T Nation

Ron Paul Revelution Against Draft

http://www.therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=2255

Ron Paul appears to a sharp guy and I do agree with most of what he says but he just comes off as a kook when he speaks. He should be in the back office of the movement, not out front.

My only exposure to this guy was the debates. I was waiting for him to launch into how the moon landings were faked and about the trilateral commission. Probably not fair but …

Is he a pure libertarian or does he have a bunch of weird policy attachments on top? I stopped listening when he came out so hard against the war on terror …

[quote]flyboy51v wrote:
My only exposure to this guy was the debates. I was waiting for him to launch into how the moon landings were faked and about the trilateral commission. Probably not fair but …

Is he a pure libertarian or does he have a bunch of weird policy attachments on top? I stopped listening when he came out so hard against the war on terror …[/quote]

He is a strict constitutionalist which makes him very libertarian.

He’s done very well for himself on a Republican ticket, but since he is a strong advocate for cutting huge swaths out of the current “budget” and reducing taxes as well as putting an end to most foriegn intervention, he doesn’t actually qualify as a Republican in the modern sense. Which is the main reason the Party let him get laughed out of the race.

He has regrouped and tried another tactic though, starting small, attempting to get people to vote in constitutionalists in their local and state governments, calling it the “Campaign for Liberty”:

[quote]dhickey wrote:
Ron Paul appears to a sharp guy and I do agree with most of what he says but he just comes off as a kook when he speaks. He should be in the back office of the movement, not out front.[/quote]

Maybe I am just used to it because I have spent most of my time in the last decade around kooky professor types. I think Ron Paul as president would have been the best education the American people could have had about freedom and liberty – and the only valid role of government.

As far as conscription goes – it’s slavery. The military in general is also semi-slavery – albeit voluntary slavery. What other job exists that one cannot legally and voluntarily walk away from when one has had enough of dumb bosses and even dumber coworkers?

[quote]flyboy51v wrote:
My only exposure to this guy was the debates. I was waiting for him to launch into how the moon landings were faked and about the trilateral commission. Probably not fair but …

Is he a pure libertarian or does he have a bunch of weird policy attachments on top? I stopped listening when he came out so hard against the war on terror …[/quote]

Right, because we are going to win a “war on terror” and defeat evil forever. Just like we won the war on drugs, and the war on poverty, and …

[quote]dhickey wrote:
Ron Paul appears to a sharp guy and I do agree with most of what he says but he just comes off as a kook when he speaks. He should be in the back office of the movement, not out front.[/quote]

Yeah, kinda like the Founding Fathers!

[quote]flyboy51v wrote:
My only exposure to this guy was the debates. I was waiting for him to launch into how the moon landings were faked and about the trilateral commission. Probably not fair but …

Is he a pure libertarian or does he have a bunch of weird policy attachments on top? I stopped listening when he came out so hard against the war on terror …[/quote]

Yeah those debates with oppontents who only offered up empty rederick instead of actually answering the questions he posed. So crazy?!

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Ron Paul appears to a sharp guy and I do agree with most of what he says but he just comes off as a kook when he speaks. He should be in the back office of the movement, not out front.

Yeah, kinda like the Founding Fathers![/quote]

It’s not what he says. It the delivery.

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
flyboy51v wrote:
My only exposure to this guy was the debates. I was waiting for him to launch into how the moon landings were faked and about the trilateral commission. Probably not fair but …

Is he a pure libertarian or does he have a bunch of weird policy attachments on top? I stopped listening when he came out so hard against the war on terror …

Yeah those debates with oppontents who only offered up empty rederick instead of actually answering the questions he posed. So crazy?![/quote]

well if he’s a libertarian I bet I agree with 90% of his thinking. Wasn’t he aggressively advocating getting out of Iraq? And didn’t I hear him advocating a “chickens coming home to roost” view on 9/11?

If so … that’s when I checked out …

[quote]dhickey wrote:
Zeppelin795 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Ron Paul appears to a sharp guy and I do agree with most of what he says but he just comes off as a kook when he speaks. He should be in the back office of the movement, not out front.

Yeah, kinda like the Founding Fathers!

It’s not what he says. It the delivery.[/quote]

Yes, unfortunately many people only care about the delivery and not about the content of said delivery. Maybe if he could convey it like GWB it would be better…

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
flyboy51v wrote:
My only exposure to this guy was the debates. I was waiting for him to launch into how the moon landings were faked and about the trilateral commission. Probably not fair but …

Is he a pure libertarian or does he have a bunch of weird policy attachments on top? I stopped listening when he came out so hard against the war on terror …

Right, because we are going to win a “war on terror” and defeat evil forever. Just like we won the war on drugs, and the war on poverty, and …[/quote]

All those wars are interconnected. Watch ‘American Drug Wars’ It is probably one of the best documentaries I have seen and it addresses all the “wars” you mentioned. It is free on youtube

[quote]flyboy51v wrote:
Wasn’t he aggressively advocating getting out of Iraq? And didn’t I hear him advocating a “chickens coming home to roost” view on 9/11?
[/quote]

If by “chickens coming home to roost” you mean defending the borders and not policing the globe, you are correct.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Zeppelin795 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Ron Paul appears to a sharp guy and I do agree with most of what he says but he just comes off as a kook when he speaks. He should be in the back office of the movement, not out front.

Yeah, kinda like the Founding Fathers!

It’s not what he says. It the delivery.

Yes, unfortunately many people only care about the delivery and not about the content of said delivery. Maybe if he could convey it like GWB it would be better…[/quote]

GWB has terrible delivery as well. Much like GWB’s ever present smirk, there is something about RP that makes him seem like a nervous little lunatic. Not the best for winning votes.

[quote]dhickey wrote:

GWB has terrible delivery as well. Much like GWB’s ever present smirk, there is something about RP that makes him seem like a nervous little lunatic. Not the best for winning votes.[/quote]

Its so true that people are swayed by such stupid shit and not real topics.

As sickening as it is…

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Zeppelin795 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Ron Paul appears to a sharp guy and I do agree with most of what he says but he just comes off as a kook when he speaks. He should be in the back office of the movement, not out front.

Yeah, kinda like the Founding Fathers!

It’s not what he says. It the delivery.

Yes, unfortunately many people only care about the delivery and not about the content of said delivery. Maybe if he could convey it like GWB it would be better… [/quote]

Ouch!

I think as much as anything, Paul was a victim of circumstances. He was seen as “the Anti-War Republican” even though his policies diverge greatly from the Party line.

Drastically reducing the FedGov budget?
Stabilizing the value of the $USD? Defending the country without destroying someone else’s?
Limiting the Government’s powers to just those allowed by the Constitution? Unfortunately in today’s climate, these are all portrayed as “radical” ideals, even though at some point in the country’s history they were the norm, and at least a few voters (very few, apparently) still believe they can work.

[quote]flyboy51v wrote:
Zeppelin795 wrote:
flyboy51v wrote:
My only exposure to this guy was the debates. I was waiting for him to launch into how the moon landings were faked and about the trilateral commission. Probably not fair but …

Is he a pure libertarian or does he have a bunch of weird policy attachments on top? I stopped listening when he came out so hard against the war on terror …

Yeah those debates with oppontents who only offered up empty rederick instead of actually answering the questions he posed. So crazy?!

well if he’s a libertarian I bet I agree with 90% of his thinking. Wasn’t he aggressively advocating getting out of Iraq? And didn’t I hear him advocating a “chickens coming home to roost” view on 9/11?

If so … that’s when I checked out …[/quote]

Yes he wants out of Iraq and yes he, like many others including factions in the CIA and most of the world believe 9/11 was blowback not the lame excuse given by conservative and liberal pundits such as: they hate us for our freedoms!

[quote]dhickey wrote:
Zeppelin795 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Ron Paul appears to a sharp guy and I do agree with most of what he says but he just comes off as a kook when he speaks. He should be in the back office of the movement, not out front.

Yeah, kinda like the Founding Fathers!

It’s not what he says. It the delivery.[/quote]

Maybe he doesn’t have great force in his delivery but in the end it is the substance and ideas that ultimately count. I mean McCain sounds like he is reading off of 3x5 cue cards and W., c’mon even if you like him no president has mangled the english language quite like George.