PDA

View Full Version : The Libertarian Case for Palin




tron paul
07-15-2009, 03:25 AM
Like it or not, Palin is more powerful than a fleet of 10,000 Ron Paul Blimps.

She is a superstar of megawatt intensity. Her supporters range from debate team type Paulistas and family-oriented former Huck's Army personnel, to (normally/formerly apolitical) others admire that her for being both an icon of fashion and female power.

Lover or hater, almost everyone has an opinion and propagates the intense buzz about Palin. For example:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/the_libertarian_case_for_palin.html

September 02, 2008
The Libertarian Case for Palin
By David Harsanyi

The potential political consequences of Sarah Palin have been chewed over from every imaginable angle.

Though there is plenty to ponder, one thing is certain: libertarian-inclined voters should be encouraged. No, I'm not suggesting that your little Molly will be bringing home "The Road to Serfdom" from her (distinctly non-public) elementary school. But in contrast to any national candidate in recent memory, Palin is the one that exudes the economic and cultural sensibilities of a geniune Western-style libertarian.

Now, Palin's lack of experience has been framed as an impenetrable negative. One wire story helpfully noted that Palin had never ever appeared on "Meet the Press." Shocking! But as Barack Obama often notes, it's not about experience, it's about judgment. And Palin's penchant for reform-minded conservatism is certainly at odds with the racket Washington Republicans have offered up the past 8 years.

Palin, for example, vetoed 300 pork projects in Alaska in her first year in office. She made a habit of knocking out big-government Republicans in her brief political career. For this, the 44-year-old mother of five enjoys a sterling approval rating in a state with arguably the nation's most libertarian-minded populace.

When it comes to healthcare, Palin says she wants to "allow free-market competition and reduce onerous government regulation." These days, any mention of the "free market" that's not framed as a crass pejorative is a sign of progress.

Culturally, there is little for the Heartland to dislike. By now, you've probably seen picture or two of Palin sporting a rifle. Apparently, she's left carcasses strewn across the Alaskan wilderness. In some places -- areas where the nation is growing -- owning a gun is not yet a sin. And unlike Obama, Palin seems to believe that the Second Amendment means the exact same thing in rural Alaska as it does in the streets of Chicago.

Yes, Palin is without argument a staunch social conservative. She is fervently opposed to abortion - even in cases of rape and incest, which will raise eyebrows, but is certainly more philosophically consistent than the namby pambyism of your average politician. The choice issue, after all, is complicated, even for many libertarians. And, as I was recently reminded, Ron Paul, the Libertarian champion of the 21st century, also opposes abortion.

Even when advocating for "moral" issues, Palin's approach is a soft sell. Palin does not support gay marriage (neither does Obama, it should be noted). Yet, in 2006, Palin's first veto as Governor was a bill that sought to block state employee benefits and health insurance for same-sex couples.

We cannot bore into Palin's soul to see her true feelings about gay couples, but, at the time, she noted that signing "this bill would be in direct violation of my oath of office" because it was unconstitutional. For most libertarians, the thought of politician following any constitution, rather than their own predilections, morality or the "common good," is a nice change of pace.

On the counterproductive War on Drugs, Palin is no warrior. Her Republican opponent in 2006 primary, incumbent Republican governor Frank Murkowski, made recriminalizing the possession of small amounts of pot a priority. Palin, though she does not support legalization, believes enforcement should not be a high priority.

"I can't claim a Bill Clinton and say that I never inhaled," Palin once said. This sort of honesty is a welcome change from the standard hand-wringing about marijuana's supposed disastrous consequences.

On education, Palin supports school-choice programs. There have already been smears that she backed "creationist" teaching in "public" schools, when in fact, Palin's comment regarding intelligent design should hold some appeal to libertarians. Even if you find the idea inane, in essence, Palin pushed the idea that parents, rather than the state, should decide what children are learning.

When asked about this commotion, Palin said, "I won't have religion as a litmus test, or anybody's personal opinion on evolution or creationism." If lockstep left-wing union-run school boards in urban districts would follow this sound advice on ideological litmus tests, our educational system would be a lot more productive.

Then there is a question of authenticity. And it matters. Those who will do anything for power, will say anything and support any position that is convenient. From John McCain to Joe Biden to Obama, one gets the sense that political office is their life's work. All of them have made attempts to create the perception that, hey, they're ordinary Americans just like you. Palin won't have to work at genuineness. With Palin, you get the impression she can take politics or leave it. Her life certainly hasn't been saturated with policy, favor trading and back scratching.

Of course, Washington has a mysterious power to turn perfectly reasonable, wholesome, well-meaning human beings into equivocating crooked gasbags. But, from the little we know about Palin, such a transformation doesn't seem likely. And for libertarians - in the broadest sense of the small "l" word -- she's the best candidate they can expect.
Reach columnist David Harsanyi at dharsanyi@denverpost.com.

Steeleye
07-15-2009, 03:32 AM
In before "Palin's a stupid bimbo harpy slut while Dennis Kucinich and Brnie Sanders are shining examples of honesty and conviction" comments.

Kludge
07-15-2009, 03:33 AM
Like it or not, Palin is more powerful than a fleet of 10,000 Ron Paul Blimps.

You apparently aren't aware of the new war-equipped models we'll be using in 2012.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/secretary_part_4.png

(so perfect!!!)

Steeleye
07-15-2009, 03:36 AM
Who the hell is Cory?

Kludge
07-15-2009, 03:37 AM
Who the hell is Cory?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Cory+Doctorow

coyote_sprit
07-15-2009, 03:50 AM
Yeah no...

nayjevin
07-15-2009, 03:50 AM
The Libertarian Case for Palin

bwahahahhaha

'The Conservative Case for Karl Marx' lol

tron paul
07-15-2009, 04:57 AM
bwahahahhaha

'The Conservative Case for Karl Marx' lol

You must have missed the parts I tried to get you to notice, by boldfacing them. Let's try again. Maybe another absurd non sequitur brainfart will emit, or perhaps education will ensue. Let's see:

Palin is the one that exudes the economic and cultural sensibilities of a geniune Western-style libertarian. (unlike Marx)

Palin seems to believe that the Second Amendment means the exact same thing in rural Alaska as it does in the streets of Chicago. (unlike Marx)

Palin pushed the idea that parents, rather than the state, should decide what children are learning. (unlike Marx)

for libertarians - in the broadest sense of the small "l" word -- she's the best candidate they can expect. (unlike Marx)

Kludge
07-15-2009, 05:06 AM
*snip*

However, you failed to notice that he changed "libertarian" to "conservative".

If you're going to try and give a decent argument, you should be comparing Palin to Hitler or Mussolini, instead of Marx.

escapinggreatly
07-15-2009, 05:06 AM
Hold on, let me properly express my thoughts:

http://cowlander.neobahumut.com/LOL%20PICTURES/LMAO.jpg

tron paul
07-15-2009, 05:07 AM
You apparently aren't aware of the new war-equipped models we'll be using in 2012.

(so perfect!!!)

Aren't aware???

I was there! (At least in the last half.)

www.TronPaul.com


But seriously, thanks for googling that for us. I'd always thought Cory was the pilot chick.

It's even funnier now that I know about Doctorow, scourge of the blogosphere.:p

nayjevin
07-15-2009, 06:50 AM
Let's see:

Palin is the one that exudes the economic and cultural sensibilities of a geniune Western-style libertarian.

'Palin is the one'

... implies a closed set of predefined choices

'that exudes'

... is a purposefully indefinable vaguety

'the economic and cultural sensibilities'

... would imply Palin did not leave her state budget in worse shape than she found it and does not believe in war, but she did, and she does.

'genuine Western-style libertarian'

... this undefinable tries to use Ronnie Reagan words to fool people into buying the bullshit premise.

dantheman
07-15-2009, 07:08 AM
I can't really buy into this argument. No one takes her seriously, except for very misinformed "conservatives", like neocons. But if we embraced this woman, it would only make the media and everyone else further dismiss us. If the republicans get behind her for 2012, the Democrats will win the White House, affirming Barack Obama's eight year term. It's almost like someone's already wrote the script for us.

Let's put our efforts where they matter in our local States: like with Rand Paul, Peter Schiff, and B.J. Lawson. Hopefully Gary Johnson will do something. Who knows.

acptulsa
07-15-2009, 07:19 AM
"...in contrast to any national candidate in recent memory, Palin is the one that exudes the economic and cultural sensibilities of a geniune Western-style libertarian."

That's strange. Has this author never even heard of Ron Paul?


And, as I was recently reminded, Ron Paul, the Libertarian champion of the 21st century, also opposes abortion.

Oh. Just another 'Ron Paul is used goods, give up' propagandist. Well.

Guess what? Sarah Palin is 'used goods' too--and did not come out of the last election smelling better than he did.

Munier1
07-15-2009, 07:27 AM
That part in Kludge's comic about "dropping the gold" is the funniest thing I've heard in a month. That has to be true even if we are using naval vessels as well. Never drop the gold! We shall sink before we resort to fiat!

disorderlyvision
07-15-2009, 07:51 AM
I threw up in my mouth a little when I read Palin and Libertarian in the same sentence:eek:

Todd
07-15-2009, 08:07 AM
I threw up in my mouth a little when I read Palin and Libertarian in the same sentence:eek:

Yes...and
There's not even a "conservative" case to make for Palin.

steph3n
07-15-2009, 08:16 AM
Alaska is socialist, not libertarian.

Peace&Freedom
07-15-2009, 08:32 AM
Our plan A should of course be RON PAUL or near exact protege in 2012, and I have said loads of things very critical of Palin. But even LRC has said kind words about Palin in recent columns and blog comments. Compared to the all-war all the time GOP rivals, her support for the Iraq war was and is mild. And she should frankly wear her support for parents insuring that their kids get the evidence on both sides of the origins question like a badge of honor.

How can the people here who held up that Bilderberg womanizing buffoon Warner hold any authority to be knocking Palin around so heavily?

P.S.--I meant Sanford, not Warner (got establishment GOPers mixed up).

acptulsa
07-15-2009, 08:36 AM
How can the people here who held up that Bilderberg womanizing buffoon Warner hold any authority to be knocking Palin around so heavily?

Who's Warner? You mean Sanford?

I never held up Sanford. Some did, some didn't. I didn't keep that close track of who's who, myself...

ClayTrainor
07-15-2009, 08:41 AM
If i wasted my time supporting someone like Palin, i wouldn't respect myself very much.

Andrew-Austin
07-15-2009, 08:47 AM
And Palin's penchant for reform-minded conservatism is certainly at odds with the racket Washington Republicans have offered up the past 8 years.

Weak rhetoric.




On the counterproductive War on Drugs, Palin is no warrior. Her Republican opponent in 2006 primary, incumbent Republican governor Frank Murkowski, made recriminalizing the possession of small amounts of pot a priority. Palin, though she does not support legalization, believes enforcement should not be a high priority.

Weak. So what. A lot of states under a tight budget seem to be lightening up on the enforcement of drug laws to save money.

Legalization or stfu and don't masquerade as a libertarian. I'm not going to pretend to be appeased by "oh well we won't put the handcuffs on too tight, and might shave a few weeks off of your incarceration."


On education, Palin supports school-choice programs. There have already been smears that she backed "creationist" teaching in "public" schools, when in fact, Palin's comment regarding intelligent design should hold some appeal to libertarians. Even if you find the idea inane, in essence, Palin pushed the idea that parents, rather than the state, should decide what children are learning.

On this one tiny issue, probably just for political reasons? Schools can use a little more freedom than that.


Of course, Washington has a mysterious power to turn perfectly reasonable, wholesome, well-meaning human beings into equivocating crooked gasbags. But, from the little we know about Palin, such a transformation doesn't seem likely.

I disagree.

RevolutionSD
07-15-2009, 09:00 AM
Like it or not, Palin is more powerful than a fleet of 10,000 Ron Paul Blimps.

She is a superstar of megawatt intensity. Her supporters range from debate team type Paulistas and family-oriented former Huck's Army personnel, to (normally/formerly apolitical) others admire that her for being both an icon of fashion and female power.

Lover or hater, almost everyone has an opinion and propagates the intense buzz about Palin. For example:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/the_libertarian_case_for_palin.html

September 02, 2008
The Libertarian Case for Palin
By David Harsanyi

The potential political consequences of Sarah Palin have been chewed over from every imaginable angle.

Though there is plenty to ponder, one thing is certain: libertarian-inclined voters should be encouraged. No, I'm not suggesting that your little Molly will be bringing home "The Road to Serfdom" from her (distinctly non-public) elementary school. But in contrast to any national candidate in recent memory, Palin is the one that exudes the economic and cultural sensibilities of a geniune Western-style libertarian.

Now, Palin's lack of experience has been framed as an impenetrable negative. One wire story helpfully noted that Palin had never ever appeared on "Meet the Press." Shocking! But as Barack Obama often notes, it's not about experience, it's about judgment. And Palin's penchant for reform-minded conservatism is certainly at odds with the racket Washington Republicans have offered up the past 8 years.

Palin, for example, vetoed 300 pork projects in Alaska in her first year in office. She made a habit of knocking out big-government Republicans in her brief political career. For this, the 44-year-old mother of five enjoys a sterling approval rating in a state with arguably the nation's most libertarian-minded populace.

When it comes to healthcare, Palin says she wants to "allow free-market competition and reduce onerous government regulation." These days, any mention of the "free market" that's not framed as a crass pejorative is a sign of progress.

Culturally, there is little for the Heartland to dislike. By now, you've probably seen picture or two of Palin sporting a rifle. Apparently, she's left carcasses strewn across the Alaskan wilderness. In some places -- areas where the nation is growing -- owning a gun is not yet a sin. And unlike Obama, Palin seems to believe that the Second Amendment means the exact same thing in rural Alaska as it does in the streets of Chicago.

Yes, Palin is without argument a staunch social conservative. She is fervently opposed to abortion - even in cases of rape and incest, which will raise eyebrows, but is certainly more philosophically consistent than the namby pambyism of your average politician. The choice issue, after all, is complicated, even for many libertarians. And, as I was recently reminded, Ron Paul, the Libertarian champion of the 21st century, also opposes abortion.

Even when advocating for "moral" issues, Palin's approach is a soft sell. Palin does not support gay marriage (neither does Obama, it should be noted). Yet, in 2006, Palin's first veto as Governor was a bill that sought to block state employee benefits and health insurance for same-sex couples.

We cannot bore into Palin's soul to see her true feelings about gay couples, but, at the time, she noted that signing "this bill would be in direct violation of my oath of office" because it was unconstitutional. For most libertarians, the thought of politician following any constitution, rather than their own predilections, morality or the "common good," is a nice change of pace.

On the counterproductive War on Drugs, Palin is no warrior. Her Republican opponent in 2006 primary, incumbent Republican governor Frank Murkowski, made recriminalizing the possession of small amounts of pot a priority. Palin, though she does not support legalization, believes enforcement should not be a high priority.

"I can't claim a Bill Clinton and say that I never inhaled," Palin once said. This sort of honesty is a welcome change from the standard hand-wringing about marijuana's supposed disastrous consequences.

On education, Palin supports school-choice programs. There have already been smears that she backed "creationist" teaching in "public" schools, when in fact, Palin's comment regarding intelligent design should hold some appeal to libertarians. Even if you find the idea inane, in essence, Palin pushed the idea that parents, rather than the state, should decide what children are learning.

When asked about this commotion, Palin said, "I won't have religion as a litmus test, or anybody's personal opinion on evolution or creationism." If lockstep left-wing union-run school boards in urban districts would follow this sound advice on ideological litmus tests, our educational system would be a lot more productive.

Then there is a question of authenticity. And it matters. Those who will do anything for power, will say anything and support any position that is convenient. From John McCain to Joe Biden to Obama, one gets the sense that political office is their life's work. All of them have made attempts to create the perception that, hey, they're ordinary Americans just like you. Palin won't have to work at genuineness. With Palin, you get the impression she can take politics or leave it. Her life certainly hasn't been saturated with policy, favor trading and back scratching.

Of course, Washington has a mysterious power to turn perfectly reasonable, wholesome, well-meaning human beings into equivocating crooked gasbags. But, from the little we know about Palin, such a transformation doesn't seem likely. And for libertarians - in the broadest sense of the small "l" word -- she's the best candidate they can expect.
Reach columnist David Harsanyi at dharsanyi@denverpost.com.

I don't get it, she's not even close to being libertarian, she's pro-war!

Brian Defferding
07-15-2009, 09:02 AM
Guh. No thanks. Palin is as dumb as a box of rocks. She's a personality, that's all. I refuse to join those voters who vote on a cult of personality. Her platform doesn't even come close to Ron Paul's. Palin is a waste of time.

Freedom 4 all
07-15-2009, 09:28 AM
The fact that she's better than 99% of today's politicians says more about 99% of today's politicians than it says about her.

New York For Paul
07-15-2009, 09:55 AM
I don't get it, she's not even close to being libertarian, she's pro-war!

http://www.amconmag.com/postright/2009/07/12/solving-non-interventionisms-tough-guy-problem/comment-page-1/

acptulsa
07-15-2009, 10:25 AM
http://www.amconmag.com/postright/2009/07/12/solving-non-interventionisms-tough-guy-problem/comment-page-1/

Lol at Dondero's comment. Hey, being principled and fiscally responsible doesn't mean you can't be an imperialist and go around kicking ass!

No it doesn't!

No it doesn't!

No it doesn't and I'm sticking my fingers in my ears now!!

speciallyblend
07-15-2009, 10:50 AM
you should lobby josh to change liberty forest into sarah palin!

steph3n
07-15-2009, 11:21 AM
I question Palin's mental stability, in many regards. She is very stressed and making irrational decisions.

RonPaulR3VOLUTION
07-15-2009, 11:45 AM
..

Feenix566
07-15-2009, 11:49 AM
During the Katie Couric interview, Couric asked Palin what had caused the stock market collapse. Palin responded that it was caused by "greed on Wall street". On that day, Palin lost all chance of ever getting a campaign contribution from me. If you don't understand what caused the problem, you can't solve it.

Peter Schiff and Ron Paul understand the cause of the problem. Hell, even Dick Armey and Newt Gingrich understand the cause of the problem. I'd rather vote for any of them than Palin.

libertarian4321
07-15-2009, 01:03 PM
i threw up in my mouth a little when i read palin and libertarian in the same sentence:eek:


+ 1000

The Dude
07-15-2009, 01:04 PM
Wait. Are there libertarians out there ACTUALLY considering to vote for Palin? Look, she may be a milf, but she's a goddamn neoconservative social authoritarian.

No way!

libertarian4321
07-15-2009, 01:07 PM
Guh. No thanks. Palin is as dumb as a box of rocks. She's a personality, that's all. I refuse to join those voters who vote on a cult of personality. Her platform doesn't even come close to Ron Paul's. Palin is a waste of time.

Yup, I find it ironic that some of those who decry Obama as a "cult of personality" fall all over themselves to support Sarah Palin, given that she clearly has no substance and has nothing more going for her than a folksy charisma (appeals to right wing yahoos) and a nice rack.

libertarian4321
07-15-2009, 01:14 PM
Palin seems to believe that the Second Amendment means the exact same thing in rural Alaska as it does in the streets of Chicago. (unlike Marx)

[/B]

When David Duke ran for governor of LA as a Republican a couple of decades back, he also supported the second amendment and many of the other items you pointed out.

That doesn't mean we should support him.

Just because a politician agrees with you on SOME issues does not mean that person is WORTH OF OUR SUPPORT!

I don't support Duke, and I won't support Palin.

Palin is no libertarian, she's a big government neocon warmonger. And not a particularly bright one at that.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to find some Qtips to clean my keyboard, I vomited a bit when you proposed that Palin might be Libertarian.

Theocrat
07-15-2009, 01:16 PM
Has anyone considered the fact that maybe Palin should be staying at home with her five kids (especially the one with Downs' Syndrome) instead of trying to be the executive of a country? Oh, that's right. The State can take care of all her kids while she's trying to redeem the State from her kids. :rolleyes:

Kludge
07-15-2009, 01:18 PM
Has anyone considered the fact that maybe Palin should be staying at home with her five kids (especially the one with Downs' Syndrome) instead of trying to be the executive of a country?

Control over millions > control over 5 (potentially 6)

AutoDas
07-15-2009, 01:27 PM
Former Governers are the most vulnerable when they quit. ;)

Oyate
07-15-2009, 01:35 PM
The Libertarian Case for Palin
By Oyate

1. She is such a dim-whitted twit that she'll make a further joke of the GOP.

2. The LPUS and other "third parties" might get some more mileage out of it.

3. For sheer entertainment value she can't be beat (unless it's that gal on SNL that imitates her so well).

4. Could be as close to having a president that doesn't exist as we'll ever get.

acptulsa
07-15-2009, 01:36 PM
Former Governers are the most vulnerable when they quit. ;)

Most particularly Republicans. Which brings up an interesting question--now that she has, in the minds of the vast majority of Republican voters, removed herself from further serious consideration, why are they suddenly trying to make everyone think she's one of us? Is this the first signs of a concerted attempt to paint us as quitters?

Certainly would explain that general goofiness surrounding Sanford, wouldn't it? It would also give me new respect for his stubbornness...

Feenix566
07-15-2009, 01:39 PM
Palin strikes me as someone who's more motivated by a quest for power than ideology. She's a career politician who will say or do whatever she thinks will get her elected. She's not really on our side or against it.

I'd much rather vote for someone who's ideologically motivated like Schiff or Paul. We can trust those guys not to throw their principles out the window for campaign contributions. We can't trust Palin to do the same.

sevin
07-15-2009, 02:29 PM
Has anyone considered the fact that maybe Palin should be staying at home with her five kids (especially the one with Downs' Syndrome) instead of trying to be the executive of a country?

Theocrat, you're such a chauvinist. :rolleyes:

Volitzer
07-15-2009, 02:53 PM
Palin is too much of an air-head to be accepted in any other party than the Palin fan club.

:rolleyes:

nbhadja
07-15-2009, 03:06 PM
Palin is a freedom hating big government loving liberal whore that thinks it was gods will to invade Iraq and would not be opposed to a war with Russia.

I rated this thread one star.

Mini-Me
07-15-2009, 03:11 PM
AGHGHHH, STOP IT, STOP IT, STOP IT!!! MY SOUL HURTS EVERY TIME SOMEONE PUSHES PALIN HERE!!!


This sentence is just here so I'm allowed to scream the above sentence(s).

Dreamofunity
07-15-2009, 03:32 PM
AGHGHHH, STOP IT, STOP IT, STOP IT!!! MY SOUL HURTS EVERY TIME SOMEONE PUSHES PALIN HERE!!!


This sentence is just here so I'm allowed to scream the above sentence(s).

This.

teamrican1
07-15-2009, 05:00 PM
The Reality is that nobody knows where Sarah Palin stands on the issues. You can cherry pick her record and find things that seem like she might be on our side, such as her support for jury nullification, her husband and her support for Alaskan Independence, her states rights answer to the Drug War, and her doubts about the Iraq War. But talk is cheap and an establishment Republican could probably pick out things that suggest she's on the other side just as easily. Once Palin leaves office she will have the perfect opportunity to prove EXACTLY where she stands:

If she uses her star power to hold fund raisers for Peter Schiff and Rand Paul, then she deserves our attention and respect. If not, then we should never see her name mentioned on this forum again. It's as simple as that.

speciallyblend
07-15-2009, 05:02 PM
The Reality is that nobody knows where Sarah Palin stands on the issues. You can cherry pick her record and find things that seem like she might be on our side, such as her support for jury nullification, her husband and her support for Alaskan Independence, her states rights answer to the Drug War, and her doubts about the Iraq War. But talk is cheap and an establishment Republican could probably pick out things that suggest she's on the other side just as easily. Once Palin leaves office she will have the perfect opportunity to prove EXACTLY where she stands:

If she uses her star power to hold fund raisers for Peter Schiff and Rand Paul, then she deserves our attention and respect. If not, then we should never see her name mentioned on this forum again. It's as simple as that.

waiting for hell to freeze over, you let me know when palin fund raises for Peter,Rand or Ron;) when i see Ron and Palin hanging out and raising money for our movement! i just might consider listening to anything she and her bots have to say!

Steeleye
07-15-2009, 05:03 PM
The Reality is that nobody knows where Sarah Palin stands on the issues. You can cherry pick her record and find things that seem like she might be on our side, such as her support for jury nullification, her husband and her support for Alaskan Independence, her states rights answer to the Drug War, and her doubts about the Iraq War. But talk is cheap and an establishment Republican could probably pick out things that suggest she's on the other side just as easily. Once Palin leaves office she will have the perfect opportunity to prove EXACTLY where she stands:

If she uses her star power to hold fund raisers for Peter Schiff and Rand Paul, then she deserves our attention and respect. If not, then we should never see her name mentioned on this forum again. It's as simple as that.

Don't you know anything, she's a stupid whore! HAHAHAHAH!

nayjevin
07-16-2009, 07:41 PM
The Reality is that nobody knows where Sarah Palin stands on the issues. You can cherry pick her record and find things that seem like she might be on our side, such as her support for jury nullification, her husband and her support for Alaskan Independence, her states rights answer to the Drug War, and her doubts about the Iraq War. But talk is cheap and an establishment Republican could probably pick out things that suggest she's on the other side just as easily. Once Palin leaves office she will have the perfect opportunity to prove EXACTLY where she stands:

If she uses her star power to hold fund raisers for Peter Schiff and Rand Paul, then she deserves our attention and respect. If not, then we should never see her name mentioned on this forum again. It's as simple as that.

no. sarah palin no.

Deborah K
07-16-2009, 07:58 PM
Like it or not, she will be a force to be reckoned with, I predict. Say what you will, if she were elected US Senator or some such thing, I highly doubt she'd be voting with the Obamabots. We need to take back 41 seats in the house in order to UNseat Princess Pelosi and cut off Obama's future spending. The vast majority of his trillions in deficit spending is still in the future and a house majority can stop it through the House budget process.

Instead of eating our own (people who are anti-Obama) perhaps we should be looking at the bigger picture of trying the save this country any way we can.

RM918
07-16-2009, 09:19 PM
I can't see it. Even trying to be objective about it, what has she /really/ done? Has she /really/ put her ass on the line for any significant piece of Libertarian idealogy, or taken a stand of any sort? Her support for the war is really enough to back off anything, because even if she were golden on all the other issues (Which she is far from, she is merely 'seems' to 'lean' in their general direction at times), support for the wars are too irrational.

I can only see this as a desperate attempt for people to try to latch on to Palin as a champion because, unlike pretty much everyone we have, people actually pay attention to her. This is a bad way to go, because even if, by some ridiculous turn of events she started resembling Paul at least /slightly/, she'd lose her coverage. I'm not willing to trade ideology for a bigger media profile, because even if you 'win' what is it that you've actually 'won'?

BuddyRey
07-16-2009, 09:22 PM
There is NO libertarian case for Sarah Palin.

A libertarian case can only be made for candidates who share libertarian values.

nayjevin
07-17-2009, 12:31 AM
Like it or not, she will be a force to be reckoned with, I predict. Say what you will, if she were elected US Senator or some such thing, I highly doubt she'd be voting with the Obamabots. We need to take back 41 seats in the house in order to UNseat Princess Pelosi and cut off Obama's future spending. The vast majority of his trillions in deficit spending is still in the future and a house majority can stop it through the House budget process.

Instead of eating our own (people who are anti-Obama) perhaps we should be looking at the bigger picture of trying the save this country any way we can.

The direction our country is going is toward bigger government.

'Our own people' to me is people who represent smaller government (rare).

Sarah Palin represents bigger government, war. Flies Israeli flag in office (doesn't respect U.S. sovereignty). Runs with John McCain (liberal). Doesn't think for herself (campaign gave her canned responses). Towed the party line (RNC convention speech). Left state in deeper debt.

Not libertarian, not even conservative.

It's not about being pro- or anti- Obama -- it's about being inside the Republicrat racket or outside of it (especially to claim one as a Libertarian).

Sarah Palin is definitely inside the 2 party stranglehold, no matter how her makeup people doll her up.

dr. hfn
07-17-2009, 07:52 AM
Palin suxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Russian communist cock!

dr. hfn
07-17-2009, 07:52 AM
You apparently aren't aware of the new war-equipped models we'll be using in 2012.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/secretary_part_4.png

(so perfect!!!)

we should get this on digg!

acptulsa
07-17-2009, 07:59 AM
Instead of eating our own (people who are anti-Obama) perhaps we should be looking at the bigger picture of trying the save this country any way we can.

Yeah, fine line.

I know exactly what you're saying. Ralph Marston put it well: 'Rather than wasting you time and energy fighting against what is, put your efforts into creating what can be.' We do need to do more of that.

That said, we aren't just anti-Obama/Biden, we're also anti-Bush/Cheney. We see there's precious little difference there, and we've had enough of the status quo. So, the question becomes does she represent the status quo?

Seems to.

By a year from October, we'll be choosing from the lesser of evils all over the place, all over again. But for now, we need to get real candidates in the pipeline--people who are willing to represent real people. And to do it, we need to determine who fits the description and who doesn't. I'm very glad we've already started this process.

Deborah K
07-17-2009, 09:43 AM
Guys, think about this strategically instead of philosophically for a minute. We need to Co-opt!!! We need to beat these people at their own game. We NEED to get those seats back to stop this madness - correct? We are fighting an enemy who is pulling out all the stops to seal the deal (complete socialism and fascism in America). I agree that we need to get people in, using our platform. And I'm not suggesting Palin for President or anything else. I am suggesting taking the seats back and stopping the spending craze. That means bringing anyone and everyone under the umbrella who wants to do the same thing. We are not in a position yet of having a litmus test that is so stringent.

Honestly, I really don't get the disdain for Palin. I've never seen anything like it before. It has become a shark feeding frenzy. Does she deserve criticism? Of course. Is she evil and a part of the elitist establishment? There's no evidence whatsoever to confirm that. Did she tow the party line while running? Yeah..sure she did, but who doesn't do that (Dr. Paul notwithstanding)? And I don't agree at all that she can't think for herself. People in her own circles say she's independent to a fault, wary of taking the advice of others, etc. Like it or not, she comes with a strong following and some power. We need to CO-OPT! Beat them at their own game!

Look, I am in agreement that we need a full court press to get the 41 seats back. I just don't agree that narrowing the playing field down to only candidates that see things the way Dr. Paul does is the only way to go. If we don't stop the hemorrhaging, this country will surely bleed to death.

Look at it this way, you're on the battlefield fighting the NEW Revolution, and you get hit, the medic is not available, he's saving the life of someone else. There are two other soldiers nearby, one you just can't stand, and both have limited medical training. Are you going to accept their help, or are you going to risk bleeding to death by refusing their help until the medic arrives?

As I always say....if you can't beat em, infiltrate.

paulitics
07-17-2009, 10:11 AM
Honestly, I really don't get the disdain for Palin. I've never seen anything like it before. It has become a shark feeding frenzy.
.

It's very simple. She is for pre-emptive war.

Deborah K
07-17-2009, 10:21 AM
It's very simple. She is for pre-emptive war.

I disagree that that is the only reason for all the vitriol. It may be your reason. Again, a very stringent litmus test will accomplish little. And besides, reasonable people change their minds all the time when they realize they were wrong about something.

If this is all you have against her, then go about changing her mind.

moostraks
07-17-2009, 10:56 AM
I disagree that that is the only reason for all the vitriol. It may be your reason. Again, a very stringent litmus test will accomplish little. And besides, reasonable people change their minds all the time when they realize they were wrong about something.

If this is all you have against her, then go about changing her mind.

She is like Huckabee in drag. It isn't just pre-emptive war, but that is a huge issue. Someone who rationalizes religion with her god's will to commit murder are a very difficult lot to rationalize with, esp. considering she is rationalizing a pre-emptive war and not even a legitimate self-defense.

Deborah K
07-17-2009, 11:03 AM
She is like Huckabee in drag. It isn't just pre-emptive war, but that is a huge issue. Someone who rationalizes religion with her god's will to commit murder are a very difficult lot to rationalize with, esp. considering she is rationalizing a pre-emptive war and not even a legitimate self-defense.

We can debate her principles till the cows come home. If what you are saying is that your principles won't allow you to accept my take on co-opting her influence, then I guess you will have to find your own ways of strategizing to help save our country.

I intend to pull Palin supporters (and Palin, if possible) into the fold.

acptulsa
07-17-2009, 11:08 AM
Yes, she does appeal more to the Huckabee crowd than the McCain crowd, which is why she was chosen. And while I have zero use for Huckabee, his supporters I have found to be both sympathetic and helpful to us.

And Deborah has a point. We may not be able to build our own coalition sufficiently, even with the financial meltdown making us look brilliant. We may well have to at least talk nice to 'less idealogically pure' conservatives to accomplish what must be done.

Now that you mention it, moonstraks, she is indeed basically a Hucksterette, isn't she? I can only think of two candidates in that race whose diet became national news. Squirrel and moose. What a pair they'd make! If you are what you eat, together they could be the new Rocky and Bullwinkle!

Yeah, can't take either seriously. But I can pretend to long enough to win over a supporter or two. Their supporters I do take seriously.

Deborah K
07-17-2009, 11:16 AM
Now that you mention it, moonstraks, she is indeed basically a Hucksterette, isn't she? I can only think of two candidates in that race whose diet became national news. Squirrel and moose. What a pair they'd make! If you are what you eat, together they could be the new Rocky and Bullwinkle!



http://i32.tinypic.com/2prxjs0.jpg

moostraks
07-17-2009, 11:21 AM
Yes, she does appeal more to the Huckabee crowd than the McCain crowd, which is why she was chosen. And while I have zero use for Huckabee, his supporters I have found to be both sympathetic and helpful to us.

And Deborah has a point. We may not be able to build our own coalition sufficiently, even with the financial meltdown making us look brilliant. We may well have to at least talk nice to 'less idealogically pure' conservatives to accomplish what must be done.

Sorry guys, but I can't play nice with people I am that ideologically opposed to so I will agree to disagree. They water down the importance of one of the biggest issues facing our nation and they feel morally obligated to pursue it. Imo, it isn't even rationalized through scripture they supposedly hold so dear. To me it is as vile as the catholic crusades and I am sick of those who portray christians so publicly with this image.

After my exposure to the lock down on effort put forth in the primaries, I have very little faith in any change occuring in the short run. The system is corrupt. I doubt we will have any real choice the next go 'round either. Things will have to get much worse before the majority is able to see the error of their ways and be capable of rationalizing the use of brute force only allows victory to the violent aggressors and totalitarians. To give liberty is necessary to receive liberty.

I wish you two all the best but I will not be able to stomach tolerating the level of faulty rationalizations these people represent.

PaulaGem
07-17-2009, 11:22 AM
Yes, she does appeal more to the Huckabee crowd than the McCain crowd, which is why she was chosen. And while I have zero use for Huckabee, his supporters I have found to be both sympathetic and helpful to us.

And Deborah has a point. We may not be able to build our own coalition sufficiently, even with the financial meltdown making us look brilliant. We may well have to at least talk nice to 'less idealogically pure' conservatives to accomplish what must be done.


From my perspective you are going to have to appeal to the dreaded "liberals" too...

It also appears to me that the ideologies on this board alone are too fragmented to get anything done.

What about those who are trying to establish a "minimalist government" adopting a minimalist platform? The Constitution, Civil Rights and the Vote?

It appears that you guys got lucky on 1207 - people were scared enough to back it.

That isn't going to hold for most of the items that appear to be on the Libertarian agenda. Personally, I disagree with over half of what I read on hear and a lot of it is really dangerous and ignorant.

What if the solution the U.S. needs really isn't Libertarian but some sort of political coalition that hasn't been invented yet?

PaulaGem
07-17-2009, 11:25 AM
After my exposure to the lock down on effort put forth in the primaries, I have very little faith in any change occuring in the short run. The system is corrupt. I doubt we will have any real choice the next go 'round either. Things will have to get much worse before the majority is able to see the error of their ways and be capable of rationalizing the use of brute force only allows victory to the violent aggressors and totalitarians. To give liberty is necessary to receive liberty.

I wish you two all the best but I will not be able to stomach tolerating the level of faulty rationalizations these people represent.

Even if the majority were to see the "error of their ways" as you define it personally, it wouldn't matter. The vote is broken, they couldn't do anything about it but whine.

acptulsa
07-17-2009, 11:27 AM
From my perspective you are going to have to appeal to the dreaded "liberals" too...

I don't dread them, as I think you know. I've got very special arguments I use to try to win them over to our side, at least for national races. They work, too.

Don't use the same ones for Rocky and Bullwinkle fans--er, I mean more evangelical and/or rustic conservatives.


What if the solution the U.S. needs really isn't Libertarian but some sort of political coalition that hasn't been invented yet?

Don't see it--unless you mean by '[not] really libertarian' is very libertarian in national politics, but not necessarily in state or local politics. And, honestly, I think that proviso can help us create the greatest coalition in U.S. history over the next few years of economic chaos. Honestly. But we'll have to learn to play our cards right. Hell, some of the people around here would simply have to learn how to play cards...

moostraks
07-17-2009, 11:28 AM
Even if the majority were to see the "error of their ways" as you define it personally, it wouldn't matter. The vote is broken, they couldn't do anything about it but whine.

define your version of broken...(I quite possibly agree...)

reduen
07-17-2009, 11:32 AM
Palin is a Lying NEOCON bimbo and I will never get behind her! (Not even for what some of you men in here think of when you think of her behind.. :rolleyes:)

It embarasses me for those of you who I have worked with for Ron Paul and liberty in general in here try to make excuses for this idiotic woman...

Please, please..., go back and review all of the interviews that she did while running for the V.P. position and wake up..! Then stop this Sarah Palin nonsense for good! Please..!

moostraks
07-17-2009, 11:34 AM
I don't dread them, as I think you know. I've got very special arguments I use to try to win them over to our side, at least for national races. They work, too.

Don't use the same ones for Rocky and Bullwinkle fans--er, I mean more evangelical and/or rustic conservatives.:D




Don't see it--unless you mean by '[not] really libertarian' is very libertarian in national politics, but not necessarily in state or local politics. And, honestly, I think that proviso can help us create the greatest coalition in U.S. history over the next few years of economic chaos. Honestly. But we'll have to learn to play our cards right. Hell, some of the people around here would simply have to learn how to play cards...

I agree with you on this...We are each called according to our strengths, though, and some of us aren't meant to be mouths but hands or feet. Trust me on this!:D

acptulsa
07-17-2009, 11:38 AM
define your version of broken...(I quite possibly agree...)

"More men have been elected between sundown and sunup than ever were elected between sunup and sundown."--Will Rogers

And this one:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1599681&postcount=84

It would also be nice to help more people see the wisdom of his assertion that this nation got where it is in spite of politics, not by the aid of it. But that's another subject...

PaulaGem
07-17-2009, 11:44 AM
define your version of broken...(I quite possibly agree...)

Just refer to the Stalin quote at the bottom....

acptulsa
07-17-2009, 11:47 AM
Just refer to the Stalin quote at the bottom....

Bleah! Like, gag me with a spoon, dudette.

I'll stick to my Will Rogers quotes, thank you very much.

Deborah K
07-17-2009, 11:47 AM
"More men have been elected between sundown and sunup than ever were elected between sunup and sundown."--Will Rogers

And this one:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1599681&postcount=84

It would also be nice to help more people see the wisdom of his assertion that this nation got where it is in spite of politics, not by the aid of it. But that's another subject...

Will Rogers alludes to voter fraud. It reminds me of Stalin's quote: "It's not the people who vote that count. It's the people who count the votes."

Voter fraud is yet another concern of mine. Luckily in my neck of the woods the voting machines were NOT certified, which gives me some hope. But people who have them in their counties should fight to have them removed.

Deborah K
07-17-2009, 11:48 AM
oh oops Paula beat me to the punch....lol

Deborah K
07-17-2009, 11:51 AM
From my perspective you are going to have to appeal to the dreaded "liberals" too...

It also appears to me that the ideologies on this board alone are too fragmented to get anything done.

What about those who are trying to establish a "minimalist government" adopting a minimalist platform? The Constitution, Civil Rights and the Vote?

It appears that you guys got lucky on 1207 - people were scared enough to back it.

That isn't going to hold for most of the items that appear to be on the Libertarian agenda. Personally, I disagree with over half of what I read on hear and a lot of it is really dangerous and ignorant.

What if the solution the U.S. needs really isn't Libertarian but some sort of political coalition that hasn't been invented yet?

The anarchist/atheist element aside, you should have been here in our heyday. We were awesome. I miss those days. Btw, I'm not a libertarian, although I do agree with many of their principles. I am personally against a party system.

moostraks
07-17-2009, 12:01 PM
Just refer to the Stalin quote at the bottom....

yep...we are on the same page :D

tron paul
07-17-2009, 01:05 PM
We can debate her principles till the cows come home. If what you are saying is that your principles won't allow you to accept my take on co-opting her influence, then I guess you will have to find your own ways of strategizing to help save our country.

I intend to pull Palin supporters (and Palin, if possible) into the fold.

Amen! Nice to hear I'm not the only one that realizes if we don't join and influence whatever Palin is cooking up, we might lose our leadership role in the Tea Party movement.

That's "God's will" canard is really hurting her around here, even tho the quote is twisted to mean the opposite of what she really said.

Reminds me of fighting the MSM smears on Ron Paul. Feels like the right thing to do.

dantheman
07-18-2009, 06:51 AM
I'm glad we're talking strategy now instead of just bashing Palin. That's like bashing Bush: it's too easy and everyone does it. But I still can't get behind the idea of supporting her. I'm glad Deborah K brought up the idea of infiltration, but this is one where America will just think we're crazier than we already are.

When people hear Ron Paul say we don't need something like the F.D.A. they don't take him seriously. And if people are going to blow off the most sound conservative of our time, how is a hockey mom from Alaska going to get any respect from the American people?!

tonesforjonesbones
07-18-2009, 07:05 AM
Sarah Palin was the darling of this forum during the primaries. Did ya'll get brainwashed by the socialist Huffington Post and the idiots on Saturday Night Live? I think so, and some of you just follow the little clique on this board. Pitiful. Sarah Palin supported Pat Buchanan when he ran for president and she was involved with the Alaskan Independent Party which is an affiliate of the Constitution Party. I guess it's because ya'll are really young that you think you have to follow the unspoken leaders on this board rather than look at things objectively and most of you are still in high school and can't vote. Tones

pcosmar
07-18-2009, 07:27 AM
Sarah Palin was the darling of this forum during the primaries.

Not so. She was promoted by a few, as were many others.
(just as some proclaim, Glen Beck to be working on our side)
She was said to be on Ron Paul's short list, by these same promoters.
I never saw anything from Ron Paul to that effect.

She was rumored and promoted till it was accepted by many.
Then she jumped on board with McCain. :eek:
:confused:

Steeleye
07-18-2009, 07:36 AM
Sarah Palin was the darling of this forum during the primaries. Did ya'll get brainwashed by the socialist Huffington Post and the idiots on Saturday Night Live? I think so, and some of you just follow the little clique on this board. Pitiful. Sarah Palin supported Pat Buchanan when he ran for president and she was involved with the Alaskan Independent Party which is an affiliate of the Constitution Party. I guess it's because ya'll are really young that you think you have to follow the unspoken leaders on this board rather than look at things objectively and most of you are still in high school and can't vote. Tones

What are you, retarded? Palin's a dumb bitch slut! HAHAHAHAHA! We learned that from Katie Couric. Besides, all this talk of Sarah Palin is a distraction from working with our allies, the wonderful, principled socialists Dennis Kucinich and Bernie Sanders. LOL! They don't like the Federal Reserve!

emazur
07-18-2009, 07:56 AM
I just had a look at who Palin follows on Twitter - establishment neocons like Hannity, McCain, Jindall, Huckabee, Rove, Gingrich, etc. And it's not a big list. Only name that stood out to me was DeMint.

acptulsa
07-18-2009, 11:10 AM
Sarah Palin was the darling of this forum during the primaries.

A fine and shining example of revisionist history. Except, of course, that some revisionist history improves accuracy...

moostraks
07-18-2009, 11:24 AM
Sarah Palin was the darling of this forum during the primaries. Did ya'll get brainwashed by the socialist Huffington Post and the idiots on Saturday Night Live? I think so, and some of you just follow the little clique on this board. Pitiful. Sarah Palin supported Pat Buchanan when he ran for president and she was involved with the Alaskan Independent Party which is an affiliate of the Constitution Party. I guess it's because ya'll are really young that you think you have to follow the unspoken leaders on this board rather than look at things objectively and most of you are still in high school and can't vote. Tones

:rolleyes: bull chips...She was a darling to you and a few others who insisted we agree. I am not young, can vote and do, don't watch saturday night live, and avoid HuffPost as much as FOX news using only when necessary. Take your broad stroke elsewhere. I have made a rational, well thought choice not to follow another war monger who tries to moralize failed decisions by calling upon her god. She does not represent my idea of femininity or family values and needs to tend to her own home before running a country.

tonesforjonesbones
07-18-2009, 11:42 AM
well nope...wrong to the above poster. I didn't even know who she was until mccain tagged her. I only know she was the DARLING of this forum when Mccain chose her..and MANY were very excited about Palin coming onboard....and THOSE people, there were quite a few, LEFT this forum because of little anarchists like YOU. FFS. tones

tonesforjonesbones
07-18-2009, 11:43 AM
I am so sick of the atheists on this forum...you RUN off decent people. TONES!

youngbuck
07-18-2009, 11:50 AM
I, for one, always saw right through Palin. She was never a 'darling' to me, and I think she's probably an unprincipled "conservative" that all to easily sways the way of the neo-con.

heavenlyboy34
07-18-2009, 11:50 AM
well nope...wrong to the above poster. I didn't even know who she was until mccain tagged her. I only know she was the DARLING of this forum when Mccain chose her..and MANY were very excited about Palin coming onboard....and THOSE people, there were quite a few, LEFT this forum because of little anarchists like YOU. FFS. tones

I didn't get the impression that she was the darling of these boards, but I wasn't as heavy a reader here at that time. Perhaps you're right. I'm on record as never trusting her or Beck.

No need to get upset at anarchists on these boards, Tones. We're on the side of individual liberty. :cool::) (tho some can be rude, sadly.)

tonesforjonesbones
07-18-2009, 12:07 PM
well heavenly...they are typically rude. TONES (that attitude is what pissed people off with Ron Paul)

ClayTrainor
07-18-2009, 12:36 PM
well heavenly...they are typically rude. TONES (that attitude is what pissed people off with Ron Paul)

I think many of the Christians here are equally as rude as atheists, or anarchists.

To be fair, i've been quite turned off by some of the Christian viewpoints and attitudes in here. We even have a Christian who advocates the use of the state for the capital punishment of all gay people. That's very offensive stuff, that i'm sure any believer in individual rights would be turned off by, if they read it.

I'm not a collectivist though, and i'll never act like you are towards the atheists. I'm have no religion or collective view point.

The problem with this forum, and why some people may be turned off is because people are too willing to jump to insults, accusations and rather than just stick to their fundamental logic, and honesty. There's no need to blame "groups" of people for your frustration, as we are just a collection of individuals.

No specific group is responsible for what you speak of.

And just my 2 cents, Sarah Palin will never get my support nor do i agree that this board treated her as a "darling", and i've been here a pretty dam long time.

pahs1994
07-18-2009, 12:55 PM
i think many of the christians here are equally as rude as atheists, or anarchists.

To be fair, i've been quite turned off by some of the christian viewpoints and attitudes in here. We even have a christian who advocates the use of the state for the capital punishment of all gay people. That's very offensive stuff, that i'm sure any believer in individual rights would be turned off by, if they read it.

I'm not a collectivist though, and i'll never act like you are towards the atheists. I'm have no religion or collective view point.

The problem with this forum, and why some people may be turned off is because people are too willing to jump to insults, accusations and rather than just stick to their fundamental logic, and honesty. There's no need to blame "groups" of people for your frustration, as we are just a collection of individuals.

No specific group is responsible for what you speak of.

And just my 2 cents, sarah palin will never get my support nor do i agree that this board treated her as a "darling", and i've been here a pretty dam long time.

+100000

Kludge
07-18-2009, 01:01 PM
That's offensive.

I'm offended.

I'm also amused upon figuring out why Tones' latest thread came into existence.

heavenlyboy34
07-18-2009, 01:02 PM
well heavenly...they are typically rude. TONES (that attitude is what pissed people off with Ron Paul)

That hasn't been my experience. :cool: (and I'm forum buds with many anarchists)

Anti Federalist
07-18-2009, 01:31 PM
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/H/G/2/mccain-palin-anna-nicole.jpg

max
07-18-2009, 01:38 PM
Palin is a power hungry slut who cheated on her husband with his business partner.

She is uneducated, war mongering, Israel worshiping neo-con who raised a slut for a dughter and cares more about career than family

tonesforjonesbones
07-18-2009, 03:15 PM
I think most of you are confused about collectivism. VOLUNTARY collectivism is a good thing..such as all of us coming together to support liberty and Ron Paul...forced collectivism is BAD...like the government forcing things....Christianity is VOLUNTARY....therefore is not BAD collectivism. tones

Kludge
07-18-2009, 03:24 PM
I think most of you are confused about collectivism. VOLUNTARY collectivism is a good thing..such as all of us coming together to support liberty and Ron Paul...forced collectivism is BAD...like the government forcing things....Christianity is VOLUNTARY....therefore is not BAD collectivism. tones

That's what I say about anarcho-communism, but people seem to have a knee-jerk reaction to "communism" being included.

nayjevin
07-28-2009, 09:34 AM
I intend to pull Palin supporters (and Palin, if possible) into the fold.

That's entirely different than supporting Palin, or doing anything which might put her in office.

Sarah Palin represents nothing I believe in - she is a big government stooge who is honestly not smart enough to think for herself.

Who doesn't toe the party line? Almost no one. That is why almost no one is worth supporting.

Going to a Sarah Palin rally and isolating libertarian-leaning conservatives is great.

Hand them a pamphlet which shows that Sarah Palin is more liberal than liberals of 50 years ago.

dr teeth
07-28-2009, 09:55 AM
Palin is dead in the water. It may not seem like it now, but she wouldn't survive a primary. The attack add would read as follows from Romney or Huckabee. I was governor too, only I finished what I started. People want to compare her to Reagan, but Reagan was a successful governor. Of the entire Republican field, she has the least experience. Her decision to step down, means in 3 years, that will be worse.

speciallyblend
07-28-2009, 10:02 AM
Palin is dead in the water. It may not seem like it now, but she wouldn't survive a primary. The attack add would read as follows from Romney or Huckabee. I was governor too, only I finished what I started. People want to compare her to Reagan, but Reagan was a successful governor. Of the entire Republican field, she has the least experience. Her decision to step down, means in 3 years, that will be worse.

ditto. i might vote for her to be a girl scout troop leader but that is about it! the gop truly is deaf dumb and blind but i will make sure my vote keeps the gop in check until they listen!

Deborah K
07-28-2009, 10:07 AM
Palin is dead in the water. It may not seem like it now, but she wouldn't survive a primary. The attack add would read as follows from Romney or Huckabee. I was governor too, only I finished what I started. People want to compare her to Reagan, but Reagan was a successful governor. Of the entire Republican field, she has the least experience. Her decision to step down, means in 3 years, that will be worse.


Reagan and the others did not experience the vitriol and villification that this woman experiences day after day, month after month. Their families were not mercilessly and relentlessly attacked. It is disgusting what this woman and her family have been put through. She was a lame duck and a target. She got out of the way, so sue her. Oh, I forgot, plenty are already doing that - and LOSING!!

I know she's the favorite whipping post on this forum. I don't really understand why. She deserves critcism for some of her stances, yes, but calling her the horrible names she's been called is reprehensible and it is disappointing to see the cyber- assassination of her that takes place on here.

It's one thing to disagree with someone, but to do what has been done to her gives me great pause as a woman, wife, mother, and political activist. Never before have I seen such an attack on someone, let alone a woman. Even Doc Paul didn't get this kind of treatment.

Kraig
07-28-2009, 10:09 AM
Reagan and the others did not experience the vitriol and villification that this woman experiences day after day, month after month. Their families were not mercilessly and relentlessly attacked. It is disgusting what this woman and her family have been put through. She was a lame duck and a target. She got out of the way, so sue her. Oh, I forgot, plenty are already doing that - and LOSING!!

I know she's the favorite whipping post on this forum. I don't really understand why. She deserves critcism for some of her stances, yes, but calling her the horrible names she's been called is reprehensible and it is disappointing to see the cyber- assasination of her that takes place on here.

It's one thing to disagree with someone, but to do what has been done to her gives me great pause as a woman, wife, mother, and political activist. Never before have I seen such an attack on someone, let alone a woman. Even Doc Paul didn't get this kind of treatment.

Not nearly as disgusting as what the government puts us through via programs SHE ENDORSED by running with McCain. I don't know if she was singled out or not, but they all deserve far worse.

speciallyblend
07-28-2009, 10:35 AM
Not nearly as disgusting as what the government puts us through via programs SHE ENDORSED by running with McCain. I don't know if she was singled out or not, but they all deserve far worse.

actually palin is the one that brought her family into the campaign! palin has no argument and if palin is the gop's future. you can count me out!

palin is trying to make an argument out of nothing! sorry palin doesn't make the cut and she is no where near our Ron Paul message! she is part of the failed gop leadership that needs to be fired or expelled. the gop has along way to go to grow!

speciallyblend
07-28-2009, 10:37 AM
Reagan and the others did not experience the vitriol and villification that this woman experiences day after day, month after month. Their families were not mercilessly and relentlessly attacked. It is disgusting what this woman and her family have been put through. She was a lame duck and a target. She got out of the way, so sue her. Oh, I forgot, plenty are already doing that - and LOSING!!

I know she's the favorite whipping post on this forum. I don't really understand why. She deserves critcism for some of her stances, yes, but calling her the horrible names she's been called is reprehensible and it is disappointing to see the cyber- assassination of her that takes place on here.

It's one thing to disagree with someone, but to do what has been done to her gives me great pause as a woman, wife, mother, and political activist. Never before have I seen such an attack on someone, let alone a woman. Even Doc Paul didn't get this kind of treatment.

palin got what she and the gop deserves! no sympathy for this woman or the gop! she doesn't represent women or my wife, thank god!

until the gop wakes up and smells the coffee. they have 0 credibility well lets say at least 10-25% credibility( aka Ron Paul)! thanks to Ron Paul. the bar has been set high and unfortunately not many in the gop can even come close to the bar Ron paul set.

the gop will continue to fall without Ron Paul and the gop will continue to grow with Ron Paul. the gop better be real careful which road they choose;)

Deborah K
07-28-2009, 10:43 AM
actually palin is the one that brought her family into the campaign! palin has no argument and if palin is the gop's future. you can count me out!

palin is trying to make an argument out of nothing! sorry palin doesn't make the cut and she is no where near our Ron Paul message! she is part of the failed gop leadership that needs to be fired or expelled. the gop has along way to go to grow!


palin got what she and the gop deserves! no sympathy for this woman or the gop! she doesn't represent women or my wife, thank god!


ALL Candidates introduce their families. She has been reviled in the extreme. And I disagree that she deserves all the hatred being spewed at her. Vehement criticism is one thing - complete annihilation of one's reputation is quite another and I would venture that this attack on her has been hugely successful in convincing other women who are NOT liberals to EVER run for high office. Nice work!

nayjevin
07-28-2009, 03:08 PM
She has been reviled in the extreme. And I disagree that she deserves all the hatred being spewed at her. Vehement criticism is one thing - complete annihilation of one's reputation is quite another and I would venture that this attack on her has been hugely successful in convincing other women who are NOT liberals to EVER run for high office. Nice work!

I certainly agree with the first part, and think you could be right about the second too, at least in some cases. Female leaders for true conservatism would be awesome.

I think some of the venom is in part brought on by Palin's policies and actions as well. For those of us vehemently against war, she can be rationalized as an advocate of murder.

It's not appropriate or necessary for a person to spit hate at her, but some of the common reasons for that hate are justified I think.

Deborah K
07-28-2009, 03:19 PM
I certainly agree with the first part, and think you could be right about the second too, at least in some cases. Female leaders for true conservatism would be awesome.

I think some of the venom is in part brought on by Palin's policies and actions as well. For those of us vehemently against war, she can be rationalized as an advocate of murder.

It's not appropriate or necessary for a person to spit hate at her, but some of the common reasons for that hate are justified I think.

I don't think what has been done to her is justifiable in any way. :(

nayjevin
07-29-2009, 04:19 AM
some of the common reasons are justified.

Let me try to explain how I can see a person coming to hate Sarah Palin. I don't, or rather hadn't really thought about it -- I think hate is a waste of time.

But I can see a person thinking:

- I like everyone until I find out I shouldn't
- I would probably like people in Iraq for the most part
- Sarah Palin thinks God wants her to advocate killing lots of those people
- I hate Sarah Palin

In my mind, some of that is justified - i.e. people in Iraq are dying, assuredy alot of them good people, and Palin supports that.
The hating part isn't justified, or maybe I should say it isn't productive or positive.

acptulsa
07-29-2009, 05:57 AM
The G.O.P. is doing what it has been doing for some time now--propping up charismatic idiots, waiting for them to develop a fierce opposition because they're obviously too stupid to ever have a clue what to do in a job like theirs, wait until a bunch of average people get to identifying with them, and spin the whole thing up into one big soap opera. And this works for the G.O.P. machine because it all serves to obscure the question we should always be asking--who's the power of intelligence behind this charismatic idiot obviously not fit for the job? The answer all too often is names like Rove and Cheney.

Restrict your view to candidates competent in their own right for the job in question, like Ron Paul, and you save yourself a lot of headaches...

moostraks
07-29-2009, 06:44 AM
The G.O.P. is doing what it has been doing for some time now--propping up charismatic idiots, waiting for them to develop a fierce opposition because they're obviously too stupid to ever have a clue what to do in a job like theirs, wait until a bunch of average people get to identifying with them, and spin the whole thing up into one big soap opera. And this works for the G.O.P. machine because it all serves to obscure the question we should always be asking--who's the power of intelligence behind this charismatic idiot obviously not fit for the job? The answer all too often is names like Rove and Cheney.

Restrict your view to candidates competent in their own right for the job in question, like Ron Paul, and you save yourself a lot of headaches...

wow...well said!

Hoot
08-05-2009, 06:12 PM
I disagree that that is the only reason for all the vitriol. It may be your reason. Again, a very stringent litmus test will accomplish little. And besides, reasonable people change their minds all the time when they realize they were wrong about something.

If this is all you have against her, then go about changing her mind.

Deb is right. Being a libertarian you can't be a hater imho. I think it is a much better idea to educate people then to ignore them. I wish I could send a copy of The Creature From Jekyll Island to Palin, Biden, and everyone else in D.C. Maybe that is what we should do, a book bomb. Buy enough copies of G. Griffin's book to send to every congressmen (and women).

If we started hating everyone that runs for office and the people who support them, we won't be left with many friends. Educate the masses should be our goal.

Hoot
http://www.libertyunleashed.com

tron paul
08-06-2009, 10:29 AM
We can debate her principles till the cows come home. If what you are saying is that your principles won't allow you to accept my take on co-opting her influence, then I guess you will have to find your own ways of strategizing to help save our country.

I intend to pull Palin supporters (and Palin, if possible) into the fold.

Maybe it's time for the liberty movement to split into two camps.

The Anti-Palin greens, anarchists, communists, nihilists, and libertarians form Camp#1.
They can grow up and replace the Democrat Party.

The Pro-Palin conservatives, minarchists, populists, nationalists, and libertarians form Camp#2. Camp#2 can grow up and replace the Republican Party.

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 10:31 AM
Maybe it's time for the liberty movement to split into two camps.

The Anti-Palin greens, anarchists, communists, nihilists, and libertarians form Camp#1.
They can grow up and replace the Democrat Party.

The Pro-Palin conservatives, minarchists, populists, nationalists, and libertarians form Camp#2. Camp#2 can grow up and replace the Republican Party.

When does Palin grow up?

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 10:36 AM
Maybe it's time for the liberty movement to split into two camps.

The Anti-Palin greens, anarchists, communists, nihilists, and libertarians form Camp#1.
They can grow up and replace the Democrat Party.

The Pro-Palin conservatives, minarchists, populists, nationalists, and libertarians form Camp#2. Camp#2 can grow up and replace the Republican Party.

How about Camp#3? People who are against politicians who supported the socialist banker bailout? That, of course, rules OUT Sarah Palin. Really, I don't get your fascination with her. The fact that she thought the bailout was somehow related to tax cuts shows she's not fit to be dogcatcher. There's one way and one way only to get our country back. We have to stand on principles. The overwhelming majority of Americans were against the bailout. If everyone who was against the bailout only supported anti bailout politicians then we'd have our country back. Sarah Palin can't "replace" the current Republican party. She IS the current republican party.

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 10:38 AM
How about Camp#3? People who are against politicians who supported the socialist banker bailout? That, of course, rules OUT Sarah Palin. Really, I don't get your fascination with her. The fact that she thought the bailout was somehow related to tax cuts shows she's not fit to be dogcatcher. There's one way and one way only to get our country back. We have to stand on principles. The overwhelming majority of Americans were against the bailout. If everyone who was against the bailout only supported anti bailout politicians then we'd have our country back. Sarah Palin can't "replace" the current Republican party. She IS the current republican party.

That stategy hasn't worked out very well for the pro-lifers. What makes you think it will work out for the fiscally conservative?

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 10:39 AM
Really, I don't get your fascination with her... Sarah Palin can't "replace" the current Republican party. She IS the current republican party.

I fear I'm beginning to 'get' it. Between the fact that he titled his thread 'divide and conquer' and statements like this:


Maybe it's time for the liberty movement to split into two camps.

tron paul
08-06-2009, 10:43 AM
We may well have to at least talk nice to 'less idealogically pure' conservatives to accomplish what must be done.

Many of us have been busting our asses doing that for years. Where have you been? Too busy hating?

We also won over many 'less idealogically pure' liberals like Kucinich and McKinney, BTW. That's why HR1207 has so much support. Not because we let the abortion & war issues dominate everything else and refused to work with the 'impure.'


Yeah, can't take either seriously. But I can pretend to long enough to win over a supporter or two. Their supporters I do take seriously.

A goal higher than 1 or 2 would be more helpful. But it's a start.

Thanks for stopping the bashing long enough to consider the strategic possibilities of using the insurgent Palinite, Tea Party, Townhall Mob movement to further our mutual goals.

marc1888
08-06-2009, 10:54 AM
No disrespect to anyone who likes Palin.

However how low do we have to go. Ron Paul supporters, libertarians have convinced me over the years by their argument. What is actually wrong with running a strong intellectual candidate who actually believes in your principles who can make a coherent argument and has a background of actually supporting it. Rather than these types who want a shot at glory and find their "Libertarian" ideals when it is politically expedient to do so.

Palin might well be more powerful than a fleet of Ron Paul blimps. I would rather however support someone who is unelectable and unpalatable to the masses who was right and honorable than someone who knows how to stir the groins of middle aged goppers. I dont think there has been one word that came out of Palin's mouth that was original, impressive or even meaningful. In fact the majority of people who i have met who love Palin are salivating male goppers or pathetic women goppers who think 'She's just like us'. They are right, dumb and stupid.




Like it or not, Palin is more powerful than a fleet of 10,000 Ron Paul Blimps.

She is a superstar of megawatt intensity. Her supporters range from debate team type Paulistas and family-oriented former Huck's Army personnel, to (normally/formerly apolitical) others admire that her for being both an icon of fashion and female power.

Lover or hater, almost everyone has an opinion and propagates the intense buzz about Palin. For example:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/the_libertarian_case_for_palin.html

September 02, 2008
The Libertarian Case for Palin
By David Harsanyi

The potential political consequences of Sarah Palin have been chewed over from every imaginable angle.

Though there is plenty to ponder, one thing is certain: libertarian-inclined voters should be encouraged. No, I'm not suggesting that your little Molly will be bringing home "The Road to Serfdom" from her (distinctly non-public) elementary school. But in contrast to any national candidate in recent memory, Palin is the one that exudes the economic and cultural sensibilities of a geniune Western-style libertarian.

Now, Palin's lack of experience has been framed as an impenetrable negative. One wire story helpfully noted that Palin had never ever appeared on "Meet the Press." Shocking! But as Barack Obama often notes, it's not about experience, it's about judgment. And Palin's penchant for reform-minded conservatism is certainly at odds with the racket Washington Republicans have offered up the past 8 years.

Palin, for example, vetoed 300 pork projects in Alaska in her first year in office. She made a habit of knocking out big-government Republicans in her brief political career. For this, the 44-year-old mother of five enjoys a sterling approval rating in a state with arguably the nation's most libertarian-minded populace.

When it comes to healthcare, Palin says she wants to "allow free-market competition and reduce onerous government regulation." These days, any mention of the "free market" that's not framed as a crass pejorative is a sign of progress.

Culturally, there is little for the Heartland to dislike. By now, you've probably seen picture or two of Palin sporting a rifle. Apparently, she's left carcasses strewn across the Alaskan wilderness. In some places -- areas where the nation is growing -- owning a gun is not yet a sin. And unlike Obama, Palin seems to believe that the Second Amendment means the exact same thing in rural Alaska as it does in the streets of Chicago.

Yes, Palin is without argument a staunch social conservative. She is fervently opposed to abortion - even in cases of rape and incest, which will raise eyebrows, but is certainly more philosophically consistent than the namby pambyism of your average politician. The choice issue, after all, is complicated, even for many libertarians. And, as I was recently reminded, Ron Paul, the Libertarian champion of the 21st century, also opposes abortion.

Even when advocating for "moral" issues, Palin's approach is a soft sell. Palin does not support gay marriage (neither does Obama, it should be noted). Yet, in 2006, Palin's first veto as Governor was a bill that sought to block state employee benefits and health insurance for same-sex couples.

We cannot bore into Palin's soul to see her true feelings about gay couples, but, at the time, she noted that signing "this bill would be in direct violation of my oath of office" because it was unconstitutional. For most libertarians, the thought of politician following any constitution, rather than their own predilections, morality or the "common good," is a nice change of pace.

On the counterproductive War on Drugs, Palin is no warrior. Her Republican opponent in 2006 primary, incumbent Republican governor Frank Murkowski, made recriminalizing the possession of small amounts of pot a priority. Palin, though she does not support legalization, believes enforcement should not be a high priority.

"I can't claim a Bill Clinton and say that I never inhaled," Palin once said. This sort of honesty is a welcome change from the standard hand-wringing about marijuana's supposed disastrous consequences.

On education, Palin supports school-choice programs. There have already been smears that she backed "creationist" teaching in "public" schools, when in fact, Palin's comment regarding intelligent design should hold some appeal to libertarians. Even if you find the idea inane, in essence, Palin pushed the idea that parents, rather than the state, should decide what children are learning.

When asked about this commotion, Palin said, "I won't have religion as a litmus test, or anybody's personal opinion on evolution or creationism." If lockstep left-wing union-run school boards in urban districts would follow this sound advice on ideological litmus tests, our educational system would be a lot more productive.

Then there is a question of authenticity. And it matters. Those who will do anything for power, will say anything and support any position that is convenient. From John McCain to Joe Biden to Obama, one gets the sense that political office is their life's work. All of them have made attempts to create the perception that, hey, they're ordinary Americans just like you. Palin won't have to work at genuineness. With Palin, you get the impression she can take politics or leave it. Her life certainly hasn't been saturated with policy, favor trading and back scratching.

Of course, Washington has a mysterious power to turn perfectly reasonable, wholesome, well-meaning human beings into equivocating crooked gasbags. But, from the little we know about Palin, such a transformation doesn't seem likely. And for libertarians - in the broadest sense of the small "l" word -- she's the best candidate they can expect.
Reach columnist David Harsanyi at dharsanyi@denverpost.com.

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 10:58 AM
That stategy hasn't worked out very well for the pro-lifers. What makes you think it will work out for the fiscally conservative?

Who says it didn't work? It helped get Reagan, Bush and Bush elected. It helped with Gingrich. Yes they later got betrayed by their own leaders. (Pat Robertson endorsing forced abortion in China). But the strategy worked.

In this case the strategy can work even better. Some polls had over 90% of Americans AGAINST the banker bailout. The pro life movement was NEVER that strong. The problem now is that people like Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry have latched on to the "tea party" movement even though they were initially against everything it stands for during the Bush years. (Gingrich endorsed the bailout. Perry pushed for the NAFTA superhighway). Embracing Palin only exacerbates the problem. If this becomes simply a "Let's be the dems even if we have to sacrifice principle to do it" then we could have all rallied around the McCain/Palin ticket in the first place. Until Palin at least appologizes for the bailout she's more of a liability than a help.

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 11:03 AM
Who says it didn't work? It helped get Reagan, Bush and Bush elected. It helped with Gingrich. Yes they later got betrayed by their own leaders. (Pat Robertson endorsing forced abortion in China). But the strategy worked.

In this case the strategy can work even better. Some polls had over 90% of Americans AGAINST the banker bailout. The pro life movement was NEVER that strong. The problem now is that people like Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry have latched on to the "tea party" movement even though they were initially against everything it stands for during the Bush years. (Gingrich endorsed the bailout. Perry pushed for the NAFTA superhighway). Embracing Palin only exacerbates the problem. If this becomes simply a "Let's be the dems even if we have to sacrifice principle to do it" then we could have all rallied around the McCain/Palin ticket in the first place. Until Palin at least appologizes for the bailout she's more of a liability than a help.

You missed my point. Abortion is still considered constitutionally protected, so the strategy did NOT work. One issue stances regarding the voting block are futile if the ultimate goal is to effect real change.

Kludge
08-06-2009, 11:04 AM
Many of us have been busting our asses doing that for years. Where have you been? Too busy hating?

Wait.... Is this whole thread sarcasm? Who are you making a "case" to?

tron paul
08-06-2009, 11:08 AM
It also appears to me that the ideologies on this board alone are too fragmented to get anything done.


I believe that freedom unites us. However...

The mass movement behind Palin is being put down by a Can't-Get-Along Gang of malcontents holding contradictory views (communism, nihilism, anarchism) united only by opposition to conservative principles respecting God, abortion, gays, etc.

Ron Paul and Palin strongly agree on these so-called moose & squirrel social conservative issues. They don't share the immature attitudes held by most of Digg, Fark, Wonkette, and other places where the young and opinionated to go to vent their hatred of the rural, religious, and fertile.

Yet some Palin haters claim the mantle of True Libertarianism(tm) and presume to write her movement out of our wonderful, emerging, and growing Freedom Coalition on weak, tenuous charges of neoconservatism.

This attitude, not Alaska's former Governor, has the greatest potential to co-opt and split the freedom movement.

tron paul
08-06-2009, 11:11 AM
Wait.... Is this whole thread sarcasm? Who are you making a "case" to?

People with social skills. People with a future in politics. People who can help the cause of Liberty, instead of hurting it by representing it poorly and in a boorish manner.

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 11:11 AM
Many of us have been busting our asses doing that for years. Where have you been? Too busy hating?

We also won over many 'less idealogically pure' liberals like Kucinich and McKinney, BTW. That's why HR1207 has so much support. Not because we let the abortion & war issues dominate everything else and refused to work with the 'impure.'


That's nice. Has Palin endorsed HR1207? Has she apologized for supporting the bailout? It's not whether or not Palin is "ideologically pure". It's whether or not she's on our side on the number 1 issue we are pushing right now!



A goal higher than 1 or 2 would be more helpful. But it's a start.

Thanks for stopping the bashing long enough to consider the strategic possibilities of using the insurgent Palinite, Tea Party, Townhall Mob movement to further our mutual goals.

What's hurting the Tea Party movement more than anything is the smell of hypocrisy. When people like Gingrich are allowed to speak after cutting commercials with Nancy Pelosi about "fighting global warming", coming to an agreement with Hillary Clinton on universal health care, and (initially) endorsing the Bush bailout it undermines the movement. Palin only worsens this. Every day Obama supporters are getting more and more nervous about their man. The last thing we need is to legitimize the charge that the movement is ok with GOP bailouts and "stimulus" plans that further weaken our economy, but we have a problem when a black democrat does it. Believe me. I've had that charge thrown in my face already. (Most people I know support Obama). I gently remind them that I was just as outspoken against the Bush bailout. The movement embracing republicans that supported the bailout cuts my whole argument out from under me.

Really though. Why Palin? She's not the only republican in the country. Most republicans voted AGAINST the Bush bailout. Why is this concerted effort to elevate people like Palin, Gingrich and Cornyn who supported the bailout over people like Richard Shelby, Jim Demint and others who opposed it? If you can convince Palin to repent of her ways great. If not then she can't help unite the Obama opposition because she was and is very much part of the problem. Heck I'd take Mike Huckabee over Palin. Tom Tancredo? Duncan Hunter? Fred Thompson?

Regards,

John M. Drake

Kludge
08-06-2009, 11:12 AM
People with social skills. People with a future in politics. People who can help the cause of Liberty, instead of hurting it by representing it poorly and in a boorish manner.

So then I can only assume you don't read what you write.

Edit: I quoted that snippet in hopes to bring it to your attention that rude and baseless libel against other members probably isn't a good way of representing your agenda.

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 11:15 AM
You missed my point. Abortion is still considered constitutionally protected, so the strategy did NOT work. One issue stances regarding the voting block are futile if the ultimate goal is to effect real change.

:rolleyes: What part of "they were betrayed by their own leaders" do you not understand? What part of "the anti abortion movement never came CLOSE to 90%" do you not understand?

Really, just do the math. You need 2/3rds of the states to ratify a constitutional amendment. The anti abortion movement never came CLOSE to those numbers. Opposing bailouts doesn't require a constitutional amendment. It simply requires a simple majority in the house and/or senate. It's a far more achievable goal that has far greater support across the entire country.

Regards,

John M. Drake

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 11:19 AM
So then I can only assume you don't read what you write.

Edit: I quoted that snippet in hopes to bring it to your attention that rude and baseless libel against other members probably isn't a good way of representing your agenda.

Apply your property rights! You just pwned someone...

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 11:19 AM
People with social skills. People with a future in politics. People who can help the cause of Liberty, instead of hurting it by representing it poorly and in a boorish manner.

Embracing hypocrisy does not help the cause of liberty. If I wanted a president who supported bailouts, the Iraq war etc. then I could have just voted for John McCain. Heck Bush fits that bill too. And Palin embraced Dick Cheney's view of the "all powerful" VP. Ok, she's good on guns and abortion. She gave lip service to lower taxes (while endorsing a bailout that has to be paid for somehow). What else?

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 11:24 AM
:rolleyes: What part of "they were betrayed by their own leaders" do you not understand? What part of "the anti abortion movement never came CLOSE to 90%" do you not understand?

Really, just do the math. You need 2/3rds of the states to ratify a constitutional amendment. The anti abortion movement never came CLOSE to those numbers. Opposing bailouts doesn't require a constitutional amendment. It simply requires a simple majority in the house and/or senate. It's a far more achievable goal that has far greater support across the entire country.

Regards,

John M. Drake


I responded to your "stand on principles" remark:


There's one way and one way only to get our country back. We have to stand on principles. The overwhelming majority of Americans were against the bailout. If everyone who was against the bailout only supported anti bailout politicians then we'd have our country back.


Which has little to do with what you are now claiming. Interesting how that works. I stand by my claim that one issue voters never achieve anything. Compromise is not a sin.

tron paul
08-06-2009, 11:24 AM
I'm glad we're talking strategy now instead of just bashing Palin. That's like bashing Bush: it's too easy and everyone does it. But I still can't get behind the idea of supporting her.

The strategy talk was the best part of the thread, for the short time it lasted.
Good point about the too-easy mindless bashing, I'll have to remember it applies to Obama too. What about supporting her movement with our knowledge and experience? Would that co-opt 'us' or 'them?';)



And if people are going to blow off the most sound conservative of our time, how is a hockey mom from Alaska going to get any respect from the American people?!

The hockey mom already has the respect of millions of Americans, polling highest among Conservatives. So let's act like this is an opportunity instead of a crises.

Palin may be the only person alive that can change the minds of many pro-war Republicans and bring them back to respecting the Constitution.

They won't listen to Ron Paul. Ironically, because of the Palinesque media smear job they did on him.

By now, we should all know better than to hate who the media tells us to.

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 11:26 AM
Palin may be the only person alive that can change the minds of many pro-war Republicans and bring them back to respecting the Constitution.

If she ever starts on this project, it will ameliorate my attitude towards her immensely. Not holding my breath in the meantime.

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 11:26 AM
The strategy talk was the best part of the thread, for the short time it lasted.
Good point about the too-easy mindless bashing, I'll have to remember it applies to Obama too. What about supporting her movement with our knowledge and experience? Would that co-opt 'us' or 'them?';)




The hockey mom already has the respect of millions of Americans, polling highest among Conservatives. So let's act like this is an opportunity instead of a crises.

Palin may be the only person alive that can change the minds of many pro-war Republicans and bring them back to respecting the Constitution.

They won't listen to Ron Paul. Ironically, because of the Palinesque media smear job they did on him.

By now, we should all know better than to hate who the media tells us to.


I agree with you.

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 11:31 AM
If she ever starts on this project, it will ameliorate my attitude towards her immensely. Not holding my breath in the meantime.

And that my dear friend, is where we come in. Our positive influence over her supporters can change everything.

Never before has there been so much talk about the Constitution in the media or otherwise, since Dr. Paul became so well known. His message has permeated in ways that we will never fully know. It's time to take that message to everyone that can be easily converted.

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 11:32 AM
I responded to your "stand on principles" remark:




Which has little to do with what you are now claiming. Interesting how that works. I stand by my claim that one issue voters never achieve anything. Compromise is not a sin.

If one of your principles is in line with 90% of the American people than it is absolutely stupid to "compromise" that principle. :rolleyes: Do you think the pro life movement would do better to endorse Rudy Giuliani? Like I said, the pro life movement was betrayed by their own leaders. They compromised for the sake of power and found themselves cast aside like a used condom.

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 11:35 AM
The strategy talk was the best part of the thread, for the short time it lasted.
Good point about the too-easy mindless bashing, I'll have to remember it applies to Obama too. What about supporting her movement with our knowledge and experience? Would that co-opt 'us' or 'them?';)




The hockey mom already has the respect of millions of Americans, polling highest among Conservatives. So let's act like this is an opportunity instead of a crises.

Palin may be the only person alive that can change the minds of many pro-war Republicans and bring them back to respecting the Constitution.

They won't listen to Ron Paul. Ironically, because of the Palinesque media smear job they did on him.

By now, we should all know better than to hate who the media tells us to.

Oh really?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2012/palin_at_the_top_and_bottom_for_gop_voters_in_2012
Seventy-six percent (76%) of Republican voters have a favorable opinion of Palin, even after her decision to resign as governor of Alaska, with 45% whose view of her is very favorable. Palin trails Huckabee, who unsuccessfully sought the Republican presidential nomination in 2008. Huckabee is favored by 78%, with 41% who feel very favorably toward him.

If you're going strictly by the polls you should be pushing Huckabee over Palin. Then again if your going strictly by the polls you should just support John McCain and be done with it.

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 11:37 AM
If one of your principles is in line with 90% of the American people than it is absolutely stupid to "compromise" that principle. :rolleyes: Do you think the pro life movement would do better to endorse Rudy Giuliani? Like I said, the pro life movement was betrayed by their own leaders. They compromised for the sake of power and found themselves cast aside like a used condom.


Are you capable of having a debate without implying that I'm stupid and using vulgar terms like ^ in your argument?? :rolleyes:

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 11:38 AM
And that my dear friend, is where we come in. Our positive influence over her supporters can change everything.

Never before has there been so much talk about the Constitution in the media or otherwise, since Dr. Paul became so well known. His message has permeated in ways that we will never fully know. It's time to take that message to everyone that can be easily converted.

There's nothing wrong with trying to influence Palin supporters. But then again there's nothing wrong with trying to influence Obama supporters, McCain supporters, Bush supporters, Jesse Jackson supporters or anybody you can reach. Most all of these people of these supporters were against the bailout even though the politicians they supported were not. (Don't know about Jesse Jackson but you get the point).

tron paul
08-06-2009, 11:38 AM
Sarah Palin was the darling of this forum during the primaries. Did ya'll get brainwashed by the socialist Huffington Post and the idiots on Saturday Night Live? I think so, and some of you just follow the little clique on this board. Pitiful. Sarah Palin supported Pat Buchanan when he ran for president and she was involved with the Alaskan Independent Party which is an affiliate of the Constitution Party. I guess it's because ya'll are really young that you think you have to follow the unspoken leaders on this board rather than look at things objectively and most of you are still in high school and can't vote. Tones

I've named that little clique the Can't Get Along Gang, because they'd rather resent Social Conservatives (like Ron Paul) than get along with (and influence) Palin's mass movement.

Another way to explain the situation is with Palin Derangement Syndrome. They need a new BushHitlerCheney to complete them, so they can feel all Batman superhero when opposing the Manchurian Palin's supervillainess machinations.


McCain picked Palin because she had the most "Ron Paul Cred" not because she's Huckabee in a dress. McCain wasn't worried about Hucksters voting for Obama, but knew the rEVOLution was a force he desperately needed on his side.

I've had it with the "Sarah is a Neocon" canard. I'll going to write something debunking that nonsense issue-by-issue.

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 11:40 AM
Are you capable of having a debate without implying that I'm stupid and using vulgar terms like ^ in your argument?? :rolleyes:

Are you capable of understanding that everybody can have a stupid idea? :rolleyes:

I'll put it another way. Going against 90% of Americans is just not very politically astute hows that?

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 11:44 AM
And that my dear friend, is where we come in. Our positive influence over her supporters can change everything.

Never before has there been so much talk about the Constitution in the media or otherwise, since Dr. Paul became so well known. His message has permeated in ways that we will never fully know. It's time to take that message to everyone that can be easily converted.

Verse 57 of The Book of Thomas:

Jesus said, "The Kingdom of the Father is like a man who had [good] seed. His enemy came by night and sowed weeds among the good seed. The man did not allow them to pull up the weeds; he said to them, 'I am afraid that you will go intending to pull up the weeds and pull up the wheat along with them.' For on the day of the harvest the weeds will be plainly visible, and they will be pulled up and burned."

The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer... :cool:

As for proving that Sarah Palin is 'Ron Paul in a dress', well, that could take years.

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 11:44 AM
There's nothing wrong with trying to influence Palin supporters. But then again there's nothing wrong with trying to influence Obama supporters, McCain supporters, Bush supporters, Jesse Jackson supporters or anybody you can reach. Most all of these people of these supporters were against the bailout even though the politicians they supported were not. (Don't know about Jesse Jackson but you get the point).

Except that I've little to no success convincing Obamabots of anything. Most of his supporters that I know don't have any knowledge of history. One even said to me, "Oh the Constitution needs to be thrown out. It was written so long ago, it doesn't even matter anymore. And besides, a bunch of slave owners wrote it."

I don't get that kind of crap from Palin supporters. They are more inclined to be receptive to Ron Paul's vids and writings.

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 11:45 AM
Verse 57 of The Book of Thomas:

Jesus said, "The Kingdom of the Father is like a man who had [good] seed. His enemy came by night and sowed weeds among the good seed. The man did not allow them to pull up the weeds; he said to them, 'I am afraid that you will go intending to pull up the weeds and pull up the wheat along with them.' For on the day of the harvest the weeds will be plainly visible, and they will be pulled up and burned."

The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer... :cool:

As for proving that Sarah Palin is 'Ron Paul in a dress', well, that could take years.

I really love the book of Thomas. ;)

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 11:46 AM
Except that I've little to no success convincing Obamabots of anything. Most of his supporters that I know don't have any knowledge of history. One even said to me, "Oh the Constitution needs to be thrown out. It was written so long ago, it doesn't even matter anymore. And besides, a bunch of slave owner wrote it."

I don't get that kind of crap of Palin supporters. They are more inclined to be receptive to Ron Paul's vids and writings.

I find the opposite down here, by and large. I expect the not-so-bright crowd goes with the bunch they find most populous in their area...

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 11:47 AM
Originally Posted by tonesforjonesbones View Post
Sarah Palin was the darling of this forum during the primaries. Did ya'll get brainwashed by the socialist Huffington Post and the idiots on Saturday Night Live? I think so, and some of you just follow the little clique on this board. Pitiful. Sarah Palin supported Pat Buchanan when he ran for president and she was involved with the Alaskan Independent Party which is an affiliate of the Constitution Party. I guess it's because ya'll are really young that you think you have to follow the unspoken leaders on this board rather than look at things objectively and most of you are still in high school and can't vote. Tones

I've named that little clique the Can't Get Along Gang, because they'd rather resent Social Conservatives (like Ron Paul) than get along with (and influence) Palin's mass movement.

Another way to explain the situation is with Palin Derangement Syndrome. They need a new BushHitlerCheney to complete them, so they can feel all Batman superhero when opposing the Manchurian Palin's supervillainess machinations.


McCain picked Palin because she had the most "Ron Paul Cred" not because she's Huckabee in a dress. McCain wasn't worried about Hucksters voting for Obama, but knew the rEVOLution was a force he desperately needed on his side.

I've had it with the "Sarah is a Neocon" canard. I'll going to write something debunking that nonsense issue-by-issue.

:rolleyes: I'm not sure what part of the forum "tones" was reading but Palin was never the "darling". Most people were debating whether to support to support Bob Barr or Chuck Baldwin by that point.

Ron Paul cred? Don't make me laugh! She supported the war and the BAILOUT! Really Mike Huckabee has more Ron Paul cred than Sarah Palin and he's more popular among conservatives. Mike Huckabee didn't get on national TV and claim the bailout was part of tax cuts and job creation! I don't like Huckabee, but strategically backing him makes more sense than backing Palin.

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 11:47 AM
Are you capable of understanding that everybody can have a stupid idea? :rolleyes:

I'll put it another way. Going against 90% of Americans is just not very politically astute hows that?

We are not ever going to be on the same page it seems. So be it.

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 11:51 AM
As for proving that Sarah Palin is 'Ron Paul in a dress', well, that could take years.


She's not Ron Paul! No one is. Never made that claim. But I think she's capable of evolving into a Constitutionalist. She will have regrets of course, but don't we all? Have we become so puritanical that we can no longer tolerate people with misguided principles having a change of heart?

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 11:55 AM
Except that I've little to no success convincing Obamabots of anything. Most of his supporters that I know don't have any knowledge of history. One even said to me, "Oh the Constitution needs to be thrown out. It was written so long ago, it doesn't even matter anymore. And besides, a bunch of slave owners wrote it."

I don't get that kind of crap from Palin supporters. They are more inclined to be receptive to Ron Paul's vids and writings.

I'm with acptulsa on that. I've had far more success with Obama supporters. My black muslim barber watched The Obama Deception and was totally sold on it. He already had respect for Ron Paul even though he ended up voting for Obama. I saw one of my city's black democratic councilmen at large when we had a recent Ron Paul meetup at a local restaurant. He told me "I do like your man because he stands on principle". He agreed to meet with our group to discuss how we could help him defeat a big government spending project. (That's all I can say about that so I don't derail this.) I don't mind working with people that I don't agree with. But I'm not going to pretend Palin has "Ron Paul cred" (not your words I know) when she supported the bailout. Sorry. That's my #1 top issue right now. These bailouts represent the single biggest threat to our nation. The Bush bailout grease the skids for the Obama socialist agenda. It's much bigger than the "birther" issue to me. It's not something I can compromise on. If you can then fine for you.

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 11:55 AM
I find the opposite down here, by and large. I expect the not-so-bright crowd goes with the bunch they find most populous in their area...

Interesting take. So.....how best to capitalize on it....:D

tron paul
08-06-2009, 11:55 AM
Reagan and the others did not experience the vitriol and villification that this woman experiences day after day, month after month. Their families were not mercilessly and relentlessly attacked.

I know she's the favorite whipping post on this forum. I don't really understand why. She deserves critcism for some of her stances, yes, but calling her the horrible names she's been called is reprehensible and it is disappointing to see the cyber- assassination of her that takes place on here.

It's one thing to disagree with someone, but to do what has been done to her gives me great pause as a woman, wife, mother, and political activist. Never before have I seen such an attack on someone, let alone a woman. Even Doc Paul didn't get this kind of treatment.


The haters are scared to death for a very good reason: Palin is the winnowing fork of the Culture Wars, separating the useful wheat from the useless chaff.

They know, and seethe with resentment that their time of deception has ended.

You can see that on RPF invoking her name provokes the secular liberals into identifying themselves, often demonstrating their relative merit and usefulness in the process.

Even on Free Republic, land of the Neocon Warmonger, The Palin Issue is sweeping the big-government RINOs into the dustbin of history.

The Rudy Guiliani and Mitt Romney people constantly try to slither back into the SoCon Freeper community, only to break their teeth biting Palin's ankles.

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 11:57 AM
Never made that claim.

You didn't. You're talking about reaching out to her supporters, of which I approve wholeheartedly. I've undoubtedly done it myself, though I generally knew them as Huckabee supporters.

tron made that claim. And I don't buy it. Seems like he wants to use her as a wedge. Whatever. I just spread the message--and avoid supporting status quo candidates in the process.

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 11:58 AM
The haters are scared to death for a very good reason: Palin is the winnowing fork of the Culture Wars, separating the useful wheat from the useless chaff.

They know, and seethe with resentment that their time of deception has ended.

You can see that on RPF invoking her name provokes the secular liberals into identifying themselves, often demonstrating their relative merit and usefulness in the process.

Even on Free Republic, land of the Neocon Warmonger, The Palin Issue is sweeping the big-government RINOs into the dustbin of history.

The Rudy Guiliani and Mitt Romney people constantly try to slither back into the SoCon Freeper community, only to break their teeth biting Palin's ankles.

LOL. Man you're delusional. I see you won't address the fact that Huckabee is more popular among conservatives than Palin. I see you won't address the fact that Palin supported the bailout. Something is being "revealed" alright.

Deborah K
08-06-2009, 11:59 AM
The haters are scared to death for a very good reason: Palin is the winnowing fork of the Culture Wars, separating the useful wheat from the useless chaff.

They know, and seethe with resentment that their time of deception has ended.

You can see that on RPF invoking her name provokes the secular liberals into identifying themselves, often demonstrating their relative merit and usefulness in the process.

Even on Free Republic, land of the Neocon Warmonger, The Palin Issue is sweeping the big-government RINOs into the dustbin of history.

The Rudy Guiliani and Mitt Romney people constantly try to slither back into the SoCon Freeper community, only to break their teeth biting Palin's ankles.

You certainly have a way with words. :)

tron paul
08-06-2009, 12:25 PM
That's nice. Has Palin endorsed HR1207? Has she apologized for supporting the bailout? It's not whether or not Palin is "ideologically pure". It's whether or not she's on our side on the number 1 issue we are pushing right now!

Ron Paul specifically said he wishes Palin & her Palinites would support HR1207.

Sounds like it would behoove us Campaigners For Liberty to raise their awareness of the FED issue by forming ties to the Palin community. Instead of cutting them off for disloyalty, inaction, and whatever other ideological offenses.

I'm not convinced that HR1207 is the best use of Palin's political capitol. HR1207 is only a single battle in the war. You don't risk your Queen to take a pawn; I say we keep Palin in development and play the Long Game.



What's hurting the Tea Party movement more than anything is the smell of hypocrisy.

That's an MSM talking point straight out of Ana Marie Cox's propaganda hole. Which Tea Party did you attend and smell hypocrisy at? I saw a lovely diversity of American opinions at mine. We all had a great time, left, right, and center. No purity of essence required.




When people like Gingrich are allowed to speak after cutting commercials with Nancy Pelosi about "fighting global warming", coming to an agreement with Hillary Clinton on universal health care, and (initially) endorsing the Bush bailout it undermines the movement. Palin only worsens this. Every day Obama supporters are getting more and more nervous about their man. The last thing we need is to legitimize the charge that the movement is ok with GOP bailouts and "stimulus" plans that further weaken our economy, but we have a problem when a black democrat does it. Believe me. I've had that charge thrown in my face already. (Most people I know support Obama). I gently remind them that I was just as outspoken against the Bush bailout. The movement embracing republicans that supported the bailout cuts my whole argument out from under me.

Gingrich has nothing to do with the Tea Parties. That's another Ana Marie Cox disinfo meme. Pure FUD.


Really though. Why Palin? She's not the only republican in the country. Most republicans voted AGAINST the Bush bailout. Why is this concerted effort to elevate people like Palin, Gingrich and Cornyn who supported the bailout over people like Richard Shelby, Jim Demint and others who opposed it? If you can convince Palin to repent of her ways great. If not then she can't help unite the Obama opposition because she was and is very much part of the problem. Heck I'd take Mike Huckabee over Palin. Tom Tancredo? Duncan Hunter? Fred Thompson?


Why Palin? Because I respect the millions of Americans that respect her in much larger numbers than anyone except possibly Obama. We must use Palin's starpower, along with her supporters' energy, numbers, cash, talents, and VOTES.

Your Ally In Liberty,
Tron Paul

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 12:31 PM
HR1207 is only a single battle in the war. You don't risk your Queen to take a pawn; I say we keep Palin in development and play the Long Game.

Since when is Palin a queen and the Fed a pawn? Seems to me the Fed is anything but a pawn, and if Palin didn't play McCain's pawn he'd have never even mentioned her name.


Why Palin? Because I respect the millions of Americans that respect her in much larger numbers than anyone except possibly Obama. We can Palin's starpower, and her supporters' energy, numbers, cash, talents, and VOTES.

Her supporters are one thing. But to get this queen you imagine her to be, you're going to need a hell of a lot of development. You're going to have to get McCain's pawn to your eighth rank--and we don't even know if she's willing to change colors yet. Good luck with that.

Meanwhile, I'm happy to talk with people who like her (though since she positioned herself as a quitter there are a lot fewer of those). But she's still McCain's pawn to me.

tron paul
08-06-2009, 12:32 PM
And that my dear friend, is where we come in. Our positive influence over her supporters can change everything.

Never before has there been so much talk about the Constitution in the media or otherwise, since Dr. Paul became so well known. His message has permeated in ways that we will never fully know. It's time to take that message to everyone that can be easily converted.

B-I-N-G-O

It is up to us to water the little seeds Ron Paul has planted across the country.

The Tea Parties indicate that they have already sprouted.

Signs also indicate that Palin supporters are fertile ground. Just look at how much $$$ Alaskans gave Dr Paul!

LibertyEagle
08-06-2009, 12:42 PM
I've named that little clique the Can't Get Along Gang, because they'd rather resent Social Conservatives (like Ron Paul)

Sorry, but that's not going to fly around here.

Ron Paul is NOT a social conservative! Ron Paul stands with the Constitution and regardless of his own personal opinions, he will not use government to force said opinions on everyone else. "Social Conservatives" on the other hand, seem to be solely about their agenda and could care less about the Constitution. They will use big government force anyway they can to force their agenda and then cry about that same big government being used in the same way, but on different agendas, when their big government brethren on the other side of the aisle come to power. :rolleyes:

In other words... BITE YOUR TONGUE!

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 12:43 PM
Ron Paul specifically said he wishes Palin & her Palinites would support HR1207.


I wish she would too. I wish McCain would support it. I wish Obama would support it. Not gonna happen. And you still can't bring yourself to address her support for the bailout.



Sounds like it would behoove us Campaigners For Liberty to raise their awareness of the FED issue by forming ties to the Palin community. Instead of cutting them off for disloyalty, inaction, and whatever other ideological offenses.


Why not form ties with the people who are already on our side on the bailout issue and the HR1207 issue? Why seek to continue to promote people that are against our current top two issues? She doesn't have to come to our side on the Iraq war. She does on the bailout and HR1207. Otherwise what's the point?



I'm not convinced that HR1207 is the best use of Palin's political capitol. HR1207 is only a single battle in the war. You don't risk your Queen to take a pawn; I say we keep Palin in development and play the Long Game.


Palin's a queen for the other side. She's shown no indication of being helpful. You've given no indication of how she's helpful. Ok, she's for gun rights. So is Huckabee.



That's an MSM talking point straight out of Ana Marie Cox's propaganda hole. Which Tea Party did you attend and smell hypocrisy at? I saw a lovely diversity of American opinions at mine. We all had a great time, left, right, and center. No purity of essence required.


The last one I attended in Nashville TN on July 2nd of this year. Matt Collins was also there. The festivities began with a prayer that ended with "And Lord help us support Israel through whom you will fulfill Bible prophecy and where we will receive salvation". They played a recorded message from Newt Gingrich. There was a radio talk show host that kept talking about how "They criticized my president by saying Bush sucks. But we're more sophisticated than that." Next tea party I'm going too I'm carrying my own sign that says "Bush = Obama = Sucky president" or something to that effect. Oh and there was the booth with the giant Israeli and tiny American flag. This 2 days before independence day.

I talked about this before.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2247747&postcount=3




Gingrich has nothing to do with the Tea Parties. That's another Ana Marie Cox disinfo meme. Pure FUD.


At the last tea party I went to in Nashville TN on July 2nd 2009 the official organizers played a recorded message by Newt Gingrich. This is NOT "disinformation". Ask Matt Collins. He was there. A LOT of us were really ticked by this. What you don't understand is that there are two different organizations that use the term "tea party". One is legit. The other has been coopted IMO. But (in Nashville at least) they do somewhat work together.




Why Palin? Because I respect the millions of Americans that respect her in much larger numbers than anyone except possibly Obama. We can Palin's starpower, and her supporters' energy, numbers, cash, talents, and VOTES.

Your Ally In Liberty,
Tron Paul

Why Palin over Huckabee? Again you're ignoring the poll numbers. He polls higher among conservatives than she does and as far as I know never backed the bailout. By your own "we need their supporters" argument Huckabee is a better choice than Palin.

LibertyEagle
08-06-2009, 12:46 PM
B-I-N-G-O

It is up to us to water the little seeds Ron Paul has planted across the country.

The Tea Parties indicate that they have already sprouted.

Signs also indicate that Palin supporters are fertile ground. Just look at how much $$$ Alaskans gave Dr Paul!

Are you implying that ALL Alaskans are Palin supporters? Give me a break.

I'll tell you what, show us the proof that Palin is a Constitutionalist and maybe, just maybe, some of us might get on board. Until then, it's just so much talk.

Surely you understand why we are skeptical. Right? She came across just like a neocon during the presidential election. And that Israeli flag in her office, well, does she realize she's in the U.S.? Where is her allegiance, I wonder? Is it to Israel or to the U.S.?

A good start would be for her to come out in support of HR1207 and suggest to her followers that they pay attention to Austrian economics, vs. Keynesian economics, and to listen to Ron Paul; because he's the real deal.

tron paul
08-06-2009, 12:46 PM
Like I said, the pro life movement was betrayed by their own leaders. They compromised for the sake of power and found themselves cast aside

Here are two leaders of the Pro-Life movement that are not compromised and gaining power:

1. Ron Paul

2. Sarah Palin

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 12:49 PM
You're really having fun with redefinition and name association. Wake me up when you care to add some substance.

LibertyEagle
08-06-2009, 12:52 PM
Here are two leaders of the Pro-Life movement that are not compromised and gaining power:

1. Ron Paul

2. Sarah Palin

Palin looked pretty compromised to me, during the presidential campaign.

Yup, sure did.

LibertyEagle
08-06-2009, 12:53 PM
The haters are scared to death for a very good reason: Palin is the winnowing fork of the Culture Wars, separating the useful wheat from the useless chaff.

They know, and seethe with resentment that their time of deception has ended.

You can see that on RPF invoking her name provokes the secular liberals into identifying themselves, often demonstrating their relative merit and usefulness in the process.

Even on Free Republic, land of the Neocon Warmonger, The Palin Issue is sweeping the big-government RINOs into the dustbin of history.

The Rudy Guiliani and Mitt Romney people constantly try to slither back into the SoCon Freeper community, only to break their teeth biting Palin's ankles.

I dare you to call me a liberal, Tron. I dare you.

You're not going to win many friends or influence people with this kind of BS.

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 12:55 PM
The funny thing is, we've gone on for pages over this, and around here (the reddest of the red states) these days Palin draws five words from these millions of 'fawning admirers':

"Too bad she's a quitter."

moostraks
08-06-2009, 12:56 PM
MAT 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you

MAT 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
"Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire."
Those who fail to bear "good fruit" will be "hewn down, and cast into the fire."
7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them

Palin needs to bring forth a new fruit. Everyone can gain wisdom so the door is not shut. It, however, appears to many of us she has sold her soul for fame...

georgiaboy
08-06-2009, 01:00 PM
The funny thing is, we've gone on for pages over this, and around here (the reddest of the red states) these days Palin draws five words from these millions of 'fawning admirers':

"Too bad she's a quitter."

Among conservatives, that hurdle is a very high, if not an impossible, hurdle to overcome.

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 01:05 PM
Sorry, but that's not going to fly around here.

Ron Paul is NOT a social conservative! Ron Paul stands with the Constitution and regardless of his own personal opinions, he will not use government to force said opinions on everyone else. "Social Conservatives" on the other hand, seem to be solely about their agenda and could care less about the Constitution. They will use big government force anyway they can to force their agenda and then cry about that same big government being used in the same way, but on different agendas, when their big government brethren on the other side of the aisle come to power. :rolleyes:

In other words... BITE YOUR TONGUE!

So I guess all of those "Ron Paul is a conservative" slim jims we bought from the campaign website and passed out were all false advertising? :rolleyes: That brings up a funny story. On New Years Eve 2007 we marched through downtown Nashville carrying signs and passing out slim jims including the "Ron Paul's conservative values" one. This was our 3rd biggest event (about 200 people) right behind the Ron Paul rally (over 1,000) and Ran Paul coming to our campaign HQ (about 500). Anyway someone gave a slim jim to a goth who was at first shouting "Go Ron Paul". When she read the slim jim she was aghast and started saying "Ron Paul's not a conservative! He's a libertarian."

The fact of the matter is Ron Paul is a constitutionalist. He's not for violating states right in order to push some conservative agenda. But that doesn't mean he takes the position of (some) libertarians that the government can't enforce some conservative positions. Take gay marriage. While he's against a gay marriage amendment, he defended the "defense of marriage act" and went on to introduce a bill that would take the matter away from the federal courts. But he went on to say that he if he was in the state legislature he'd introduce a similar bill to take the matter away from the state courts as well. The message is clear. If the people want gay marriage they can vote for it. If they want to ban gay marriage they can vote for that too.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html

He also voted for the partial birth abortion ban even though he felt it was constitutionally flawed.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul98.html

He's abortion position is similar to his gay marriage position. Reinstate federalism into the equation by overturning Roe v. Wade through an amendment and let the individual states decide.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul100.html

He's opposed to the federal government deciding issues like this, but the state government is still government. I definitely ran into people that didn't support Paul because the mistakenly believed he was not pro life or that he supported gay marriage. I had to explain to them that he would leave it up to the states where they had a MUCH better chance of prevailing.

Regards,

John M. Drake

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 01:07 PM
Here are two leaders of the Pro-Life movement that are not compromised and gaining power:

1. Ron Paul

2. Sarah Palin

Palin compromised her free market credentials by supporting the bailout. (Unless she was never truly free market). Huckabee is gaining more power than she is. Why aren't you pushing him instead?

tron paul
08-06-2009, 01:11 PM
Oh really?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2012/palin_at_the_top_and_bottom_for_gop_voters_in_2012
Seventy-six percent (76%) of Republican voters have a favorable opinion of Palin, even after her decision to resign as governor of Alaska, with 45% whose view of her is very favorable. Palin trails Huckabee, who unsuccessfully sought the Republican presidential nomination in 2008. Huckabee is favored by 78%, with 41% who feel very favorably toward him.

If you're going strictly by the polls you should be pushing Huckabee over Palin. Then again if your going strictly by the polls you should just support John McCain and be done with it.

I wasn't going by polls. Look at the social metrics: Palin dominates Facebook, Team Sarah.org has set up their own free version of MeetUp.com with 80,000 members. Plus Twitter.

Look at the earned media: Palin can't get a pedicure without 50 media sharks reporting on the story. She is a Rock Star and sells magazines. Huck, not so much.:rolleyes: He could lose a toe while fishing and the local paper wouldn't bat an eye, much less interrupt their Michael Jackson coverage.

Palin is the candidate that Huck's Army wanted, one they could join with the Ronulans to support in the General Election.

45% very favorable is nothing to sneeze at, considering the media hatchet job on her. Such polling is beyond McCain's wildest fantasy, despite sycophantic media.

LibertyEagle
08-06-2009, 01:12 PM
So I guess all of those "Ron Paul is a conservative" slim jims we bought from the campaign website and passed out were all false advertising? :rolleyes:

No, not at all. There is a big difference between a traditional conservative, which Ron is, and a "social conservative".

Since the conservative label has been so co-opted, many traditional conservatives now refer to themselves as constitutionalists. I do too.


The fact of the matter is Ron Paul is a constitutionalist. He's not for violating states right in order to push some conservative agenda.
Isn't that just what I said in my previous post? But, you're wrong about conservatism. Traditional conservatives were very much, constitutionalists.

RevolutionSD
08-06-2009, 01:13 PM
Palin compromised her free market credentials by supporting the bailout. (Unless she was never truly free market). Huckabee is gaining more power than she is. Why aren't you pushing him instead?


Even worse, she supports the war as much as Mccain.

She's certainly no libertarian, and is just another statist.

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 01:17 PM
Look, t p. If you think she can be sufficiently educated to become an asset to this movement, get cracking. Until then, you're just makin' spam.

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 01:18 PM
No, not at all. There is a big difference between a traditional conservative, which Ron is, and a "social conservative".

Since the conservative label has been so co-opted, many traditional conservatives now refer to themselves as constitutionalists. I do too.


Isn't that just what I said in my previous post? But, you're wrong about conservatism. Traditional conservatives were very much, constitutionalists.

Maybe we're disagreeing about labels. To me social conservatives are those who are concerned with social issues (abortion, gay marriage, etc) as opposed to fiscal conservatives who only care about smaller government and lower taxes. I guess my point is that local government banning a practice such as abortion is still "government force". There are a lot of people on the boards these days that take the position of no government involvement in social issues even at the state and local level. (Then again there are those pushing for no government at all.)

LibertyEagle
08-06-2009, 01:23 PM
Maybe we're disagreeing about labels. To me social conservatives are those who are concerned with social issues (abortion, gay marriage, etc) as opposed to fiscal conservatives who only care about smaller government and lower taxes. I guess my point is that local government banning a practice such as abortion is still "government force". There are a lot of people on the boards these days that take the position of no government involvement in social issues even at the state and local level. (Then again there are those pushing for no government at all.)

I think it's a label thing, John.

Most of my life, there was only one kind of conservative. I got disinterested in politics for awhile, when I was spending most of my time on my career, and when I looked back, I saw all these different kinds of hyphenated conservatives. I was like, what the HECK? It took me awhile to figure it out.

I still think there is only one kind. The rest are fakers who were trying to piggyback off of the, then, popular label. Well now it's been co-opted, so it's not so popular anymore.

tron paul
08-06-2009, 01:44 PM
I see you won't address the fact that Palin supported the bailout.

Getting national exposure was worth flubbing a few talking points.

Palin's job as VP was to support McCain. It doesn't seem like her heart is in it when it comes to the bailout. She doesn't sound like a genuine centrist, and that's a good thing.

This shows how badly the Palinites need to hear about Austrian economics.

They're hungry for knowledge, and we've been busy in the kitchen.

Instead of writing them off as irredeemable, let's feed them healthy ideas, so in the future they'll be on our side.

We need converts, not more choir practice.

tron paul
08-06-2009, 01:52 PM
You didn't. You're talking about reaching out to her supporters, of which I approve wholeheartedly. I've undoubtedly done it myself, though I generally knew them as Huckabee supporters.

tron made that claim. And I don't buy it. Seems like he wants to use her as a wedge. Whatever. I just spread the message--and avoid supporting status quo candidates in the process.

My actions are irrelevant; Palin is already a wedge.

How we use this already existing wedge to continue the rEVOLution is the issue.

Huck's Army has been absorbed by Team Sarah. They looked up to us, we teased them like a little brother. But when brothers grow up, they (should) stop bickering.

acptulsa
08-06-2009, 01:56 PM
Huck's Army has been absorbed by Team Sarah. They looked up to us, we teased them like a little brother. But when brothers grow up, they (should) stop bickering.

Team Sarah ended when she quit; the 'army' is rudderless--or sticking with the Huckster.

And it wasn't my experience that they looked up to us--at least not until we engaged them and gave them reason to respect us. Nor did we tease them in any way that I can think of...

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 02:03 PM
Getting national exposure was worth flubbing a few talking points.

Flubbing a talking point is saying "I can see Russia from my house" instead of "How much foreign policy experience does Barack Obama have? At least our foreign policy expert is at the top of our ticket." Defending the bailout is like Pat Robertson defending forced abortion in China. It's a watershed moment.



Palin's job as VP was to support McCain. It doesn't seem like her heart is in it when it comes to the bailout. She doesn't sound like a genuine centrist, and that's a good thing.


Fine. Then she can let us know what's in her "heart". Confession is good for the soul.



This shows how badly the Palinites need to hear about Austrian economics.


So do the Obamanots. So do the Huckbees. So do the McCainanites. We don't have to embrace every other candidate on the planet just to talk with their people.



They're hungry for knowledge, and we've been busy in the kitchen.


Well get out their and go feeding. Just don't try to convince the rest of us we have to wear an "I love Palin" apron first.



Instead of writing them off as irredeemable, let's feed them healthy ideas, so in the future they'll be on our side.

We need converts, not more choir practice.

I'm not writing off ANYBODY as irredeemable. Like I said I reached my black muslim barber. But you don't see me on year singing the praises of Louis Farrakhan.

Regards,

John M. Drake

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 02:13 PM
I wasn't going by polls. Look at the social metrics: Palin dominates Facebook, Team Sarah.org has set up their own free version of MeetUp.com with 80,000 members. Plus Twitter.


If we were just going by social metrics Ron Paul would be president already.



Look at the earned media: Palin can't get a pedicure without 50 media sharks reporting on the story. She is a Rock Star and sells magazines. Huck, not so much.:rolleyes: He could lose a toe while fishing and the local paper wouldn't bat an eye, much less interrupt their Michael Jackson coverage.


Of course. That's because A) she's more photogenic and B) the media loves controversy. Being photogenic and controversial does not make you king of the conservative hill.



Palin is the candidate that Huck's Army wanted, one they could join with the Ronulans to support in the General Election.

45% very favorable is nothing to sneeze at, considering the media hatchet job on her. Such polling is beyond McCain's wildest fantasy, despite sycophantic media.

:rolleyes: I thought you weren't looking at the polls? Are you only looking at the numbers that help your side? Palin's unfavorable rating is higher than the Huckster's.

Here's the bottom line. Reaching out to Palin supporters is a good thing. Reaching out to Palin supporters by claiming she has "Ron Paul cred" when there's no evidence of that will hurt Ron Paul's cred! There's a reason Paul dismissed her as a "country club republican". While I would have been a bit more tactful, I wouldn't have gone to the other extreme that you seem to have taken.

tron paul
08-06-2009, 02:16 PM
Since when is Palin a queen and the Fed a pawn? Seems to me the Fed is anything but a pawn, and if Palin didn't play McCain's pawn he'd have never even mentioned her name.

Her supporters are one thing. But to get this queen you imagine her to be, you're going to need a hell of a lot of development. You're going to have to get McCain's pawn to your eighth rank--and we don't even know if she's willing to change colors yet. Good luck with that.

Meanwhile, I'm happy to talk with people who like her (though since she positioned herself as a quitter there are a lot fewer of those). But she's still McCain's pawn to me.

The Fed isn't a single piece. It's the sum of all the opposing team's pieces, their 'color.'

Palin, taken together with her supporters, is the most powerful single piece on the board right now. And she hasn't even left her home row yet.

Bernanke is a pawn, coming up for reappointment. HR1207 is one skirmish in a 100 year long war. We all hope it's a game changer, but having a backup plan is wise.

Palin is very young for a politician. She'll be around long after McCain retires.

I wish you massive success in your outreach efforts!!!

tron paul
08-06-2009, 03:06 PM
Sorry, but that's not going to fly around here.

Ron Paul is NOT a social conservative! Ron Paul stands with the Constitution and regardless of his own personal opinions, he will not use government to force said opinions on everyone else. "Social Conservatives" on the other hand, seem to be solely about their agenda and could care less about the Constitution. They will use big government force anyway they can to force their agenda and then cry about that same big government being used in the same way, but on different agendas, when their big government brethren on the other side of the aisle come to power. :rolleyes:


You are describing Theocons, not SoCons. It is a very useful distinction to learn.

SoCons care deeply for the Constitution; it enshrines their Freedom of Religion and RTKBA.

The last thing SoCons want is a state religion. That's why they left England for Plymouth.

Ron Paul is a social conservative. Ron Paul is not a Theocon. The facts speak for themselves:

So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress by Rep. Ron Paul, MD (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul94.html)

and

The War on Religion by Rep. Ron Paul, MD



The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life.

The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance. Throughout our nation’s history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people’s allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before their faith in the state. (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html)


Now you know how to resolve the apparent contradiction that was forcing you to define social conservatives out of existence. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=148558&postcount=12) Remember, paradox is impossible if your premises are correct. :)

tron paul
08-06-2009, 03:21 PM
Team Sarah ended when she quit; the 'army' is rudderless--or sticking with the Huckster.

And it wasn't my experience that they looked up to us--at least not until we engaged them and gave them reason to respect us. Nor did we tease them in any way that I can think of...

Rudderless, or in stealth mode? SarahPAC is swelling with cash. Her network is buzzing with activity, and growing.

I can't correct your experience. But Google can show you the pow-wows held on HucksArmy.com with Ron Paul ambassadors, who were respected and even asked for advice. We weren't always as nice to the Huckabees that visited RPF to parley.

Oh well, let's call it a teachable moment and move on.

purplechoe
08-06-2009, 03:25 PM
Clicking on this thread was a mistake. I wish I could have the last 10 minutes of my life back. I feel dumber for having read the OP.

tron paul
08-06-2009, 03:43 PM
Being photogenic and controversial does not make you king of the conservative hill.

Disagree. Ronald Reagan.


Photogenic as well as handsome, physically robust (hence his longevity, perhaps, despite the ravages of Alzheimer's), radiating the same "talent for happiness" that he attributed to his mother, epitomizing the all-American boy who made good, Reagan charmed even many who loathed his "conservative" politics (most notably, many in the "liberal" media), convincing them that he was "presidential." Spada's selection spans Reagan's life from nine months to 89 years of age, and he looks good, if not always beaming, in every well-reproduced picture. For a man who was extremely controversial in his political career, he never looks more than miffed when angry, and he looks only slightly ill at ease in a picture from a low point in his acting career when he was a stooge for a Vegas comedy act in 1954. (http://www.amazon.com/Ronald-Reagan-His-Life-Pictures/dp/0312269900)


There's a reason Paul dismissed her as a "country club republican".

That never happened. Nobody thinks Palin is a country club republican. Does Wasilla even have a country club?

The actual quote refers to her supporters; in case you didn't know:


As for soon-to-be departing Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Paul dismisses her supporters as "more establishment, conventional Country-Club type of Republicans.”

Hence the need to reach out to them on the issues we have in common, and eventually educate them on issues where we disagree.

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 03:54 PM
That never happened. Nobody thinks Palin is a country club republican. Does Wasilla even have a country club?


According Google they do.

http://www.getfave.com/locations/16332859-canine-country-club



The actual quote refers to her supporters; in case you didn't know:



Hence the need to reach out to them on the issues we have in common, and eventually educate them on issues where we disagree.

Toche'. Of course I usually think of country club members as being so snobbish that they're unlikely to support someone for president they don't feel is one of their own. (Was that the reason for the wardrobe upgrade?)

Anyway keep up with your outreach. I'm more concerned with reaching voters like this lady.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=204076

She voted for Obama because she wanted "change" and now she feels punked. She's already embraced the free market. The last think I'd want her thinking is that someone who embraced the Bush wars and the Bush/Obama bailout (even if she only did it for "exposure") is the type of candidate this movement supports. Obama's poll numbers are in free fall. Those disgruntled voters have to go somewhere. And best of all we don't have to embrace Obama to get them.

Regards,

John M. Drake

LibertyEagle
08-06-2009, 04:10 PM
I'll look into it more, Tron. Thanks..

jmdrake
08-06-2009, 04:18 PM
Disagree. Ronald Reagan.

As a young actor maybe. There weren't women swooning over his good looks by the time he ran for president. Old age does a number on your looks.

But if your looking for "photogenic" you can always pick Dan Quayle. Ronald Reagan had a solid conservative pedagree. You'd have never seen him embracing a socialist banker bailout just to get more exposure.

Regards,

John M. Drake

CountryboyRonPaul
08-06-2009, 05:41 PM
Why would we elect another idiot to lead the ticket in 2012?

The last bumbling idiot nearly drove the Republican party to extinction.

Really.... Is the goal to kill this movement?

tron paul
08-08-2009, 09:20 PM
According Google they do.

http://www.getfave.com/locations/16332859-canine-country-club



I don't care if Wasilla's Country Club has a PGA Master's Tour stop, Jack Nicklaus designed golf course.

But it doesn't. The Canine Country Club sells embroidered gifts, and they have closed the location that your GetFave link lists. Now they are mail-order only:

http://www.justiceboxers.com/store.htm

And the former retail location is for rent:
http://www.loopnet.com/property/16070456/266-N-Boundary-Street/

The only place to golf in Wasilla is an indoor simulator at Alaska Golf Shot!

You should have realized that the idea of a CC in Wasilla was insane, instead of going for the petty, irrelevant 'gotcha.'

Mere gainsaying, without doing the research necessary to integrate what you find into a coherent argument, can make one appear foolish.:p

My point was that remote, rugged Alaska is not where Rockefeller Republicans, or Neocons for that matter, raise their families.

Any further objections to conceding that point? If so, please try to make them more salient and harder to absolutely demolish. :D

Your Ally in Libery,
Tron

tron paul
08-08-2009, 09:42 PM
As a young actor maybe. There weren't women swooning over his good looks by the time he ran for president. Old age does a number on your looks.

But if your looking for "photogenic" you can always pick Dan Quayle. Ronald Reagan had a solid conservative pedagree. You'd have never seen him embracing a socialist banker bailout just to get more exposure.

Regards,

John M. Drake

"Maybe" young Reagan drove the ladies crazy? Dude, give it up. Ron was a textbook mack daddy (A Male of supperior looks. A player of players. A romantic lady killer. A pimpalicous man who gets anything he wants.)

And he still looked good when he ran for Pres. (all the power didn't hurt either).


Reagan’s photogenic personality and good looks on televised debates, as well as his attacks on President Carter’s problems, helped him win the election of 1980 by a landslide (489-49). (http://wikinotes.wikidot.com/chapter-40-13)

It really hurts your credibility when you can't concede obvious points.

Does it really bother you so much that a Palin supporter is a better debater than you?

You're flat wrong about Reagan and the bailouts, though it pains me to point it out.

Reagan nominated Greenspan, whose monetary policy was functionally equivalent to Bernanke's bailouts, just done with less fanfare over a longer time period. Inflation is Inflation, call it what you will. And then there's this:


PRESIDENT REAGAN: I think everyone is a little puzzled because I don't know what meaning it might have--because all the business indices are up--there is nothing wrong with the economy.

PAUL SOLMAN: But on the very next day, Black Monday, the market plummeted as never before--not even in the great crash of October 1929.

PAUL SOLMAN: The next day the market began by plunging still farther--to a low of 1450. But Alan Greenspan announced the Federal Reserve would put money into the system to keep it afloat. Companies began buying their own stock; trading halted completely for awhile; and by the afternoon, the panic bottomed out. Stock prices slowly began to climb--by week's end back to 1951. Within 15 months, the Dow had returned to its pre-crash level of 2247.

Can't we forgive Palin for her faults, now that I've shown you our mutual hero Reagan was far more imperfect, in regard to bailouts?:confused:

Or do we have to get into Reagan's muscular foreign policy regime, which was lousy with NeoCons? You won't win that argument either....:o

Your Ally in Liberty,
Tron

Vessol
08-09-2009, 12:01 AM
Palin=NeoConservative.

No way out of it.

They are just as bad as liberals in my book.