PDA

View Full Version : Do they really agree with us on domestic issues?




eugenekop
12-19-2011, 02:12 PM
I noticed so many media people say that they agree with Ron Paul on everything except on foreign policy. From Hannity, to Limbaugh, to Ann Coutler, to Bachmann, Glenn Beck, just almost everyone.

But do they really agree with Ron Paul on domestic issues? Do they even understand what a minimal government is? Do they get it that it means almost no regulations, almost no taxes, almost no government services of any kind? I think they don't really realize what do they say they support. Ron Paul is not a republican or a conservative. When he says we should abide by the constitution he means it literally, not figuratively like most tea party people. Does Sarah Palin understand what a government that is not involved in anything besides defense means? I honestly don't think so.

Sola_Fide
12-19-2011, 02:17 PM
You're right. They aren't with us in regards to domestic or foreign policy.

Liberty is one big package, and big government abroad can't exist without big government at home. How anyone can read the founders like Samuel Adams or Patrick Henry and NOT see this...well, its just beyond me...

amy31416
12-19-2011, 02:26 PM
Nope...they don't have underlying principles, so I fully expect them to "stealthily" promote Obama if Paul gets the nomination. The reason I'm pretty convinced of this is because they are just as much for corporatism as they are for a belligerent foreign policy...there's a lot of overlap there, obviously. Can't forget how much they love to imprison Americans also--the domestic military-industrial-complex. You can't pretend to love free markets and embrace the bastardization of it.

Of course, pill-boy Rush Limbaugh thinks that only applies to the peons, not him.

ConsideringRonPaul
12-19-2011, 02:28 PM
I noticed so many media people say that they agree with Ron Paul on everything except on foreign policy. From Hannity, to Limbaugh, to Ann Coutler, to Bachmann, Glenn Beck, just almost everyone.

But do they really agree with Ron Paul on domestic issues? Do they even understand what a minimal government is? Do they get it that it means almost no regulations, almost no taxes, almost no government services of any kind? I think they don't really realize what do they say they support. Ron Paul is not a republican or a conservative. When he says we should abide by the constitution he means it literally, not figuratively like most tea party people. Does Sarah Palin understand what a government that is not involved in anything besides defense means? I honestly don't think so.

I personally consider myself a Conservative who supports the domestic policy fully, including everything you said. Yet I do still have reservations, mostly about our security, which is imo necessary to maintain liberty. And I wouldn't say Ron is not a republican or conservative, but rather both in the radical (meaning root) senses. And I also don't think most "tea party people" want a figurative reading of the Constitution. Read WND.com if you want to see true TEA party Republicans opinions, don't spew this crap (I wouldn't say Hannity or Coulter are TEA party either, and why are you bashing Beck, he said he support Ron over Romney or Gingrich third party.)

eugenekop
12-19-2011, 02:30 PM
Forget the foreign policy for a minute.

I think when they say they want a conservative who supports the constitution they mean it figuratively. They don't actually want the congress to follow the constitution. I just can't believe they really would want to privatize all national parks, roads, money, and remove all economic regulations. I don't think they understand what is minarchism, or understand the literal implication of following the constitution.

ConsideringRonPaul
12-19-2011, 02:34 PM
Idk, I can't speak for everyone but I can speak for myself. I consider myself a Jeffersonian follower of the Constitution, meaning there are certain enumerated powers and that's it for the fed gov. I have tea party friends who agree with me there. You're probly right that not everyone thinks like me but don't group all of us into one.

thehungarian
12-19-2011, 02:35 PM
How often do you hear the three headed serpent of Limbaugh/Hannity/Levin discuss the Fed or civil liberties? Almost never.

ConsideringRonPaul
12-19-2011, 02:39 PM
I've heard Rush mentioning the Fed before, don't really listen to the other two. As for civil liberties, what do you mean, like anti-patriot act. Doubtful they would say that when there's not really a viable alternative.

gls
12-19-2011, 02:40 PM
Of course they don't really agree with Paul on domestic issues. These are by and large the same people who supported huge federal expansions such as Medicare Part D and No Child Left Behind just because they were passed under a Republican administration.

ConsideringRonPaul
12-19-2011, 02:42 PM
Of course they don't really agree with Paul on domestic issues. These are by and large the same people who supported huge federal expansions such as Medicare Part D and No Child Left Behind just because they were passed under a Republican administration.

Do you think the average conservative tea-partier is happy with the establishment right now?

nasaal
12-19-2011, 02:46 PM
No they don't. Beck and company say they agree because the people agree and they would look foolish to discount it. Foreign policy is an issue that people generally play follow the leader with to avoid being out of their depth. Domestic issues under Paul are very simple and broad. Basically the idea is that the people are allowed to make dumb decisions and do great things for one another. He acknowledges the fact that you can't really legislate morality, society needs to be allowed to govern itself at least until people in general change. This is a great policy as it's simplicity resonates with people. People like Bachman and such have pet issues that Ron Paul isn't concerned with. Gay marriage isn't a thing, because marriage is a social construct to begin with; so you do what you want and call it what you want, I will do what I want and call it what I want.

gls
12-19-2011, 02:49 PM
Do you think the average conservative tea-partier is happy with the establishment right now?

Considering that several polls show the ultimate D.C. insider Newt Gingrich leading among self-identified "tea-partiers", I would say yes.

ConsideringRonPaul
12-19-2011, 02:50 PM
Considering that several polls show the ultimate D.C. insider Newt Gingrich leading among self-identified "tea-partiers", I would say yes.

Do you also see how quickly he is falling in the polls once people find out his real positions? The tea party members were probly ill-informed and misguided by his rhetoric which sounds convincing in the debates.

specsaregood
12-19-2011, 02:54 PM
Of course, pill-boy Rush Limbaugh thinks that only applies to the peons, not him.

Well, history sorta backs his position doesn't it?

gls
12-19-2011, 03:07 PM
Do you also see how quickly he is falling in the polls once people find out his real positions? The tea party members were probly ill-informed and misguided by his rhetoric which sounds convincing in the debates.

Well, that's the problem. People are easily swayed into voting against their professed beliefs. And if they can pass off Newt Gingrich - a former Speaker of the House who pleaded guilty to highly publicized corruption charges - as anti-establishment, then they can pass off anyone.