"Confessions of a former Tea Party guy." - Democratic Underground (anti-war)

[purplechoe]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9484081


Confessions of a former Tea Party guy.

I catch hell here because I talk about the Tea Party Patriots like they are human beings. The reason is because I have been one. When the Tea Party started, it wasn't the Tea Party, it was the money bombs for Ron Paul. Why did I support Ron Paul here, when everyone else thought he was a nut (and now they think he's a dangerous nut because he has been effective). Well, at the time, he was one of the few people who was anti-war. And I was, before I was a Democrat or a liberal or a libertarian or whatever you want to call me, I was anti-war. Ron Paul was anti-war, and it was a major part of his identity, and remains a major part of his identity. He was antiwar before it was cool to be antiwar. He voted against the AUMF in Iraq.

War is the most destructive force a government can unleash. It is obviously destructive to its victims, the Afghan weddings interrupted by Predator drone strikes, the Iraqi babies with their heads blown off by indiscriminate American gunfire, the prisoners raped and tortured to death while our soldiers looked on and did nothing... These things accompany EVERY WAR. I said so in 2005, and everyone thought, well, Americans don't fight that way, but they do, and Wikileaks proved it recently to the sound of crickets.

War destroys the soldiers, too. Not just the 4,000 plus who have died, and not just the 100,000 more who have been greviously wounded, but also probably half a million young men with PTSD and other psychological disorders that the military refuses to admit exist, and the thousands more exposed to toxic chemicals. War is an obscenity. It is a vile filth in the world.

War destroys our economy. We print money and fake money to hide the true cost, so it looks like we pay nothing -our taxes, after all, don't go up. But the money comes from somewhere. It comes down the line as a bill to our kids and grandkids who don't get to see American moonbases and don't get to go to Mars and still have to face cancer and things that the money could have cured, but it's all gone because we spewed it out as liquid fire upon the children of other souls. So we are sliding into a massive economic depression, the same slide that accompanies all wars, and all the nice social programs we need to keep our seniors healthy and our poor housed all go on the altar of Mars. And we squabble about them now as if we can ever, ever afford them again.

It destroys our moral compass. It destroys our moral compass in that generals become like kings. When war is going on they have the power of life and death in their dominions. Does it surprise us that they don't want to give this up? The profits from war are measured in the trillions to defense contractors and weapons makers and weapon system designers. Nobody is happy when a helicopter crashes except the seller of helicopters. He measures his profits in the millions, and the price is paid in blood, terror and death.

The Tea Party started with Ron Paul. It started with people like me who were willing to put this principle, that war was the enemy, above party loyalty and above the so-called liberal/conservative divide, and we Tea Party founders desperately wanted to find a home and forge an alliance with the anti war liberals, thinking we could unite on this one principle, and put it above other principles. Oh, sure, economics was part of it. Constitutionalism was part of it. The assault on our freedoms was part of it. It was what united us in the beginning, our principled opposition to the welfare/warfare state. So the economics were "conservative" and the anti-war position was "liberal" in the parlance of the day, but in those days the Republicans were running everything, and it seemed like driving an antiwar splinter into the middle of them might end the wars.

What happened when I talked about Ron Paul here? The threads got locked, that's what. And that's what happened to the energy of anti-war conservatives. We were told to fuck off at Free Republic, where every war is a good one. We were told to fuck off here at DU, where every Republican is a bad one. And at Kos, and basically everywhere major except for a few small, little read blogs.

So we started to organize, and run candidates, and we paid a lot of money to get Ron Paul's message out there. 20 million bucks, back when that was a lot of money, and it wasn't corporate cash, it was $50 here, $10 there, paypal, mastercard, whatever it took, because we WANTED TO END THE WAR. Whose attention did we get? We got the damn attention of the damn Republicans, of course, who, licking their wounds after the well-deserved thrashing they got in 2008 saw the energy in the Ron Paul campaign, saw the energy in the Tea Party frustration, and they infiltrated it, co-opted it, took it over and ended it as an expression of anti-war libertarianism, and turned it into Sara Palin central.

It's not the Tea Party anymore, it's the GOP Party now. So that's what happened to the anti-war libertarian right, following in Hayek's footsteps and Mises' footsteps into the wilderness once again.

But seriously, though.

What the fuck happened to the anti war left? Obama got elected and you just fucking disappeared.

You know, the Tea Party energy could have been here. There could have been a bipartisan grass-roots movement that would have really shaken D.C. up, and we really would be bringing our soldiers home, and we really could have saved a lot of people from being blown to smithereens by our soldiers, who are our sons and brothers and fathers, who are coming home scarred for life.

I come here and I post and I have been doing it for a long time. I have gone from hard left (when I started, hence the name) to a general disgust for all government when I saw how corrupt everyone in DC seemed to be, and when I saw how the corporations just OWN everyone. But I have always been against the murders that are being committed in our name in the Middle East. There has always been a strong anti war contingent here, but not anymore.

It's all about us vs. them. "All Republicans eat babies". "All Teabaggers (I know that means sucking balls in a bar, but it's funny because they are all so stupid they don't get the joke, haw haw, but we are clever and we get it, nevermind that it insults every gay person we know, so long as we can insult THEM) are face stomping stupid trailer dwelling white trash who vote against their own interests because they are so dumb, haw haw!

Well, okay, DU. You got Obama in office. Gratz.

The killing goes on and on and on, but let's don't talk about it, let's remain FOCUSED on us versus those stupid ass redneck Tea Party guys.

I'm so goddamn disappointed I have tears in my eyes writing this, you miserable, short-sighted accomplices.

[low preference guy]

wow

[tremendoustie]

What an absolutely outstanding post.

[LibertyVox]

bookmarked!

[silentshout]

Awesome post.

[Esor]

My favorite reply to the post:

"LOL
Sweet! What I really need is the unsolicited advice of someone who campaigned for racist reactionary RON PAUL! "

I find many liberals to be the most close-minded people I've ever dealt with... even more-so than religious neo-conservatives.

[amy31416]

Holy fucking brilliant...emotion is spot-on, logic is spot-on.

Hard to get both in one post.

[tremendoustie]

My favorite reply to the post:
I find many liberals to be the most close-minded people I've ever dealt with... even more-so than religious neo-conservatives.

I agree - but most democrats/liberals don't fit this description, just a few. I actually find the average so called liberal easier to talk to than the average neocon.

Again, there are exceptions.

[Pericles]

My favorite reply to the post:


I find many liberals to be the most close-minded people I've ever dealt with... even more-so than religious neo-conservatives.

This - and all too frequently combined with unmerited arrogance.

[susano]

My favorite reply to the post:


I find many liberals to be the most close-minded people I've ever dealt with... even more-so than religious neo-conservatives.

And arrogant.

The fact that the left totally dropped all concerns about the wars just shows that all they really care about is redistribution of wealth and social programs.

[socialvirus]

Holy Crap! Well written and articulated post! You can't get all that mad at zombies who can only call you names and not refute your arguments, or discuss the issues. People are gonna remain ignorant.

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

Great post. I didn't see that one. In another thread expressing similar messages I posted a concise, well articulated thesis where I pointed out that we and 'they' have more in common than we do with the NeoCon. I was going to try and get a dialogue with those that could still be reached. However, it is private property and the Moderators are assholes who are within their rights to do what they did: ban me and delete my posts.

Here is the message I mailed to the mods about the banning:


Since I am someone who highly values the concept of Private Property, I wholeheartedly applaud you for defending your private property. I am sad you decided to ban me since I didn't troll anyone nor post anything hateful or offensive. I came and offered an olive branch in a gesture of goodwill. Apparently, that is not appreciated by Democratic Underground. Sadly, you would have found allies in those like me who are Ron Paul supporters.

I don't suppose you saved my messages for me so I could reclaim them?

Yours Truly,

RonPaul_Anarchist

Libertatis Æquilibritas

[EvilEngineer]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9484081

I applaud this post. Not only by merit of it's content but in how well it is written and articulated.

Bravo.

[Kregisen]

And of course all the dems on that site give him shit because he's speaking his mind......they're so tolerant.

[puppetmaster]

fun read.....at least this guy is paying attention

[EvilEngineer]

And of course all the dems on that site give him shit because he's speaking his mind......they're so tolerant.

Their vitriol toward one another for a descenting view point is always a quality I didn't care for in either main stream party. Red State / Kos / DU are all horrific sites to post on if you want any kind of constructive argument.

Sadly most forum debates simply can't get above the bottom of the argument pyramid.

http://www.myconfinedspace.com/wp-content/uploads/tdomf/156715/argpyr.jpg

[jclay2]

That was an outstanding post. To bad most of the people at DU are to stuck up their a** to see that Obama will never decrease the defense budget yoy and will not reduce net oversees troop levels. I talked to one guy just last week who has a cousin in Afghanastan. He fully believes that within 18 months, Obama will pull the troops out of there. It is a joke how hypocritical these people they are. They compare Bush & Cheney to Hitler/Stalin and then see Obama as someone who is a slight disappointment.

When will they wake up? They pretend like they are mad (Stewart, Olberman, etc), but do they completely reject him? No! What do they do, they say "Obama might be luke warm, but the Republicans are pure evil". Better keep the war master in office. Gosh our country is done for. The only thing we can place our faith is now is Ron/Rand Paul taking on the Federal Reserve. Other than this, I don't have a lot of hope.

[Anti Federalist]

From the comments:


This site is for Democrats, not for just anyone opposing Republicans.

And there you have it, that's what it's all about. Nothing but Freepers of the left.

But this, oh this, was brilliant:


What the fuck happened to the anti war left? Obama got elected and you just fucking disappeared.

I'm so goddamn disappointed I have tears in my eyes writing this, you miserable, short-sighted accomplices

Wish I could give out +rep on other boards.

[BuddyRey]

Major applause to the author of this post, both for his/her sincerity and courage. If this message doesn't give pause to at least some of those poor, deluded souls on DU, then I don't know what will.

[splint]

I never really thought about it, but where are all the anti-war Democrats? Shouldn't this be an issue that would gravitate many of them to the side of the Ron Paul Republicans? Where is that large out cry from the left? It would appear that they have just been awfully silent...

Is eating crow that much worse than having a spine? Apparently so...

Speak out against your shitty president.

[Anti Federalist]

I never really thought about it, but where are all the anti-war Democrats? Shouldn't this be an issue that would gravitate many of them to the side of the Ron Paul Republicans? Where is that large out cry from the left? It would appear that they have just been awfully silent...

Is eating crow that much worse than having a spine? Apparently so...

Speak out against your shitty president.

Yeah, looks that way.

Welcome to the forums, Splint.

Awesome Screeching Weasels avatar BTW.

[moonshineplease]

I really liked reading your post.

[LibertyVox]

I never really thought about it, but where are all the anti-war Democrats? Shouldn't this be an issue that would gravitate many of them to the side of the Ron Paul Republicans? Where is that large out cry from the left? It would appear that they have just been awfully silent...

Is eating crow that much worse than having a spine? Apparently so...

Speak out against your shitty president.

Aye man, You're among friends here. Call it your e-home.

[MyLibertyStuff]

People are really starting to wake up. I am constantly amazed by the progress we are making in the minds of Americans and the media :)

[akforme]

I never really thought about it, but where are all the anti-war Democrats? Shouldn't this be an issue that would gravitate many of them to the side of the Ron Paul Republicans? Where is that large out cry from the left? It would appear that they have just been awfully silent...

Is eating crow that much worse than having a spine? Apparently so...

Speak out against your shitty president.

And they can't understand why the neocons only bitched about the spending when Obama came into office.

I watched Bill Maher a few weeks back and it was about the intolerance and bulling of the homophobes, while they showed no tolerance and bullied them for the whole hour. It was quite revealing.

[Esor]

I was wondering how long it would take to get locked.


We're locking this as a General Attack on other DUers

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

I was wondering how long it would take to get locked.

Yea, sad. Doesn't surprise me in the least. I remember right after Obama won visiting DU and reading alot of the 'We're gonna stick it to 'em now!' type posts. Its the same sort of vitriol now. Its a circular firing squad since they're most certainly going to toss overboard even more of the reasonable Democrats in favour of the same scum that run the Republican party.

[RM918]

Depressing to see this guy shouted down. One guy even said Paul was a hypocrite for caucusing with 'evil' and used, as evidence, Paul voting against a military spending bill (like he always does) but was mad at him because it had a thing in there about troop withdrawal dates.

[amy31416]

We do the same damned thing here, we're not as bad (or as hypocritical, or as partisan)...but we do. We demonize all Dems as being THE problem, rather than the manipulative gov't & media. Notice that a few of the comments accused the guy of being a paid psy-op? Sound familiar? People here who say that Kucinich, Grayson and Feingold are evil filth, because they don't agree with us on 1 out of 20 issues--are those guys misguided on certain issues, like gun control and health care "reform?" Hell yeah...but they aren't corporate-controlled monsters who support our killing machine, like some politicians who WE support who are all about keeping up the status quo on warfare. (Bachmann & DeMint come to mind.)

We should be as civil as possible up until the point comes when we can no longer be civil--and even then, they aren't our real enemy. We'll never end these wars alone, and perhaps we could consider addressing individual issues, rather than beating people over the head who ask "How do we keep guns out of the hands of the criminally insane?"

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

We do the same damned thing here, we're not as bad (or as hypocritical, or as partisan)...but we do. We demonize all Dems as being THE problem, rather than the manipulative gov't & media. Notice that a few of the comments accused the guy of being a paid psy-op? Sound familiar? People here who say that Kucinich, Grayson and Feingold are evil filth, because they don't agree with us on 1 out of 20 issues--are those guys misguided on certain issues, like gun control and health care "reform?" Hell yeah...but they aren't corporate-controlled monsters who support our killing machine, like some politicians who WE support who are all about keeping up the status quo on warfare. (Bachmann & DeMint come to mind.)

We should be as civil as possible up until the point comes when we can no longer be civil--and even then, they aren't our real enemy. We'll never end these wars alone, and perhaps we could consider addressing individual issues, rather than beating people over the head who ask "How do we keep guns out of the hands of the criminally insane?"

It's part of the partisan culture of politics. I am only partisan when it comes to principles. :D I've been beaten around a bit here when I supported those who agreed with my positions on certain issues (Immigration, war, etc.) which are 100% inline with libertarianism, but they are the 'evil incarnate' Democrats. They are the same people who accuse me of being a no-compromiser, yet they won't work with 'Dems', and other sorts even if they agree on the damn issue at hand! So, yes, I agree there are those here, but you will find that everywhere where politics is involved. Principles > politicking. That's why I was attracted to Ron because he didn't politick much at all, and just spoke and voted his philosophy. I am sure saying we should end the IRS and income tax lost him votes, which to most here would be a sign of blasphemy to speak such things that cost you votes even though it is the truth. That got me a ban for a few days also. /shrug

[Bern]

I haven't read through the comments to that outstanding post, but someone should drop a link to Justin Raimondo's op-ed in there:

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/10/26/whatever-happened-to-the-antiwar-movement-2/

[Elwar]

I tend to get asked the question "where were you guys when we were protesting the war under Bush"?

They didn't like the answer that I was there protesting the war but that it wasn't so much a protest against the war as a big recruiting ground for the communists and socialists and every other liberal agenda that had nothing to do with the war. Leaves a bad taste in your mouth and makes you not want to be around such groups.

[Icymudpuppy]

We do the same damned thing here, we're not as bad (or as hypocritical, or as partisan)...but we do. We demonize all Dems as being THE problem, rather than the manipulative gov't & media. Notice that a few of the comments accused the guy of being a paid psy-op? Sound familiar? People here who say that Kucinich, Grayson and Feingold are evil filth, because they don't agree with us on 1 out of 20 issues--are those guys misguided on certain issues, like gun control and health care "reform?" Hell yeah...but they aren't corporate-controlled monsters who support our killing machine, like some politicians who WE support who are all about keeping up the status quo on warfare. (Bachmann & DeMint come to mind.)

We should be as civil as possible up until the point comes when we can no longer be civil--and even then, they aren't our real enemy. We'll never end these wars alone, and perhaps we could consider addressing individual issues, rather than beating people over the head who ask "How do we keep guns out of the hands of the criminally insane?"

This is true, but at least banning is really rare here and pretty much restricted to personal attacks

[Theocrat]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9484081

What a sad post, but what's even more sad are the responses to his post:

Not So Impressive As You May Suppose, Sir: Paul Is A Militia-Style Racist Reactionary
Expecting anything he was even figurehead of to prove out anything but an extreme right quasi-fascist movement shows, shall we say, extremely poor judgement....

Teabaggers are morons and Ron and Rand Paul are kooks
"I'm so goddamn disappointed I have tears in my eyes writing this, you miserable, short-sighted accomplices."

Your precious Rand Paul enabled war criminals by caucusing with them.

See this bill (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll186.xml).

House and Senate conferees approved this legislation providing $124.2 billion primarily for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and setting benchmarks and a timetable for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, but President Bush vetoed the bill on May 1. ...The legislation says that troops in Iraq would not have their service extended beyond a year for any tour of duty. It also mandates that the president must certify that the Iraqi government is meeting certain diplomatic and security benchmarks. If that certification is made, deployment would begin no later than Oct. 1, 2007, with a goal of completing the redeployment by within 180 days. Some U.S. forces could remain in Iraq for special counterterrorism efforts along with protection, training and equipping Iraqi troops

Paul voted against it with all the other Republicans.

See this bill (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll624.xml). This bill would require the president to begin reducing the number of U.S. troops serving in Iraq 120 days after its enactment and would require most troops to be withdrawn by April 1, 2008.

Paul skipped the vote and all the other Republicans voted against it.

Paul does things like vote against SCHIP. He is a Republican kook.

"What happened when I talked about Ron Paul here? The threads got locked, that's what. And that's what happened to the energy of anti-war conservatives. We were told to fuck off at Free Republic, where every war is a good one. We were told to fuck off here at DU, where every Republican is a bad one. And at Kos, and basically everywhere major except for a few small, little read blogs."

Wonder why?

Homophobes and racists don't deserve civility.
Not a goddamn one of them was an anti-war person; they've always been a bunch of nasty, reactionary, racist filth -- good to know you're proud of counting yourself amongst their number.

Those people are pathetically hopeless, and they deserve everything they get from an Obama Presidency.

[Deinonychus]

Stossel was right when he said most liberals are politically intolerant.

[amy31416]

This is true, but at least banning is really rare here and pretty much restricted to personal attacks

I agree...but I think we have to ask ourselves if we would have run someone like that off, as he does, obviously, hold some leftist beliefs and I suspect, feels more "at home" on DU than here. (Though maybe not anymore.)

We can be pretty brutal, and I'm not sure about the mindset of folks who agree with RP on a lot of things, but disagree vehemently on others--as soon as I knew he was genuine on the war issue, and very principled on all other issues, I was open to hearing and researching the rest of the issues where I didn't know where he was coming from.

I guess all they hear is

"This guy wants to end affirmative action! RACIST!"
"He wants fewer gun laws! VIOLENT!"
"He's anti-abortion! HE HATES WOMEN HAVING EQUAL RIGHTS!"
"He wants to end SS and welfare! HE HATES MINORITIES AND OLD PEOPLE!"

And on, and on (similar arguments are used against him by neocons too, btw)...we know the underlying philosophy of his beliefs, and so even if we don't agree on some particular issues--we don't have knee-jerk reactions to it. But how do we convey these things? Like Ron Paul--the ever patient professorial-type who keeps explaining every aspect of his philosophy and how his voting record/conclusions are based on it? Or are we more like Lew Rockwell, who just dismisses you as "stupid?"

Many of the former neocon-believers here complain about us being more like Lew Rockwell than Ron Paul, I'm sure that former/current Dems would have the same issue.

Not saying that I'm not guilty of it myself, but it's something to think about. Until the time comes that this country is totally torn apart, I can see the serious value in being civil to those on the right AND on the left who aren't on board--yet.

[raystone]

Great post, except that Ron Paul is not anti-war. He's anti unconstitutional war.

In 2002, as war with Iraq loomed, I proposed that Congress officially declare war against Iraq, making it clear that I intended to oppose my own measure. The point was to underscore our constitutional responsibility to declare war before commencing major military operations, rather than leaving the decision to the President or passing resolutions that delegate to the president the decision making power over war.Source: The Revolution: A Manifesto, by Ron Paul, p. 52-53 Apr 1, 2008

[Icymudpuppy]

Great post, except that Ron Paul is not anti-war. He's anti unconstitutional war.

In 2002, as war with Iraq loomed, I proposed that Congress officially declare war against Iraq, making it clear that I intended to oppose my own measure. The point was to underscore our constitutional responsibility to declare war before commencing major military operations, rather than leaving the decision to the President or passing resolutions that delegate to the president the decision making power over war.Source: The Revolution: A Manifesto, by Ron Paul, p. 52-53 Apr 1, 2008

Umm, he says in your quote that he would have voted against his own call for a declaration of war. Still anti-war, even one that was constitutionally declared.

[ChaosControl]

That website sure has awful design. And it is full of idiots, but I expected that given its name. Good post though.

[hugolp]

That website sure has awful design. And it is full of idiots, but I expected that given its name. Good post though.

It has to look bad. The young turds there like to feel underground. If the page had a good design it would not be the real deal, dont you get it?

[aravoth]

I feel bad for the OP. But then, most progressives aren't antiwar at all, they just talk shit when the opposite party is in power. People getting massacered by war, and the horrifying psychological results is has on everyone involved means nothing to them.

Sure, they'll spin a good yarn when it suits them. It's easy really. That base will do whatever they are told, and right now, no one is telling them to protest the war, no one is telling them that it's OK to hold their own elected party official accountable.

I thought once, that we had some things in common with the anti-war left. Since Obama got elected I learned how wrong I was.

They all turned into nothing more than shortsighted Neo-cons,and not a single one of them realizes it.

[klamath]

We do the same damned thing here, we're not as bad (or as hypocritical, or as partisan)...but we do. We demonize all Dems as being THE problem, rather than the manipulative gov't & media. Notice that a few of the comments accused the guy of being a paid psy-op? Sound familiar? People here who say that Kucinich, Grayson and Feingold are evil filth, because they don't agree with us on 1 out of 20 issues--are those guys misguided on certain issues, like gun control and health care "reform?" Hell yeah...but they aren't corporate-controlled monsters who support our killing machine, like some politicians who WE support who are all about keeping up the status quo on warfare. (Bachmann & DeMint come to mind.)

We should be as civil as possible up until the point comes when we can no longer be civil--and even then, they aren't our real enemy. We'll never end these wars alone, and perhaps we could consider addressing individual issues, rather than beating people over the head who ask "How do we keep guns out of the hands of the criminally insane?"
Well Amy it comes down to the voting record. You say 1 out of 20 issues. The freedom index that almost always rates RP at 100% also rates all the other members of congress on their voting records. Kucinich who happens to be one of the highest rated democrats, votes with RP only 4.5 out of 10 times. Now look at the others.
Feingold only 3.5 out of 10
Grayson only 2 out of 10

Demint 9.7 out of 10
Bachmann 8.8 out of 10

This is based on 120 house votes and 40 senate votes.

There is a reason some of us support Demint and Bachmann over Grayson and Feingold.I will support Kucinich Grayson and Feingold where they are on RP's side but would I vote for and support people I disagree with 60 to 80% of the time? No.

[Angel]

I can remember attending my first anti-war rally. It was during Ron Paul's primary campaign in Philadelphia, and I was there, holding a RevoLution banner down Market Street. Of course, at the time, Ron Paul was but a blip on the radar screen, and most non-RPers had no clue who he or his supporters were, but this was our opportunity to gather support amongst those who shared some of our views of ending these unconstitutionally declared wars. I had high hopes and was excited and upbeat about the event. My experience, however, was that most other people there, especially the event organizers and the hardcore politicos, were very angry and despondent. Most had done this for so long that they really didn't seem to expect anything to change because of it. There were no constructive ideas, no positive plan-of-actions. This was their identity and label - the liberal anti-war protester - and this was their cathartic hate-fest.

Yes, there were plenty of leftist political groups looking for people to sign up to their causes, but in all honesty, that is exactly why we were there as well.

Before 2007, I voted primarily democratic. I shared many viewpoints with friends and relatives who also voted democratic, but on a whole, I did not, nor do I now, subscribe to any political camp (i.e., liberal, conservative, libertarian, etc.) and in my experience, most people that I know don't truly fall lockstep into any of them as well, even if they, when pressed to do so, identify themselves as such. It is my opinion that the vast majority of Americans are this way as well. It is only when they fully embrace a label that they start down a path to where they become ideologically rigid, and begin to see other Americans as "those people", as in "those liberals are intolerant" or "those conservatives are evil" or "those tea partiers are downright racist". Using labels such as these tends to shut down the reasoning part of people's brains, in my experience. I fear that "Ron Paul", as well as "Tea Party", has also become a label of sorts. Perhaps it's time to strip the label off the ideas. It's my opinion, anyway, that Ron Paul never sought to be idolized, just to educate people.

The Ron Paul RevoLution did something extraordinary for me. It showed me that a political movement based on tearing down the left-right, liberal-conservative, us-them illusion was possible. I'm happy to see, even after all of this "Tea Party Republican" stuff, that some still see past it, even if only on one forum. I hope that most on this forum, especially the ones who took away the same thing as I did from campaigning in '07 and '08, don't forget this.

[klamath]

Now let's look at the record of the progressive democrats.
WWI Democrat
WWII Democrat
Korea Democrat
Vietnam Democrat
Gulf I Republican
Bosnia Democrat
Kosovo Democrat
Iraq Republican
Afganistan Republican

I only included wars that the troops stayed for over 5 years.
Of those 3 wars that republicans started they were both the Bush's.
By actions Progressives are not against war.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Great post, except that Ron Paul is not anti-war. He's anti unconstitutional war.

In 2002, as war with Iraq loomed, I proposed that Congress officially declare war against Iraq, making it clear that I intended to oppose my own measure. The point was to underscore our constitutional responsibility to declare war before commencing major military operations, rather than leaving the decision to the President or passing resolutions that delegate to the president the decision making power over war.Source: The Revolution: A Manifesto, by Ron Paul, p. 52-53 Apr 1, 2008

Actually, he is anti-'constitutional' war also (if you read that passage he even says he would have voted against it). Ron Paul is foremost pro-peace & anti-state. You can't really be Anti-State and advocate wars which enlarge the State. It's a contradictory position. Ron knows it.

[Angel]

They all turned into nothing more than shortsighted Neo-cons,and not a single one of them realizes it.

This could just as easily come out of the mouth of an Obama supporter about Republican or Tea Party supporters. I'm sure many wonder why people would support Republicans, being that neoconservatives are in that party as well. I highly doubt that "they" are all shortsighted neocons. If you want to change their perspectives, you need to find the commonalities and build bridges. If you truly want to reach people who seem unreasonable or unreachable, you have to presume from the beginning that they are going to be confrontational with you.

When you push back, the discussion ends. Both of you head back to your political camps and nothing improves. If you give them nothing to push back on (like refraining from labeling them a neocon, for instance), most people attempt to see your point of view, even if they may not always agree with it.

[LibertyEagle]

Actually, he is anti-'constitutional' war also (if you read that passage he even says he would have voted against it). Ron Paul is foremost pro-peace & anti-state. You can't really be Anti-State and advocate wars which enlarge the State. It's a contradictory position. Ron knows it.

He didn't say a dang thing about wars which enlarge the state. The poster said that Ron was not "anti-war".

Dr. Paul is very strong on national defense. If someone attacks us, or poses an imminent threat of doing so, I have no doubt that he would be very supportive of declaring war.

[klamath]

This could just as easily come out of the mouth of an Obama supporter about Republican or Tea Party supporters. I'm sure many wonder why people would support Republicans, being that neoconservatives are in that party as well. I highly doubt that "they" are all shortsighted neocons. If you want to change their perspectives, you need to find the commonalities and build bridges. If you truly want to reach people who seem unreasonable or unreachable, you have to presume from the beginning that they are going to be confrontational with you.

When you push back, the discussion ends. Both of you head back to your political camps and nothing improves. If you give them nothing to push back on (like refraining from labeling them a neocon, for instance), most people attempt to see your point of view, even if they may not always agree with it.
Ok this was a guy trying to build a bridge and the thread was locked. If nothing else if they didn't like RP it should have opened a debate on what happened to the antiwar left but no they don't even want to talk about that.

[tremendoustie]

He didn't say a dang thing about wars which enlarge the state. The poster said that Ron was not "anti-war".

Dr. Paul is very strong on national defense. If someone attacks us, or poses an imminent threat of doing so, I have no doubt that he would be very supportive of declaring war.

The phrase "anti-war" means anti wars like Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. Ron paul is definitely antiwar.

Virtually nobody would suggest we shouldn't repel an invasion.

[angelatc]

There is a reason some of us support Demint and Bachmann over Grayson and Feingold.I will support Kucinich Grayson and Feingold where they are on RP's side but would I vote for and support people I disagree with 60 to 80% of the time? No.

I tend to agree, with the caveat that ending the wars isn't really on the agenda. Unlike a liberal, I'd sell out some conservative values if I thought there was a snowball's chance of getting a real bipartisian "get us the hell out of the Middle East" coalition organized in Congress.

[Deborah K]

Now let's look at the record of the progressive democrats.
WWI Democrat
WWII Democrat
Korea Democrat
Vietnam Democrat
Gulf I Republican
Bosnia Democrat
Kosovo Democrat
Iraq Republican
Afganistan Republican

I only included wars that the troops stayed for over 5 years.
Of those 3 wars that republicans started they were both the Bush's.
By actions Progressives are not against war.

I distinctly remember a time when democrats were considered war mongers.

[LibertyEagle]

The phrase "anti-war" means anti wars like Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. Ron paul is definitely antiwar.

Virtually nobody would suggest we shouldn't repel an invasion.

I understand. However, that may be what it means to you, but that sure isn't what it means to most Republicans.

[klamath]

I tend to agree, with the caveat that ending the wars isn't really on the agenda. Unlike a liberal, I'd sell out some conservative values if I thought there was a snowball's chance of getting a real bipartisian "get us the hell out of the Middle East" coalition organized in Congress.

Actually the freedom index does consider war votes. They generally are against the wars but I agree with you. When the democrats won 4 and 2 years ago I hoped if nothing else they would end the wars even if we got an expanded rate of socialism. They didn't so now I have to go back and look at the long term history of the parties. The democrats by FAR have a worse record of nation building with wars.

[Angel]

Ok this was a guy trying to build a bridge and the thread was locked. If nothing else if they didn't like RP it should have opened a debate on what happened to the antiwar left but no they don't even want to talk about that.

I wholeheartedly agree. Had they wanted an open discussion, they would have not locked the thread. Reading his post, there was no call for it.

That being said, especially in this climate, you can't expect most politically charged people to be civil unless you take the initiative. It has been hypercharged so much by the media, that some people are motivated to kill (or physically defend themselves against) other Americans because they are told by radio and TV personalities that they are a personal threat to them and their liberties. This is not only to the "right" but the "left" as well, and it's wrong. We are all Americans, first and foremost, and we have more values in common than we have that divide us.

Yes, these forums will lock your thread when they hear buzz words, labels and talking points. And some of them are not even worth trying to participate in. But sometimes, you slip in and maybe, just maybe, change a few minds by appealing to their better angels, while getting your point across.

Again, there was nothing uncivil about his post. They had a knee-jerk reaction to the words "Tea Party", didn't want to hear anything after that, and behaved poorly because of it.

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

Although I'm sure he'll never see it, I thought I would reply to my deleted post in the DU thread: Can we please talk honestly?


It is a shame that post we replied to was deleted

For those of you who missed it, it was from someone of a different political persuasion, who was trying to reach out to us and form an alliance on the issues we both agree on. Work together for the popular common good. He was very respectful and wanted to work with us.

Poboy, thank you for being one of the few at DU who understand. Yes, it is awful that my post was deleted. I wholeheartedly and respectfully applaud the Moderators for what they did as it is their Private Property. Unlike some I get the concepts behind it even when it affects me personally. I would have loved to open a serious, meaningful and respectful dialogue with those on 'the left' who understand the perils we face from the Warfare-Surveillance State that is moving forward crushing our Liberties.

Yours Truly,
RonPaul_Anarchist

Libertatis Æquilibritas


.................................................. .......................

To my fellow Ron Paulers, we need to find allies and start building bridges. Yes, I know I'm not saying something we already don't know and don't understand. There is a whole pile of chaff and its going to be maddening trying to find the wheat among it. In a way, we got kicked in the balls just as badly as the reasonable Progressives by the last election as there is a whole passel of NeoCons going to Washington that will try and overshadow Ron, Rand, Justin and the other Liberty-minded politicians. Although I detested him over the Healthcare issue, Alan Grayson at least could work with Ron on The Federal Reserve issues and I applauded him with great enthusiasm when he introduced The War is making you Poor Act.

[purplechoe]

Now let's look at the record of the progressive democrats.
WWI Democrat
WWII Democrat
Korea Democrat
Vietnam Democrat
Gulf I Republican
Bosnia Democrat
Kosovo Democrat
Iraq Republican
Afganistan Republican

I only included wars that the troops stayed for over 5 years.
Of those 3 wars that republicans started they were both the Bush's.
By actions Progressives are not against war.

Thanks for posting that list, it will come in handy...

[Ethek]

I agree - but most democrats/liberals don't fit this description, just a few. I actually find the average so called liberal easier to talk to than the average neocon.

Again, there are exceptions.

Truth

[Inflation]

That was an epic rant. I give it 10/10.

How cowardly of the mods to lock it as a "general attack on DUrs."

It wasn't an attack, it was very sincere and well put criticism.

How cowardly to frame honest criticism as a "general attack."

Many of the responses were receptive, or at least sympathetic.

Rants like this are the first shots of the DemocRAT civil war being fired.

[txaslftist]

Hi. This is Txaslftist, and I thought y'all should know that after posting the thread made reference to in this article, I actually was banned from posting at DU.

Which is okay, since I've been learning and growing as a politically aware person, and I don't think the Democratic Party is really a fit for me anymore.

Anyway that's a follow up from this article. I am gratified that people saw fit to share my ramblings here.

[cswake]

I actually was banned from posting at DU.Sorry to hear it, especially considering you had a history (1000+ posts) of contributing to their discussions.

Let me suggest that you are welcome to continue posting here! :D

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Hi. This is Txaslftist, and I thought y'all should know that after posting the thread made reference to in this article, I actually was banned from posting at DU.

Which is okay, since I've been learning and growing as a politically aware person, and I don't think the Democratic Party is really a fit for me anymore.

Anyway that's a follow up from this article. I am gratified that people saw fit to share my ramblings here.

Well there is a wealth of information available here. Just shy away from LibertyEagle, ahhhh just kidding just kidding. :D

Might I recommend:

http://mises.org/media/961

As a starting point. Cheers.

PS: I think you will find that 99.9% of us here aren't at home in either major party.

[klamath]

Hi. This is Txaslftist, and I thought y'all should know that after posting the thread made reference to in this article, I actually was banned from posting at DU.

Which is okay, since I've been learning and growing as a politically aware person, and I don't think the Democratic Party is really a fit for me anymore.

Anyway that's a follow up from this article. I am gratified that people saw fit to share my ramblings here.
Welcome aboard. Very heartfelt and sincere post you made. You have to watch out for forums that are in existence only to promote a party. If you say one thing against the promoted party you will be in violation of the forum guidelines and get banned. I like a little more freedom to speak honestly so I never post and join sites like that.

[txaslftist]

"Welcome aboard. Very heartfelt and sincere post you made. You have to watch out for forums that are in existence only the promote a party. If you say one thing against the promoted party you will be in violation of the forum guidelines and get banned. I like a little more freedom to speak honestly so I never post and join sites like that."

Well, I had been posting on that site since prior to 2003, or thereabouts, so I'd been there a long time. My political leanings have shifted significantly since then.

[Todd]

The people at DU don't represent anything resembling what is the core of the anti war left.


The anti war left is still around, but unfortunately it's numbers are pretty insignificant at most events. Like this group (http://www.charlottesvillepeace.org/)

[txaslftist]

Well, it was probably 4000+ posts or so. Most of my posting now is at different sites. As a consequence, my posts at DU tend to rouse ire, because I no longer feel a need to be politically correct or "site correct".

Apparently they'd had enough of me, and that's fine. There are other places that exchange ideas freely, and frankly, I prefer them.

[georgiaboy]

Phenomenal OP. Excellent thread.


...we know the underlying philosophy of his beliefs, and so even if we don't agree on some particular issues--we don't have knee-jerk reactions to it. But how do we convey these things? Like Ron Paul--the ever patient professorial-type who keeps explaining every aspect of his philosophy and how his voting record/conclusions are based on it? Or are we more like Lew Rockwell, who just dismisses you as "stupid?"

Many of the former neocon-believers here complain about us being more like Lew Rockwell than Ron Paul, I'm sure that former/current Dems would have the same issue.

Not saying that I'm not guilty of it myself, but it's something to think about. Until the time comes that this country is totally torn apart, I can see the serious value in being civil to those on the right AND on the left who aren't on board--yet.

Very yes.

[Esor]

Well, it was probably 4000+ posts or so. Most of my posting now is at different sites. As a consequence, my posts at DU tend to rouse ire, because I no longer feel a need to be politically correct or "site correct".

Apparently they'd had enough of me, and that's fine. There are other places that exchange ideas freely, and frankly, I prefer them.

Welcome txaslftist. Hope you enjoy it here.

[silentshout]

Hi. This is Txaslftist, and I thought y'all should know that after posting the thread made reference to in this article, I actually was banned from posting at DU.

Which is okay, since I've been learning and growing as a politically aware person, and I don't think the Democratic Party is really a fit for me anymore.

Anyway that's a follow up from this article. I am gratified that people saw fit to share my ramblings here.

Welcome! I am a former Democrat, too. I can't believe that they banned you from posting. People over there need to hear stuff like this. Then again, I CAN believe that they banned you. It's just..sad.

[TheHumblePhysicist]

And arrogant.

The fact that the left totally dropped all concerns about the wars just shows that all they really care about is redistribution of wealth and social programs.

Well, yeah. To say that if you are against the war, you MUST be for socialism makes absolutely no sense at all.

The left is really a giant top-down organization, with the people with money at the top, politicians below them, scientists below them, students below them, and activists below them. Opposition to the war was a strategy by the people at the top to advance their real agenda through the people at the bottom.

The students have been taught from their inception into the school system that God is a fantasy, and so have constructed idols out of university professors, converting their natural instinct for religious worship into worship of the state.

I have met these people, foaming at the mouth radicals who are ready to dismiss a logical argument with a sideways smile and a sarcastic reply.

[amy31416]

Thanks to purplechoe for starting the thread...welcome TXlftist. :)

[txaslftist]

thanks.

[txaslftist]

So much of our current troubles stem from our incorrect response to 9-11 and the commencement of the war in Iraq. This is a consequence of our interventionism worldwide, of course. War and aggression are really key, and I find it hard to believe how little they were discussed in the 2010 election.

[txaslftist]

I have met these people, foaming at the mouth radicals who are ready to dismiss a logical argument with a sideways smile and a sarcastic reply.



I am very thankful to Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell and, of course, Ron Paul, for giving my misgivings about the Democrats structure and form. Otherwise my disappointment with them on the war issue would have been much greater.

[Bruno]

Welcome, txaslftist! Great post, sorry to hear you got banned.

I particularly liked this part of your post:

It's all about us vs. them. "All Republicans eat babies". "All Teabaggers (I know that means sucking balls in a bar, but it's funny because they are all so stupid they don't get the joke, haw haw, but we are clever and we get it, nevermind that it insults every gay person we know, so long as we can insult THEM) are face stomping stupid trailer dwelling white trash who vote against their own interests because they are so dumb, haw haw!

[txaslftist]

I am not sorry I got banned. I think it helped me cross several personal political rubicons. The banning basically gelled with me the fact that I'm not really a Democrat anymore. I will never consider them "enemies" of course, but I never considered Republicans to be my "enemies" (with a few notable exceptions during the Bush years), either. I have to write a letter to the Democratic Party boss in my city to let her know I am resigning as a precinct chair, for starters. Gonna start politicking for Ron Paul Republicans against establishment guys, instead.

[Bruno]

I am not sorry I got banned. I think it helped me cross several personal political rubicons. The banning basically gelled with me the fact that I'm not really a Democrat anymore. I will never consider them "enemies" of course, but I never considered Republicans to be my "enemies" (with a few notable exceptions during the Bush years), either. I have to write a letter to the Democratic Party boss in my city to let her know I am resigning as a precinct chair, for starters. Gonna start politicking for Ron Paul Republicans against establishment guys, instead.

That is excellent news to hear. :)

+ rep

[trey4sports]

I am not sorry I got banned. I think it helped me cross several personal political rubicons. The banning basically gelled with me the fact that I'm not really a Democrat anymore. I will never consider them "enemies" of course, but I never considered Republicans to be my "enemies" (with a few notable exceptions during the Bush years), either. I have to write a letter to the Democratic Party boss in my city to let her know I am resigning as a precinct chair, for starters. Gonna start politicking for Ron Paul Republicans against establishment guys, instead.

Welcome to the r3VOLution!

[txaslftist]

Well, I've sent money to Ron Paul a few times before, and I've posted on his behalf many times.

To see the way he's unfairly portrayed on DU repeatedly, despite my posting proof to the contrary, it's gotten really old.

[JacksonianBME]

Welcome to the r3VOLution!

Yes indeed. Don't listen to the media about us or Ron Paul. He is quite sane in his economic philosophies. I suggest reading "The Law" by Frederic Bastiat and anything Mises. I'll start you out with the point that inflation is a phenomenon that occurs when currency, credit, loans, leverage, etc. is created beyond the output (GDP) of a nation, and therefore leads to the inevitable contraction (bust), indebtedness, and impoverishment.

[Bern]

Howdy neighbor!

[Aratus]

rep. ron paul understands what smedley butler was trying to say!
i am not surprised at all the DU went hyper over how conformistic
potus barack obama is being when around g. w bush's old people!

[farrar]

I wanted to post a response on their site, defending the op... but they locked it "as a general attack on DU users"...

hypocrites, all they know how to do is call us fascist racists. funny because both those ideologies are rooted in group rights over individual rights... and guess as to which rights where littered all over those forums? group rights, thats what. ahhh it annoys me because I actually created an account to respond... lol.

[tremendoustie]

txaslftist, welcome -- that post of yours on DU was epic -- you said exactly what I've been feeling about the antiwar left for a while now, and said it so much better than I could.

If only people on the left would work for peace, and defend civil liberties when a democrat is in office, and if people on the right would work for small government and financial liberty when a republican is in office, we'd be far, far better off in this country.

We need people who stand for principles (and ideally the principles of liberty), rather than just party.

[devil21]

I distinctly remember a time when democrats were considered war mongers.

Interventionist foreign policy is a creation of the left. Historically, Republicans/conservatives are fiercely anti-war. I remember my southern-born, old-right grandparents giving my mother shit for working for the "war machine" not 25 years ago. She was employed by Raytheon at the time.
It's just since W. decided to make the Republican party the new "war party" that it has changed. People have such short memories and a terrible grasp of history.

[ravedown]

amazing post- im sending a copy to friends. btw...my favorite line was
(and now they think he's a dangerous nut because he has been effective).
so true...

[amy31416]

Interventionist foreign policy is a creation of the left. Historically, Republicans/conservatives are fiercely anti-war. I remember my southern-born, old-right grandparents giving my mother shit for working for the "war machine" not 25 years ago. She was employed by Raytheon at the time.
It's just since W. decided to make the Republican party the new "war party" that it has changed. People have such short memories and a terrible grasp of history.

Mmmm...GHW Bush bombed/invaded Iraq as well. Reagan had some pretty iffy foreign policy, as did Eisenhower.

The Dems were generally less covert and did things on a bigger scale, but Republican interventionists have been with us for over 50 years now.

[oyarde]

Mmmm...GHW Bush bombed/invaded Iraq as well. Reagan had some pretty iffy foreign policy, as did Eisenhower.

The Dems were generally less covert and did things on a bigger scale, but Republican interventionists have been with us for over 50 years now.

If we really start digging , you probably have to go back to before WW1 .

[amy31416]

If we really start digging , you probably have to go back to before WW1 .

I'm sure you're right, just going with what I know so's I don't look like a chump. :p

[txaslftist]

I wanted to post a response on their site, defending the op... but they locked it "as a general attack on DU users"...

hypocrites, all they know how to do is call us fascist racists. funny because both those ideologies are rooted in group rights over individual rights... and guess as to which rights where littered all over those forums? group rights, thats what. ahhh it annoys me because I actually created an account to respond... lol.

They banned me from the site, too.

[txaslftist]

Thanks. I've been very gratified by the responses I got from that post of mine. I didn't know it would get me banned from DU, but it's probably about time I moved on from there anyway.

[TheHumblePhysicist]

They banned me from the site, too.

They are intolerant of opposing views. These people are rabid

[txaslftist]

They are intolerant of opposing views. These people are rabid

I don't think the majority of them are rabid. Many of them are people I have known for years over there. I think they are confused, and they are having problems coming to grip with Obama as president, as opposed to Obama as "great hope and change". They fail to see that he's spent 2 years kicking the can down the road, not really standing up for anything.

It is disheartening, but I imagine their site is losing members fast, too, as they become more rigid in their accepted idealogy.

[cswake]

^ This reminds me of the Bush era. Republicans are just coming to terms that they were had for eight years.

[Yieu]

Thank you for that post, I think it conveys how a lot of us feel, and it was inspirational.

[txaslftist]

Thank you.

[moonshineplease]

Bumping great post for progressive support.

[tangent4ronpaul]

Ummm - yeah - I heard this guy on C-SPAN... "Umm Yeah - I'm a republican and I used to be a teaBAGGER" till Obama won me over with his bank bailouts and....[/B]

:rolleyes:

[Chester Copperpot]

Amazing...

[Chester Copperpot]

Thanks. I've been very gratified by the responses I got from that post of mine. I didn't know it would get me banned from DU, but it's probably about time I moved on from there anyway.

Wow, that was you?... glad to have you aboard man

[BUSHLIED]

Yeah, where is move-on.org now that Obama has been in office...they moved-on

[Agorism]

Did he get tombstoned?

[angelatc]

Yeah, where is move-on.org now that Obama has been in office...they moved-on I goet an email from them almost every day. They're very much alive and well. Sadly.

[JK/SEA]

Just to let you know. I'm a former democrat. Supported democrats since the 60's. Protested every war starting with Vietnam. I'm 60 years old now, and the ONLY reason i jumped onto this Ron Paul Revolution 'bandwagon' was because of Ron Paul's foreign policy as it relates to war. You are so very correct about ''war eats everything'' statement, and that pretty much sums up my political ideology. Everything else pales in comparison. What bothers me now, and i guess it's always bothered me, just that as i get older my tolerance wanes towards people who just don't get it. Damn, you would think after 10 years of chasing that Bin Laden clone army, people would be sick of war by now. What the hell is going on?

I weep at least once a week for those young soldiers we have over there. Basically just fodder for the war machine and the money involved. Thanks for your service soldier, now die for me. Thankyou.

[Sentient Void]

Wow... just. Wow.

Amazing.

[jmdrake]

We do the same damned thing here, we're not as bad (or as hypocritical, or as partisan)...but we do. We demonize all Dems as being THE problem, rather than the manipulative gov't & media. Notice that a few of the comments accused the guy of being a paid psy-op? Sound familiar? People here who say that Kucinich, Grayson and Feingold are evil filth, because they don't agree with us on 1 out of 20 issues--are those guys misguided on certain issues, like gun control and health care "reform?" Hell yeah...but they aren't corporate-controlled monsters who support our killing machine, like some politicians who WE support who are all about keeping up the status quo on warfare. (Bachmann & DeMint come to mind.)

We should be as civil as possible up until the point comes when we can no longer be civil--and even then, they aren't our real enemy. We'll never end these wars alone, and perhaps we could consider addressing individual issues, rather than beating people over the head who ask "How do we keep guns out of the hands of the criminally insane?"

Well here you'll at least get a debate. I like Kucinich and frankly had forgotten about Feingold. I liked Grayson until he became a hyper-douche on healthcare. (Falsely accusing opponents of Obamacare of wanting to kill seniors. Sorry but I don't take any more kindly to Grayson on that than I did Beck calling us terrorists.) I was sorely disappointed on Kucinich for caving on Obamacare after getting an Air Force One ride. I'm not a Bachmann fan or a Demint fan, but Demint did help Rand and that means it's possible to work with him.

[KingRobbStark]

I'm glad someone resurrected this thread.

[jmdrake]

Just to let you know. I'm a former democrat. Supported democrats since the 60's. Protested every war starting with Vietnam. I'm 60 years old now, and the ONLY reason i jumped onto this Ron Paul Revolution 'bandwagon' was because of Ron Paul's foreign policy as it relates to war. You are so very correct about ''war eats everything'' statement, and that pretty much sums up my political ideology. Everything else pales in comparison. What bothers me now, and i guess it's always bothered me, just that as i get older my tolerance wanes towards people who just don't get it. Damn, you would think after 10 years of chasing that Bin Laden clone army, people would be sick of war by now. What the hell is going on?

I weep at least once a week for those young soldiers we have over there. Basically just fodder for the war machine and the money involved. Thanks for your service soldier, now die for me. Thankyou.

I hear ya! And I hate it when people perpetuate the myth that these soldiers are somehow "protecting our freedoms overseas". I hear that crap and church and I know the pastor doesn't support the wars. But when some poor sucker joins the military because he has no economic future we get the whole "Let's pray for him as he goes overseas to protect us" nonsense. I know, I know there's a time and place for everything, but just once I'd like to hear "Let's pray for him that he escapes the plans of the new world order minions that run this nation and who are endangering our futures by sending U.S. soldiers around the world to fight these senseless wars."

[jmdrake]

Ummm - yeah - I heard this guy on C-SPAN... "Umm Yeah - I'm a republican and I used to be a teaBAGGER" till Obama won me over with his bank bailouts and....[/B]

:rolleyes:

http://forum.i3d.net/attachments/counter-strike-source/943179244d1247668385-abuse-request-double-facepalm.jpg

[eproxy100]

Just to let you know. I'm a former democrat. Supported democrats since the 60's. Protested every war starting with Vietnam. I'm 60 years old now, and the ONLY reason i jumped onto this Ron Paul Revolution 'bandwagon' was because of Ron Paul's foreign policy as it relates to war. You are so very correct about ''war eats everything'' statement, and that pretty much sums up my political ideology. Everything else pales in comparison. What bothers me now, and i guess it's always bothered me, just that as i get older my tolerance wanes towards people who just don't get it. Damn, you would think after 10 years of chasing that Bin Laden clone army, people would be sick of war by now. What the hell is going on?

I weep at least once a week for those young soldiers we have over there. Basically just fodder for the war machine and the money involved. Thanks for your service soldier, now die for me. Thankyou.

Though I don't disagree with you that war is a very major issue, it's not the only main issue. Check this chart out:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/ce/Fy2010_spending_by_category.jpg

There are certainly things about war that cannot be put in $ terms, but this chart shows there are a lot of other problems too like SS and such.

[gb13]

Shit. That might be the best thing I've read in a month.

[JK/SEA]

Though I don't disagree with you that war is a very major issue, it's not the only main issue. Check this chart out:


There are certainly things about war that cannot be put in $ terms, but this chart shows there are a lot of other problems too like SS and such.

Military spending or Social Security?
Military spending or Medicare?
Military Spending or Dept. of Education?
Military Spending or Various social programs like food stamps?
Military spending or Infrastructure?

etc. etc....going by your chart

Military spending does not mean Defense spending. This is an 'either or exercise' on cuts. You decide.

[BamaAla]

Those responses were very telling. Great post OP.

[JCLibertarian]

This - and all too frequently combined with unmerited arrogance.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9eSBP2EoiM&feature=related

[eproxy100]

Military spending or Social Security?
Military spending or Medicare?
Military Spending or Dept. of Education?
Military Spending or Various social programs like food stamps?
Military spending or Infrastructure?

etc. etc....going by your chart

Military spending does not mean Defense spending. This is an 'either or exercise' on cuts. You decide.

Yeah, the department of defense should be renamed department of offense. Anyway, my point is that we shouldn't compromise cuz when we do they (rep/dem) win. BTW, I was never a neocon so there's no need to reason out with me that military spending isn't defense spending.

I think if the federal reserve got taken down then all of the money spending will be severely cut.

[heavenlyboy34]

Nice! If the author of the message quoted in the OP were a member here, I'd +rep him. :cool:

[White Bear Lake]

Great article!

Although I'm coming from almost the exact opposite side being a former neo-con who came over to Ron Paul after losing all hope for the traditional GOP on economic issues after TARP. Since then I've slowly become converted on foreign policy.


Nice! If the author of the message quoted in the OP were a member here, I'd +rep him.

He is. Scroll back a few pages.

[moonshineplease]

Thought I would bump this gem of a thread in preparation for support for the money bomb and to annoy/expose the nanny statists at Kos and DU

[moonshineplease]

bump. Ron Paul is the anit-war movement.

[wannaberocker]

Id say the writer of the post had to high of hopes for people who live by party lines. People like the tea party because atleast they stick to what they stand for. If a republican gets in office and gives bailouts to some company, do you think the tea party would be in favor? Hell no.

[affa]

i've made about 3 posts on DU. I will never post there again. Hate filled ignorance, and that's coming from someone who identifies more with the left than the right on almost everything.

[purplechoe]

i've made about 3 posts on DU. I will never post there again. Hate filled ignorance, and that's coming from someone who identifies more with the left than the right on almost everything.

I have to admit that I get riled up easily when it comes to ignorance be it on the left or the right and have to keep my emotions in check quite a bit...

[redbluepill]

That post sums up pretty well my feelings and why I ran away from politics for a while. Not only was it disheartening to see the euphoria surrounding Obama's election, but it was an even worse blow to see the Tea Party essentially hijacked.

[Todd]

and if you know anything about Democratic Underground, he will probably get the boot soon if he keeps pushing Ron Paul and logic.

[redbluepill]

Funny how the moderators locked it "as a general attack on DUers" when the only attacks I saw were coming from the DUers themselves.

[wannaberocker]

i've made about 3 posts on DU. I will never post there again. Hate filled ignorance, and that's coming from someone who identifies more with the left than the right on almost everything.

i had a number of friends who were big into DU. The only problem they ran into was that they were common sense democrats (ie they believe that the debt was an issue, they believe that you can disagree with people without wanting them dead, they believed that SS needed reform). According to them the DU was filled with hardcore socialist and communist. Many of them who couldnt even explain why they were socialist to begin with.