Results 1 to 10 of 76
#1 Ron Paul (finally) calls it quits
06-14-2008, 09:29 PM
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 6, 2008; A08
As the Democratic presidential candidates held pre-primary rallies yesterday in Indiana and North Carolina, and presumptive Republican nominee John McCain spoke to the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce, another major-party presidential candidate continued his own quest for nomination, headlining a "Freedom Rally" on a Fort Wayne, Ind., university campus.
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) told supporters in early March, through a Web video, that he knew he was no longer in the running for the presidency, and aides said his campaign would be "winding down." But it turns out Paul never stopped running for president.
My first and last post on CU 2.0
06-14-2008, 09:36 PM
- Join Date
- May 2008
gatorGuest06-14-2008, 11:21 PM
When we look at a never ending war to make sure the Israelis live well, unsecured borders, a ten trillion dollar debt, a three trillion dollar a year Federal budget and a 56 trillion dollar future entitlement debt then I don't think the NeoCons have much room to call anybody a dumbass.
Americans are the dumbasses for electing Liberals and NeoCons to position of power.
GoldwaterGuest06-14-2008, 11:46 PM
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Items for Sale
SonnabendGuest06-15-2008, 12:59 AM
06-15-2008, 04:52 AMOriginally Posted by freedumbBe Not Afraid.
SonnabendGuest06-15-2008, 05:59 AM
JB..careful,we dont want him getting banned for disloyalty
JohnGuest06-15-2008, 07:45 AM
See you freedumb, and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Sometimes, I really, really wonder how CU's original members got their license to practice conservatism in the first place. Many of the members who were here when I first joined hadn't the slightest clue what it meant to be a conservative, and freedumb is no exception...especially considering a post such as this.
You are all familiar with the definition of collectivism I hope. Well, conservatives held in reverence among the original regulars of this board are practicing, promoting, and outright voting for collectivism in every way that doesn't put them voting along with Pelosi. However, since their brand of collectivism is different from Pelosi's brand of collectivism, it's just peachy keen according to members like freedumb.
When a man makes a decision, such as "I'll take care of my family, make sure they have what they need, and we'll make our own way", conservatism doesn't protect this man. Conservatism doesn't ensure that this man and his family aren't killed by marauding islamic terrorists during the night. Conservatism ensures that the next man who wishes to make the same decision and statement is still allowed to!.
Collectivism, weather it's from the left or the right, views people, families, and communities the same way adolescent consumers view batteries. According to the collectivists people are a resource owned by the state to be used up at the state's disposal. This is quite obvious to CU members when one mentions Hillbama care, yet the reaction of CU members is quite different when people are used up by the state in favor of a war on terror, drugs or poverty. Perhaps if Hillbama declares a war on inadequate healthcare then the members of CU will be passified.
I'm fairly certain none of you will like this, but if conservatism is supposed to be the opposite of collectivism, then I have to bring to the attention of 'conservative' CU members the areas in which their leaders are being collectivist.
Defense: Oh sure, only liberals and leftists want to cut defense, however the "conservative" view of national security, especially under Bush, has grown out of control. The United States spends upwards of 600 Billion a year on 'defense'! Our closest competitor, the Chinese spend less than 60 Billion. We, U.S. citizens and our families, finance more than half the entire world's defensive operations. We bought a missile defense system to place between socialist Europe and their socialist enemies the Russians. We research and develop arms and weapons to be used by any country who wants to buy into it, ala the joint strike fighter. The people of the United States cough up 600 billion a year, or the IRS forces it out of us, just so that we have the privilege of continuing to defend the world from all their bogey men. There is nothing conservative and everything collectivist about this. To finance the elaborate defense of other entire nations, Americans are being used as if they were a battery. They are expected to be used up and all wealth surrendered to the state. That is the opposite of 'conservative', that is socialist collectivism. Ron Paul brought up this discussion, and instead of thinking about how leftist the current military industrial complex acted, pride and pigheadedness forestalled any idea of admitting inadequacy.
Liberty: Personal liberty should be a big damn deal to everyone who visits this board. Apparently the definition of personal liberty on this board is something different than anywhere else. According to the original members of this board, personal liberty extends only to private people, not to private persons or groups that own companies. After all, the very members of this board thought it absurd that a company should be allowed to train, arm and utilize it's own staff to secure the assets and subsequent liability that would belong to that company. Thus we have the greatly expanded, collectivist TSA, ordering paying customers to strip to their boxers and agree to a body cavity search. Never mind that a conservative approach would be to make each airline company responsible for it's passengers and it's assets, and allow them every authority to preserve their name and reputation. Apparently the collective and socialist approach of a government protection scheme suited the members of this board better.
I have a ton more examples of this board behaving as if they believe in collectivist doctrine up my sleeve. However, that has to end if any sort of conservative philosophy is to remain in power. Compare the presidencies of Bush W. Jr. to Clinton and you will see that the left is much, much better in enacting collectivist doctrine than we are. Bush's collectivism has left us with a devastated economy, a military deployed who's only hope of funding is a further damaged economy, and an entire religious crusade arrayed against us. The right is no good at collectivism! So let's drop the 'compassionate conservative' BS, and go back to real 'America first', conservatism. Clinton proved he can play socialist better than any Republican can play socialist, and now we are trying to play some sort of "I'm more socialist than you" catch up game!
Look back to the presidencies of Bush Sr. and Regan, and you'll see how real, honest to goodness, political (not social) conservatism effects our nation, our economy, and most importantly the governed.
If nothing else, Ron Paul introduced an entire generation of chat room, MySpace, FaceBook slackers to the principles of conservative freedom in a way that stuck. The aging greyness of the republican party should be thankful for that. Freedom loving youth is the only thing that is going to save this party from the youthful charm of the Obama-like, and Ron Paul brought naive freedom loving youth in spades.....what other nominee wantabee can say that this primary season. Paul brought new blood and youth to the table. It's going to be up to the remaining blue haird wrinkled conservative party to keep them for survival. I don't think these 20 or 30 somethings are going to hang around if the right wing brand of socialism continues as normalcy. BTW, If you don't want, or like the Paulite youth who are currently infusing the party through local, congressional and even gubernatorial elections...well, your stuck with it. It's either the Paullite youth or no youth at all to speak of at this point. Get used to it. The party is going to change and it's going to take a big step to the right. Hell, even I myself am a committeeman now.
Last edited by John; 06-15-2008 at 08:24 AM.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|