more than to see people getting kicked out of their homes and losing their jobs as a result of this phony system that is passed off as a free market economy--it is not. It is a system that is so corrupt and tilted against the average person of average means. And it's going to require a genuine paradigm shift to get power back in the hands of everyday people.

      But I say, not out of avarice or contempt of others, that helping people is a voluntary act. People need the freedom to choose to help others. It is the only way a person can see the meaningfulness of his or her action. Such voluntariness brings people together. Coercion through the force of government only serves to divide people. Worse yet is the reality that any money the government takes from people, under the guise of helping them, gets used to fund illegal wars, build prisons, and bail out shit corporations. We're just left to fight over the crumbs they throw us.

      More importantly is the idea that my property, albeit not all that much, is mine. I earned it. I can do whatever I want with it so long as it is not to cause harm to others. Nobody has a higher claim to my property than me just as nobody has a higher claim to your property than you. To believe otherwise is to believe that others have a higher claim to your life and livelihood than you. What could be more corrupt, dare I say evil, than the belief that certain people have a higher right over other peoples' lives?

      A true revolution will come about when people realize that they have the power to end this cycle of debt enslavement and poverty--not through their government, but through their own volition. People have ideas. People have ambition and the ability to see their ideas achieved. That is where I place my faith--in people and not politicians. This true revolution will start when people stop giving power to their oppressors, for the politicians who continuously claim to be acting on our behalf will only bleed us for more and give back less and less.

    • 1 year ago
  • kennymotown
    • +2
      kennymotown  
    • ScottyT:

      One of my favorite things I've heard in the way to describe the current corrupt financial schemes is how the pack of financial thieves have set a system of rakes placed on ones lawn so you accidentally step on one and wham your financial well being is gone. That my friend is where government need be the referee and enforcer. Alan Greenspan in saying he could not foresee the human instinct of greed in this financial collapse is pure criminal. He is as corrupt as any of the banksters for not seeing what would develop.

    • 1 year ago
  • afloyd60
  • iamaman
  • iamaman
    • +4
      iamaman  
    • ScottyT:

      http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/funnyquotes/a/george-carlin.htm

      "Have you ever wondered why Republicans are so interested in encouraging people to volunteer in their communities? It’s because volunteers work for no pay. Republicans have been trying to get people to work for no pay for a long time."

      "Once you leave the womb, conservatives don't care about you until you reach military age. Then you’re just what they’re looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers."

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
  • iamaman
  • ScottyT
  • kennymotown
  • kennymotown
  • kennymotown
  • ScottyT
  • shanklinmike
    • 0
      shanklinmike  
    • kennymotown:

      It's all about forced collectivism and failed central planning by bureaucrats and politicians. These people don't care about individual rights and Freedom, they just want to control everything, they are brainwashed into believing that slavery is long-run prosperous.....and obviously don't understand the definition of capitalism.

      They don't even bring up central banking nor the Federal Reserve's low interest rates and the moral hazard and malinvestment it creates. Heck, just the existence of a central bank is an indicator that there is no free markets. Central banks are anti-free markets, anti-peace, and anti-capitalism.

      "Regulators asleep at the switch"?!?!?!? That's what he thinks? So he doesn't realize that regulators are a joke in the first place, they are employed by the government corporation. Remember, corporations do not exist in free market capitalism, only individuals that have businesses (HUGE DIFFERENCE that most economic enslavers don't realize).....of course, all of this gives him the idea that we need MORE regulators...except for GLOBAL tyrants to control us (as if that's worked out so well for poorer countries where it only spreads more fascism - big business in bed with government).

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

      This is referred to as crony corporatism, which has NOTHING to do with capitalism and everything to do with coercive slavery!

      "Too many people bought into Hayek"?!?!? Hayek wasn't even known about by many until after the Bush/Obama elections! How can he really think that Freedom played any part of this slavery?!? He is blind to the nature of economics....great video creator though....

      Lula also stated that it had to do with skin color (Lula is a racist)!

      Lula wants the same IMF that has backed up some of the most brutal 3rd world dictators to get MORE involved?!? He has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to economics nor International corruption!
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary...

      This guy doesn't care about your Freedom or prosperity. He feels that savings and capital accumulation is the problem, which is not true...
      He also puts capitalism on the Monopoly board?!? Monopoly is more socialistic than anything, it doesn't allow for voluntary transactions and is based around central planning with victimless crimes and fines imposed in the game. It is more statist and corporatist than capitalist.

      Capitalism doesn't "discipline labor", it leaves people alone. REAL Capitalism is live and let live, unlike statism which is pointing guns at peaceful people. This guy is clueless to the read world.

      Capitalists don't have control over labor, corporatism has control over labor, a HUGE DIFFERENCE. Statism is what controls things, capitalism allows for market pressures on the rich, capitalism doesn't allow taxloopholes nor does capitalism do anything to labor. Capitalism is simply the act of NOT monopolizing through a centralized coercive monopoly(government) and allowing the People to have control over their own lives and choices. Capitalism is anti-war on drugs, PRO-individual uniqueness and personal choice. Mainstream ideals of capitalism are watered down with statism, which means it has nothing to do with capitalism....

      Besides, nobody hates the unions because they're "greedy", we simply understand their inefficiencies and how they have hurt the worker in the long-run through propped up prices which lower demand in their own countries...thereby driving out investment

      Speaking of housing, he doesn't even mention how institutions like Freddie and Fannie were Government Sponsored Enterprises nor does he mention the fact that they were implicitly backed. Now explicitly backed since conservatorship in 2008, which means the taxpayers are placed directly on the line. We're already in debt over 94% of our annual GDP and he wants to mandate higher wage controls? Ludacris. He never mentions how the government and politicians on both sides of the aisle tried to push for loosing lending standards so they could boast about high homeownership rates
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DIaNHPTVJU

      He once again states we have capitalism, when no one in the world has true capitalism and peace. How can capitalism be the problem when nobody has capitalism?
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

      "Capitalism has a number of barriers and a number of limits."
      That is not true, capitalism's only limit is that you cannot harm another person and that no one has the right to harm you and your property. STATISM and government are the barrier and limit creators, Freedom's (capitalism's) only limit is the use of fraud, force, and theft. Capitalism rejects coercion and threats of violence, statism is war and infliction.

      How does investment get to the right place at the right time? It's called profit signals, where there are industries with high profits, competitiors will try to rush in to fill the demand, where profits are low in an industry, investors will invest elsewhere where profit signals show a strong need for supply to answer the consumer demand. People VOLUNTARILY invest money where they want to and that is how money gets invested, he believes in FORCED central planning where people with guns can come in your house and arrest you if you don't pay them for their reckless spending behavior. This guy is clueless because he believes that the bankers are bad, but then turns around and acts like more of what we've been getting from the central bankers (that he ignores) will make the situation better!

      Another thing, greed has been around since the beginning of time. It's not like an explosion of greed just occurred, it's an explosion of violence and coercion and loose fiscal and monetary policy from statist systems that are the roots of our problems. We now have a government that is 6 times the size of our government just 100 years ago. The socialists and statists and fascists just want more central banking powers. Look at Bush and Obama, they continually give the Fed central bank more and more power, with very little transparency. Obama is just proof that skin color doesn't matter.... all races have their evil people that will take advantage of the world.

      Statism rules the world, managed trade (not free trade), war on drugs,(not personal choice), WAR (just another government program...with a mix of corporatist contractors - has NOTHING to do with Freedom and Capitalism

      Statism created the wars, not Freedom/Capitalism. Statism creates the overflowing jails, not Freedom. Statism created our problems, not Freedom! Until people wake up to the slave system they live in, our world will only continue it's violent decline.

    • 1 year ago
  • kennymotown
    • +2
      kennymotown  
    • Now let me get this straight.......it takes Ron Paul saying Obama's not a socialist before you finally get it. I have been saying for over a year he wasn't and I have been giving you so much information about the corporatist movement and how we destroy it before it destroy's us. Well guess what......It's too late.

    • 1 year ago
  • AdMo
  • HatFella
    • +1
      HatFella  
    • Yeah whatever, this is no revelation. Obama is the best politician we have going
      right now. He cares about all of us not just some of us. Save all the double talk
      and B.S. Everything that is happening now in the brutal world of politics is centered around the upcoming day of minority dominance. Republicans feel they must do something to offset this. It is a scary future for them as we move into a population dominated by minorities. That's why we need "secure patroled borders", "state rights", and the KKK, oops, I'm sorry, I mean the tea party.

    • 1 year ago
  • shanklinmike
    • +2
      shanklinmike  
    • HatFella:

      Ron Paul only ran as a republican to get media attention because 3rd parties don't get attention.

      Obama doesn't care about you.... give me a break. He is a warmonger and debt enslaver. He arrests people for victimless crimes and is pro-war on drugs. Obama is your enemy, just like the neocon republicans....

    • 1 year ago
  • ScottyT
    • +1
      ScottyT  
    • HatFella:

      Shanklin's correct on this one HatFella. President Obama is no better than the corporate puppet that preceded him. You just feel better about having this one in office. You see, this nation is already dominated by minorities--you know, the big bankers, oil companies, defense corporations and the like.

      Forget about the politicians you endear. They're just there to keep you under the impression that you actually have a voice in all of this. News flash: you don't. They're just as bought and sold as the food you eat and the gasoline you put in your car. No, they're not the KKK (thank goodness), but they'll sell their integrity to the highest bidder as was evinced with your dear leader's signing of the Iran Sanctions Act into law and a spineless House of Representatives' appropriation of another $60B to be pissed away in Afghanistan.

      Show me some real change HatFella. At least a libertarian government would bring some.

      Many libertarians, like myself, believe in open borders and aren't going to waste our time, or your money, attempting to keep people from trying to pursue a better life regardless of where that life may be. People are free to come and go as they choose. They also have the right to spend their time and money as they choose as well.

      Libertarians certainly don't advocate violence against our neighbors--whether those neighbors be on our block or farther away. Nor do we advocate jailing people for the private decisions they make so long as they do not cause harm to others.

      Therefore, you might want to reserve your reactionary comments for people that profess the ideologies that you chastise.

    • 1 year ago
  • kurthsb27
  • iamaman
  • ScottyT
    • +2
      ScottyT  
    • iamaman:

      If that is so, then why does he have such reverence for our Constitution? I dare you to find some smear job insinuating that he wants to get rid of that.

    • 1 year ago
  • ocanada
    • 0
      ocanada  
    • ScottyT:

      Yeah, he likes the constitution! He just wants to get rid of the Americans With Disabilities Act, The Civil Rights Act, The FDA, FBI, USDA, FTC, SEC, EPA, Hell I think he even dislikes the coast gaurd.

    • 1 year ago
  • ScottyT
  • Psymoniac
    • -2
      Psymoniac  
    • ron paul for president....he cant be as bad as obama or even the bush's....and hes a mason, so he has inside information BUT i think he can also turn his mask down if he would be the president...BUT i don't think so...i trust him because he makes himself so many enemies like he really doesnt care about the elite and THATS what we need...with his anti-coroporatism he hits the nail on the head!!!

    • 1 year ago
  • UrbanMechanic
    • +1
      UrbanMechanic  
    • I wouldn't consider myself a big Ron Paul fan, though I appreciate his candor and willingness to say what everyone else knows and feels but is too beholden to say. In this case I certainly find myself in agreement. It's true, we have a political establishment that is wholly owned and operated in deference to corporate paymasters. Unfortunately this quite simply corrupts any notion of a viable democratic process let alone a free enterprise economy. We have neither.

    • 1 year ago
  • RaceBannon
    • +2
      RaceBannon  
    • I did my days in philosophy and to quote a philosopher in:
      "curse the man who picked up the dirt looked at his tribe and said this belongs to me!"

      So yeah I don't believe in individualism, but it is a cute myth.

    • 1 year ago
  • trut
  • ocanada
    • -4
      ocanada  
    • Government of for and by the people will not perish from this Earth because a bunch of gun nuts in tri cornered hats took to worshipping an Anarchist from Texas.

    • 1 year ago
  • kurthsb27
  • ocanada
  • Andrew_Douglas
  • Andrew_Douglas
  • jcward
    • +5
      jcward  
    • Libertarianism is a self-serving idea--I can not call it a philosophy. Ron Paul is, ergo, self-serving. Jubal demonstrates this by saying the social contract is a joke. The contract is that the electors must direct the elected. Poverty, indeed, is economic slavery; how is that ended without a social contract?

    • 1 year ago
  • jubal
  • thedirtman
  • jubal
  • thedirtman
  • jubal
    • +2
      jubal  
    • The social contract is a complete joke. Most people, especially those elected to represent us in government, are only looking after their own bottom lines. They could give a rats ass about the working class or the poor.

      Poverty is just another word for economic slavery.

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
  • rluz
    • +3
      rluz  
    • Hey guys--

      Obviously this is a heated issue, and we understand that everyone has an opinion. However, please remember that personal attacks on other members of the community are not acceptable.

      If this continues, we will be locking the thread to give everyone a chance to cool down.

      Best,
      Regina
      Online Community Team

    • 1 year ago
  • unimatrix0
    • +3
      unimatrix0  
    • Libertarianism is a juvenile philosophy. I honestly don't understand how any intelligent person can advocate for an arrogant nihilism that abandons the social contract while offering only a naive Utopian impossibility.

    • 1 year ago
  • shanklinmike
    • +3
      shanklinmike  
    • unimatrix0:

      social contract? A contract needs four tenants, offer, acceptance, capacity, and consideration.

      You've obviously offered, I know I at least have the capacity, the consideration is negligible, by the offer is rejected. That means there is no contract. Contracts are voluntary, not forced or imposed on people. The whole point is, nobody ones you, and when you give someone the right to own you, it only gets corrupted.

      A free society is not juvenile nor is it irrational. What's irrational is believing that threats of violence and force is long-run sustainable and prosperous.

      Peace unimatrix.

    • 1 year ago
  • ScottyT
    • +2
      ScottyT  
    • unimatrix0:

      Yep. I would consider libertarianism to be quite juvenile in comparison to the divine right of kings or the rule of mystics. Yet look how far humanity has advanced in the time since Locke's Second Treatise was written.

      The idea of popular sovereignty and self ownership is very new to the human experience, and people are continuously waking up to this notion. Hooray for freedom!

      Even Rousseau's "Social Contract" (written less than 250 years ago) unleashed the idea of freedom on a people living under absolutist rule: "Man was born free, and everywhere he is in chains." And I say that man shall remain in chains so long as there are those who somehow see themselves as having rights superior to those of their fellow human beings--those who use the force of government to enslave the people they purportedly serve.

      It wasn't nihilism that has affirmed man's basic rights to life, liberty and property. To the contrary, Unimatrix. It was the idea of liberty--the idea that mankind can live for themselves and not for the sake of others.

    • 1 year ago
  • ScottyT
  • iamaman
    • +3
      iamaman  
    • ScottyT:

      no man can truly live alone. the constitution preserves the right for every American to have a government that is "for the people and by the people!"

    • 1 year ago
  • ScottyT
    • +2
      ScottyT  
    • iamaman:

      That is definitely the basic tenet of a republican (note the lower case "r") form of government. Make no mistake, I am not an anarchist. I believe in government--albeit substantially limited.

      Nor is it my goal to truly live alone. I like to think that I get along quite well with my neighbors and community at large because I show them the respect that they deserve--I don't lie to them, I don't steal from them, and I try to help them out if they need a hand. Because this is so, I like to believe that they return my respect in kind.

      It's only when some stranger comes into my neighborhood promising me this or promising my neighbor that in exchange for our votes where things get a little shaky.

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
  • ScottyT
    • 0
      ScottyT  
    • iamaman:

      I will admit my ignorance of the totality of facts involving the whole Enron debacle. I can only tell you about my former employer--a haz-mat trucker that hauled oil to refineries. His company was bought by Enron. I think he's about 65 now, and doesn't have a retirement account thanks to that whole swindle.

      Enron misrepresented their financial condition to buy out smaller companies. Enron, in turn, raided those smaller corporations pension funds and savings to represent as future capital in buying out even more corporations. In turn, they did offer shares of stock as an alternative to pension accounts. Moreover, the boards of the corporations that Enron bought out probably got some pretty fat paychecks out of the deal too. (I do not know if any of those directors were sued for breach of fiduciary duty or not--I'm not a securities attorney anyway)

      Needless to say, the people who were bought out by Enron, like my former employer, thought it was a good deal at the time and bought in. They, just like their bosses, got suckered in by the lure of bigger money.

      Also understand, that Enron was able to operate with impunity with the full blessings of both federal and state government officials. I need not mention the GWB connections, do I?

      Their little ponzi scheme imploded though, and it left a huge number of employees holding worthless stock that was promised to serve as their retirement accounts.

      Because of this misrepresentation, I believe the contracts between Enron and the companies they purchased should have been declared void. (If I'm not mistaken, that was the result in a number of cases).

      However, when it was all said and done, Enron's stock was worthless--and the Wall Street traders that pumped and dumped their stock got away with millions. That's how Wall Street works, and it would serve you well to consider such situations if you hold publicly traded stock.

      Sadly, people like Kenneth Lay did not live long enough to see their assets seized and redistributed.

    • 1 year ago
  • jubal
  • ocanada
    • +1
      ocanada  
    • ScottyT:

      There has to be a balance. To say no man holds rights above another sounds like equal protection under the law not total avoidance of law. The idea that the only currency in a Democratic Republica is the consent of the governed is too a worthy thought.

    • 1 year ago
  • cztheday
    • +1
      cztheday  
    • unimatrix0:

      Uni, while I believe that the concept of the "social contract" is somewhat antiquated (after all, Hobbes initially promulgated the concept to justify the power of absolute monarchies -- while later philosophers attempted to bootstrap the concept to cover representational democracies, the fit was uneasy at best...), I concur that libertarianism as a philosophy and as a political movement tends to be both naive and devoid of compassion.

      While the leading "thinkers" in the movement have attempted to apply their philosophy to a broad range of issues, their thinking tends to be an inch deep (i.e., two dimensional), the greatest weakness being a lack of appreciation for the full consequences of their proposals.

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
  • TheEmpireGuy
    • +1
      TheEmpireGuy  
    • I honestly don't understand why some people are so hostile towards liberty, free-markets, and sound money. It's as if they've never read about that sort of stuff....oh wait...

    • 1 year ago
  • flyingkick
    • +6
      flyingkick  
    • TheEmpireGuy:

      Because Milton Friedman was wrong.
      Greed is not a good thing for society.

      Industry requires regulation.
      Otherwise, you would see no workers' rights, monopolies, more environmental disasters, etc.

      Corporations are too powerful now for the invisible hand to have any effect. That's why the government has to step in and regulate it.

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
    • +3
      iamaman  
    • Image
    • TheEmpireGuy:

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/mar/03/chile-earthquake

      Milton Friedman did not save Chile

      To say the late economist deserves credit for the country's building codes shows a lack of knowledge of pre-coup Chile


      * Naomi Klein
      *
      o Naomi Klein
      o guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 3 March 2010 22.15 GMT
      o Article history

      Ever since deregulation caused a worldwide economic meltdown in September '08 and everyone became a Keynesian again, it hasn't been easy to be a fanatical follower of the late economist Milton Friedman. So widely discredited is his brand of free-market fundamentalism that his admirers have become increasingly desperate to claim ideological victories, however far fetched.

      A particularly distasteful case in point. Just two days after Chile was struck by a devastating earthquake, Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens informed his readers that Milton Friedman's "spirit was surely hovering protectively over Chile" because, "thanks largely to him, the country has endured a tragedy that elsewhere would have been an apocalypse … It's not by chance that Chileans were living in houses of brick – and Haitians in houses of straw –when the wolf arrived to try to blow them down."

      According to Stephens, the radical free-market policies prescribed to Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet by Milton Friedman and his infamous "Chicago Boys" are the reason Chile is a prosperous nation with "some of the world's strictest building codes."

      There is one rather large problem with this theory: Chile's modern seismic building code, drafted to resist earthquakes, was adopted in 1972. That year is enormously significant because it was one year before Pinochet seized power in a bloody US-backed coup. That means that if one person deserves credit for the law, it is not Friedman, or Pinochet, but Salvador Allende, Chile's democratically elected socialist president. (In truth many Chileans deserve credit, since the laws were a response to a history of quakes, and the first law was adopted in the 1930s).

    • 1 year ago
  • Buddha2112
    • -2
      Buddha2112  
    • TheEmpireGuy:

      It's scary because it means people have to WORK and actually do something for themselves, other than let the gov't take care of them. People can form their own power if they just work together... Oh lordy, i've said a great atrocity, i must be racist or something...

    • 1 year ago
  • Buddha2112
    • -2
      Buddha2112  
    • iamaman:

      Ok, so Chileans can claim credit... Good for them, does that really refute any of Ron Pauls arguments? Or anything he's said in this video? Or... Is this more non-sense off topic red-herring bullshit that gives you a hard-on.

      I think i see a tent.

    • 1 year ago
  • shanklinmike
1 - 100 of 300
more from Community:

top videos