PDA

View Full Version : RedState: "CPAC: Reagan, Gingrich, and Paul"




Inkblots
02-11-2011, 05:01 PM
This guy obviously doesn't care for Ron, but he at least is honest about the spirit of the political moment we're living in. It may be a cause for concern to him and those like him, but to me it is a great shining hope for the future:


Every decade of conservatives has its hero. In fact, I think Ronald Reagan became the hero of the conservatives who came up in the 1970s and 1980s. He won the Cold War, he cut and then simplified taxes, he fought the unions, and he was an outspoken champion of the pro-life cause. He energized a movement, a party, and a country. Itís why many of us flew in for CPAC to an airport named for him.

In the 1990s, for those of us who were too young to appreciate President Reagan, we had Speaker Gingrich. ďNewt is the man!Ē is what one CPAC blogger said to me, when I admitted I still enjoyed seeing him here as much as I did. I am a fan, not just an activist, when it comes to Gingrich. He broke a 40 year old hold the Democrats had on the House, he introduced Americans to the 10th amendment, he smashed up the old, destructive welfare system, and he cut spending to the point that the national debt went down.

Looking around at CPAC now though, seeing the students here and watching the excitement, itís clear to me that the youth coming up today have their own hero, and his name is Ron Paul.
http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2011/02/11/cpac-reagan-gingrich-and-paul/

wizardwatson
02-11-2011, 05:04 PM
http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2011/02/11/cpac-reagan-gingrich-and-paul/

Well, that was the most condescending blog post I've read all week.

This:


It doesn’t matter that his monetary ideas would be a disaster for every American with a mortgage – not just all Americans who got in over their heads, but all Americans with debt – because that doesn’t matter yet to college kids. The details don’t matter; it’s the spirit that counts.
WTH?

and this...


Reagan is remembered as a hero, Gingrich as a winner, and yes, many of the young people of today have a crush on the ideas Ron Paul represents, regardless of what the practical reality looks like.

So young people have a "crush" on ideas like liberty and freedom? Classy.

sailingaway
02-11-2011, 05:10 PM
So we terrify them with Ron in 2012 and then they'll be desperately grateful to get Rand as president in 2016....

From the CPAC speeches I'm almost wondering if that isn't the plan....

wizardwatson
02-11-2011, 05:11 PM
So we terrify them with Ron in 2012 and then they'll be desperately grateful to get Rand as president in 2016....

From the CPAC speeches I'm almost wondering if that isn't the plan....

+rep

sailingaway
02-11-2011, 05:15 PM
I’m not sure what this means for the party in the next 20 years, but I think we’ll have to find a way to make peace. I’m not calling for a truce, but we’ll have to deal with it.

Response: Yeah, ok, just be fair and don't insult our guys. You know it is cheap when you do. Let us compete, fairly within the tent, and we won't have to keep acting like outsiders.

Inkblots
02-11-2011, 05:17 PM
So we terrify them with Ron in 2012 and then they'll be desperately grateful to get Rand as president in 2016....

From the CPAC speeches I'm almost wondering if that isn't the plan....

I believe this strategy is called 'good cop/bad cop'. I'm told it's quite effective ;)

libertybrewcity
02-11-2011, 05:35 PM
they're scared of what the Republican Party will be like in twenty years:)

KramerDSP
02-11-2011, 05:42 PM
So we terrify them with Ron in 2012 and then they'll be desperately grateful to get Rand as president in 2016....

From the CPAC speeches I'm almost wondering if that isn't the plan....

When my brother visited me a few months ago, I told him "Rand Paul is going to be the President in 2016". He said "Who's Rand Paul? I never heard of him and you're saying he's going to become the President?!?". I responded that he was the son of Ron Paul, and I was convinced 2016 would be the equivalent of 1980 (Goldwater is to Reagan as Paul is to Paul). I'm sure he thought I was crazy, but I would bet on this if I could find a place to take my bets.

With that said, I am 100% for Ron 2012. As Ron himself famously said in the Leno interview, "There is a risk that I could win". And that would be a risk I'll take every single time.

Dreamofunity
02-11-2011, 06:02 PM
When my brother visited me a few months ago, I told him "Rand Paul is going to be the President in 2016". He said "Who's Rand Paul? I never heard of him and you're saying he's going to become the President?!?". I responded that he was the son of Ron Paul, and I was convinced 2016 would be the equivalent of 1980 (Goldwater is to Reagan as Paul is to Paul). I'm sure he thought I was crazy, but I would bet on this if I could find a place to take my bets.

With that said, I am 100% for Ron 2012. As Ron himself famously said in the Leno interview, "There is a risk that I could win". And that would be a risk I'll take every single time.

I agree with this. I will vote, campaign, and do whatever it takes for Ron in 2012, and no one else in that year would get any where near as much commitment even if Ron wasn't running, but I have doubts that he would win - defeatist, I know, but realisitic. Regardless, spreading the message, oppose to winning, is what is important in my opinion, and to that extent I will work my hardest. However, in 2016 I think there is a real opportunity for Rand to get nominated, especially if Ron runs again furthering the base. Ron is old and has certain baggage that won't work well in a republican primary, he is an idea man, and he is best at being a principled example of how people and politicians should be. I think 2012 will be the biggest this movement has ever seen in terms of spreading the message, and I think the fruit of that labor will pay off in political power in 2016.

Flash
02-11-2011, 06:42 PM
Haha look at this comment


These are kids who don’t have a truelly patriotic bone in their body. They don’t know, have, or grew up in a military family or lifestyle. They barely know why anyone would volunteer for the military. They have no clue why my Dad is retired Air Force and veteran of Desert Storm, or why my brother joined the Air Force two years ago. These kids may be conservatives in most lights…but they are lonely and find the only thing in “true” common with each toher is they have a “fear” of going to war. They have a “fear” of actually having to serve in the military. They “fear” being forced to go to war. They have no idea of voluntering to be in the armed forces, and why people do it. Its like a “Breakfast Club” to them, to be anti-war it gives thema common bond, like libs have “anti war clubs”, “tree hugging clubs”, “koch protest clubs” and so on…its their only common thread that they can discuss in depth blah blah

William R
02-11-2011, 06:49 PM
Not too bad coming from Red State.

sailingaway
02-11-2011, 06:51 PM
This author can't stand Ron, too.

Austrian Econ Disciple
02-11-2011, 07:10 PM
RedState is venom. Avoid like the plague (its not like they won't ban you anyways).

William R
02-11-2011, 08:19 PM
This author can't stand Ron, too.

I know. He banned me from RedState in 2007 for simply saying Ronald Reagan supported the gold standard.

Badger Paul
02-11-2011, 08:30 PM
"To the young people wearing Campaign for Liberty stickers, Ron Paul isnít the porker who hasnít accomplished anything in his long DC career but to spin conspiracy theories about the Federal Reserve. He is the idea of small government, respect for the Constitution, and a stable economy. It doesnít matter that his monetary ideas would be a disaster for every American with a mortgage Ė not just all Americans who got in over their heads, but all Americans with debt Ė because that doesnít matter yet to college kids. The details donít matter; itís the spirit that counts."

In other words Ron Paul is what you wish could be but know you can't

dbill27
02-11-2011, 08:52 PM
I cant stand redstate, its not even worth mentioning her, ive been banned for reasonable arguments so many times and yet they equate Ron and all his supporters to truthers and conspiracy theorists. Neil Stevens is a POS who hates Ron Paul, his arguments against Austrian econmics are shallow and krugman like. F*** Redstate

sailingaway
02-11-2011, 08:58 PM
I cant stand redstate, its not even worth mentioning her, ive been banned for reasonable arguments so many times and yet they equate Ron and all his supporters to truthers and conspiracy theorists. Neil Stevens is a POS who hates Ron Paul, his arguments against Austrian econmics are shallow and krugman like. F*** Redstate

They like Rand. I think they'd like, or at least respect Ron if they hadn't already bought into the spin against him.

dbill27
02-11-2011, 09:10 PM
They like Rand. I think they'd like, or at least respect Ron if they hadn't already bought into the spin against him.

That's what's so insane about it. When they bash his anti fed stance and you ask them if they support the current system they back off. They realize things they won't admit. It all stems from foreign policy. Many republicans are so dug into their positions they refuse to even think anymore.

Brett85
02-11-2011, 09:20 PM
RedState is venom. Avoid like the plague (its not like they won't ban you anyways).

Yeah. I think I got banned after my third post for opposing the surge in Iraq. The people who post their now aren't representative of the average conservative.

ord33
02-11-2011, 10:38 PM
The comment section in that article are some of the most vicious things (and outright lies/misconceptions) I have ever seen about Dr. Paul.

Wow, I knew RedState was bad, but I didn't know it was that bad - and without hardly and Paul supporters interjecting with corrections on their statements.

hugolp
02-11-2011, 11:05 PM
Well, that was the most condescending blog post I've read all week.

This:


It doesn’t matter that his monetary ideas would be a disaster for every American with a mortgage – not just all Americans who got in over their heads, but all Americans with debt – because that doesn’t matter yet to college kids. The details don’t matter; it’s the spirit that counts.

WTH?

This is 100% false.

Ron Paul proposes legalazing competing currencies as a way to get away from the government imposed currency monopoly of the Federal Reserve. So as other currencies would start to appear, a lot of them probably based on gold and silver, the Federal Reserve notes would depreciate as they loose market share, and this would make the debts easier to pay. Not harder. In fact, keeping the present monetary system is worse for people with a mortgage.

Also, allowing competing currencies would help to get out of the recession very quick as the new currencies would be able to represent the natural market rate propdcuing productive investment, reducing the unemployment.

EDIT: If someone has an account there, should go and correct this info in the comments.

Agorism
02-11-2011, 11:06 PM
Remember when McCain won CPAC.

LOL

William R
02-12-2011, 10:41 AM
This is 100% false.

Ron Paul proposes legalazing competing currencies as a way to get away from the government imposed currency monopoly of the Federal Reserve. So as other currencies would start to appear, a lot of them probably based on gold and silver, the Federal Reserve notes would depreciate as they loose market share, and this would make the debts easier to pay. Not harder. In fact, keeping the present monetary system is worse for people with a mortgage.

Also, allowing competing currencies would help to get out of the recession very quick as the new currencies would be able to represent the natural market rate propdcuing productive investment, reducing the unemployment.

EDIT: If someone has an account there, should go and correct this info in the comments.

Someone has talked about competing currencies at Redstate, but truth be told most of the posters there are not very literate when it comes to economics.

jkr
02-12-2011, 11:31 AM
Haha look at this comment

`hmmmmmmmmmmm...did they do it to KILL PEOPLE?