PDA

View Full Version : Democraticunderground (socialist forums) torn up about Ron Paul...




RPFTW!
12-17-2007, 11:54 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3104673

Seems like about 1/2 at least respect Ron Paul and another 1/2 are idiot socialists who feel threatened by him and call him a 'racist.' Some pretty partisan morons there that look like they belong right up there with the Bolsheviks. Heres some good posts however...



"No offense, but if he and his supporters manage to capture the Republican nomination against all odds, they have pulled off an INCREDIBLE coup. He's not likely to self-destruct; we already know what we don't like about him, and considering his Libertarian nature I'd be shocked if there were any big skeletons in his closet that hadn't been uncovered by then. The mainstream r's hate him every bit as much, and perhaps more, than he is hated here.
No, the implications of him achieving a nomination are probably bad for the dem candidate. We'd lose half of our major issues - including the anti-Republican, anti-war vote. The best bet is to hope he finishes with enough votes for his message to be taken seriously, but not enough to win."



"He is tapping into some sort of disaffection with the rest of the field.
I suspect many of his supporters don't know all of his weird stands on social issues, but are glomming onto to his anti-war (and anti-drug war) stance. I bet some of them would vote for Paul first, then Kucinich. (I'm not trying to trash Kucinich by association here; merely suggesting that Paul is getting some of the anti-war vote that Kucinich also appeals to...and suggesting that many Paul supporters are just not that sophisticated about all this ideological stuff and just want out of the war.)
To merely deride his supporters instead of trying to figure out what's going on is not smart politics."

RPFTW!
12-17-2007, 11:55 PM
"Agreed. Some of Paul's positions are great.
Some... not so much. And he does tend to stand out in the Republican field, all alone, with his anti-war stance."

Hackked
12-17-2007, 11:57 PM
The mainstream r's hate him every bit as much, and perhaps more, than he is hated here.

Very telling statement.

RPFTW!
12-18-2007, 12:01 AM
Very telling statement.

This guy is spot on:

"I don't think he believes in interjecting every one of his beliefs into public policy. In fact, I don't think it would hurt to have someone come in who is against big government and for a balanced budget. He speaks against the powers of the Federal Reserve - that's a biggie.

The democrats are driving more people into his camp every day by their inability to move us forward."

Goldwater Conservative
12-18-2007, 12:15 AM
I would think liberals value civil liberties, rule of law under the Constitution, non-corporate government that's accountable to the people (including being opposed to the Federal Reserve), and a non-interventionist foreign policy above all else. I imagine those who hate Ron do so because they can't stand the idea of giving the people greater control over welfare programs by leaving all social services to the states. Petty, really.

azam
12-18-2007, 12:57 AM
sasquatch (1000+ posts) Mon Dec-17-07 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Ron Paul is one of the very few people I want to see win the nomination
Edited on Mon Dec-17-07 02:13 PM by sasquatch
==
sasquatch (1000+ posts) Mon Dec-17-07 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Oops, I want to see a dem win too I just had a brainfart in my post

JDeVriese
12-18-2007, 01:07 AM
Sometimes the blinders are on really tight...

koob
12-18-2007, 02:08 AM
and perhaps more, than he is hated here

so what, these folks hate freedom?

socialism is like the half-assed version of communism which is the opposite of freedom!

ugh don't get me started on the socialists. they'll never understand. saving darfur and giving to the poor makes them think they're better than those low, racists republicans. ha!

Dave Pedersen
12-18-2007, 02:14 AM
The problem with armchair socialists is that they really believe all that government power can be monopolized by well intended people.

Maverick
12-18-2007, 02:18 AM
ugh don't get me started on the socialists. they'll never understand. saving darfur and giving to the poor makes them think they're better than those low, racists republicans. ha!

Can you really blame them though? What have the Republicans done well lately?

*crickets chirping*

So, I think they just don't know any better, and are latching onto what they perceive to be the only opposition to the big-spending, imperialistic, civil-liberties stomping Republicans of our day.

pugifat
12-18-2007, 02:44 AM
Can you really blame them though? What have the Republicans done well lately?

*crickets chirping*

So, I think they just don't know any better, and are latching onto what they perceive to be the only opposition to the big-spending, imperialistic, civil-liberties stomping Republicans of our day.

ooh, ooh i can answer this one: they waltzed and or shimmied into Iraq and now against all intelligence [literally intelligence reports] they want to sidle up to tehran with Abrams tanks

angrydragon
12-18-2007, 02:48 AM
Weird stands on social issues? Like what? Liberty?

kojirodensetsu
12-18-2007, 04:53 AM
I would not be surprised in the slightest if some people didn't like Ron Paul for the sole reason that he is running as a republican.

xao
12-18-2007, 05:18 AM
Can you really blame them though? What have the Republicans done well lately?

*crickets chirping*

So, I think they just don't know any better, and are latching onto what they perceive to be the only opposition to the big-spending, imperialistic, civil-liberties stomping Republicans of our day.

You mean Neo-cons. There is a difference.

If you pit a true republican like Ron Paul against a socialist/democrat, there is no contest.

Thomas Paine
12-18-2007, 05:19 AM
Similar reaction on the Dailykos site. They are talking about the moneybomb over the weekend and there are several defending Ron Paul against typical liberal criticisms. The common theme I hear is that even if a liberal disagrees with Ron Paul's policy positions, they view him as the candidate with the most honesty, integrity, and sincerity compared to all the other establishment candidates including Hillary and Obama.

xao
12-18-2007, 05:20 AM
Similar reaction on the Dailykos site. They are talking about the moneybomb over the weekend and there are several defending Ron Paul against typical liberal criticisms. The common theme I hear is that even if a liberal disagrees with Ron Paul's policy positions, they view him as the candidate with the most honesty, integrity, and sincerity compared to all the other establishment candidates including Hillary and Obama.

They have their agenda. Socialism.

The rest are just too stupid or naive to know what is going on.

Really, most people shouldn't even be allowed to vote. It's almost scary that so many people don't even know what is truly going on.

xao
12-18-2007, 05:26 AM
I would not be surprised in the slightest if some people didn't like Ron Paul for the sole reason that he is running as a republican.

They're too ignorant to know what a Republican is. They believe what the controlled marxist news media has been telling them for the past 40 years.

Then when a fake-republican channel like fox snooze comes on the air, they hear about george bush(a neocon), they don't grasp that he isn't a real republican. Ironically he is dead on with democrats historically by pushing for foreign wars and globalism(wilson, fdr), letting illegals flood in(johnson). etc.


Thanks the gods that some former democrats had brains and actually saw the light through the tunnel. Thus coming over to Ron Paul.

CelestialRender
12-18-2007, 10:28 AM
The problem with armchair socialists is that they really believe all that government power can be monopolized by well intended people.

My brother is one of these. :rolleyes:

european
12-18-2007, 11:14 AM
"I suspect many of his supporters don't know all of his weird stands on social issues, but are glomming onto to his anti-war (and anti-drug war) stance. I bet some of them would vote for Paul first, then Kucinich. [...] To merely deride his supporters instead of trying to figure out what's going on is not smart politics."


LMAO
To me it seems that he doesnt grasp the stand of Ron Paul on many of these issues himself. Ofcourse there isn't a 100% agreement-level with Ron Paul by most people, but that isn't needed. Next to that, i do believe this guy that is quoted can be coverted into a paulite when he discovers what ron paul really stands for!
my guess is that he doesnt know the practical overthinking that ron paul has done and wants gradual changes, not abrupt changes.

MicroBalrog
12-18-2007, 11:22 AM
Can you really blame them though? What have the Republicans done well lately?
.

Does repealing the death tax, ending the AWB, cutting income taxes count for anything with you?

steph3n
12-18-2007, 11:34 AM
They have their agenda. Socialism.

The rest are just too stupid or naive to know what is going on.

Really, most people shouldn't even be allowed to vote. It's almost scary that so many people don't even know what is truly going on.

Statements like people shouldn't be allowed to vote show your extremism and get taken fully out of context by opponents of Dr Paul.

Why not wipe the slate and start fresh on this, people are mislead greatly. Insulting people will NOT WIN votes.

PaleoForPaul
12-18-2007, 12:01 PM
Statements like people shouldn't be allowed to vote show your extremism and get taken fully out of context by opponents of Dr Paul..

If you're into the founding fathers, they felt the same way as the poster you replied to (That not everyone was fit to vote).

Quite honestly, we filter out people for many dangerous things in society, such as driving a car. An argument could be made for doing the same with voting.

PaleoForPaul
12-18-2007, 12:02 PM
I suspect many of his supporters don't know all of his weird stands on social issues,

I love how the leftists always assume that people who don't agree with their views are somehow 'uninformed'.

Paulitician
12-18-2007, 12:16 PM
Yeah, Ron Paul supporters don't know what they're supporting. In reality they want:

More government
Higher taxes
Interventionist foreign policy
Government to decide social issues
Socialized healthcare
More illegal immigration
Less civil liberties
More government secrecy
An ultra regulated economy
etc. etc.

Those stupid Ron Paul supporters, don't they know that Ron Paul is completely opposed to those things? How anyone can want the opposite of all those great things weird /sarcasm

Those lefties iz dumb!

Voluntaryist
12-18-2007, 12:19 PM
sasquatch (1000+ posts) Mon Dec-17-07 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Ron Paul is one of the very few people I want to see win the nomination
Edited on Mon Dec-17-07 02:13 PM by sasquatch
==
sasquatch (1000+ posts) Mon Dec-17-07 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Oops, I want to see a dem win too I just had a brainfart in my post

+10000000000000

Blooberry777
12-18-2007, 01:54 PM
Love Ronnie!!

Maverick
12-18-2007, 02:28 PM
You mean Neo-cons. There is a difference.

If you pit a true republican like Ron Paul against a socialist/democrat, there is no contest.

Of course I meant the Neo-cons. What did you think I meant by "the big-spending, imperialistic, civil-liberties stomping Republicans of our day?" Does that not perfectly describe a Neo-con? The problem is, most people are too ignorant to understand that doesn't represent all Republicans.

And yes, I also think that there are many people out there who automatically have a negative perception of Ron Paul simply because he has a (R) next to his name. I have to admit that I didn't expect to be voting for a Republican this time around either. I had been just as turned off as everyone else by how much Bush and the neo-cons have royally screwed everything.

robandsally
12-18-2007, 02:54 PM
They have their agenda. Socialism.

The rest are just too stupid or naive to know what is going on.

Really, most people shouldn't even be allowed to vote. It's almost scary that so many people don't even know what is truly going on.
XAO, while I agree that the "left" is highly vectored, so is the "right." Actually, it's pretty damn hard to grow-up and live in the USA and not be totally vectored into any number of falsehoods. Keep looking inward my friend and question your own beliefs, how many vectors do you and I still buy into?

To say that the "left's" agenda is "Socialism" is the type of "grouping' of people that RP fights against. Adopting a message of individualism means defending us against group labels and judging people on their own beliefs and actions.

Wow, your last sentence takes the cake. Perhaps you should join forces with the elite, as I don't think many elitest like the idea of the public's right to vote either.

Aldanga
12-18-2007, 03:28 PM
I agree that many people do not have the brain capacity to vote intelligently.

But we can't remove those rights. That leads down a 'slippery slope' toward revocation of votes for anyone the government deems incapable of voting, which could eventually mean the liberty movement.

xao
12-18-2007, 09:19 PM
If you're into the founding fathers, they felt the same way as the poster you replied to (That not everyone was fit to vote).

Quite honestly, we filter out people for many dangerous things in society, such as driving a car. An argument could be made for doing the same with voting.

Thanks for the backup on that. The funny thing is that I didn't even mean it literally but rather figuratviely and out of disdain for those that don't know so many of the issues at their elections.

Perhaps I am in the minority and I am a nerd but I went so far as to research each individual proposition online a few weeks before the last election. It took me 2 full days to find out all of the issues, from each position.

I certainly hope everyone else is doing this but I fear that they aren't. I have this fear because I remember an older couple once told me that they used to try to play tic-tac-toe with their ballots. So yes it's pretty scary that people don't research things as much as they should. I know a few people who only research a day before the election because they say that they are too busy.

xao
12-18-2007, 09:37 PM
[QUOTE=Maverick;655932]
And yes, I also think that there are many people out there who automatically have a negative perception of Ron Paul simply because he has a (R) next to his name.

And that was my point. Ignorant people. Sheep if you will.

>I have to admit that I didn't expect to be voting for a Republican this time around either. I had been just as turned off as everyone else by how much Bush and the neo-cons have royally screwed everything.

You're preaching to the choir. I was a Republican before the bush's Took office. I became an independent afterwards and voted for perot and now i'm back voting as a Republican because once again we finnaly have a real republican again in Ron Paul.

And there are many people like us out there who aren't involved in these msm polls. So I think the primaries will be a shock to a lot of neocons.

xao
12-18-2007, 09:39 PM
Die.

Why threaten someone? He made a good point.

xao
12-18-2007, 09:51 PM
[QUOTE=robandsally;656258]XAO, while I agree that the "left" is highly vectored, so is the "right."

You totally missed the point. The left vs. right paradigm is a problem but the Republican party has been the more quality party historically speaking and true to it's principles of limited govt. and non interventionism. The Democratic party has been the war party and big govt. party traditionally. And they were taken over by people who have socialist ideals a long time ago. So I personally don't see how any true patriot could have been voting for them the last 90 years.

Only more recently has the Republican party been taken over by neocons(ex trotskyites who have marxo-fascist and trotskyite ideals and constructs). i.e. the same constructs that the same socialist democratic party has had for over 80 years. Wilson, Fdr, johnson, etc. etc.

I'm basically saying that I want to kick out the neocons from my party. Which should be complete once Paul wins.

I became an independent once bush decided to run. I voted for Perot, then the constitution party, etc. out of protest. Now that I see a real Republican running again, I'm going to support that 100%.

>Actually, it's pretty damn hard to grow-up and live in the USA and not be totally vectored into any number of falsehoods.

True but I still think it's rather pathetic that some people are still confused into thinking about voting for a socialistic style democrat for president. Especially givin that the internet gives people the opporunity to find out the truth. Then again I know some people like socialist ideals, entitlements, handouts and moralistic wilsonianism. Of course that goes against the constitution.

Doriath
12-18-2007, 09:59 PM
So, I think they just don't know any better, and are latching onto what they perceive to be the only opposition to the big-spending, imperialistic, civil-liberties stomping Republicans of our day.

I think that's accurate. There's some level of envy/jealousy here. Historically (at least recent history), all the big antiwar, people-power-type movements have come on the left. Now one pops up on the right, has some success, and they have no idea how to react. Being a Tolkien fan, I'm reminded of an LOTR line about Sauron and The Ring: "That we should seek to cast him down and have no one take his place has not yet entered his darkest dreams." And so Ron Paul: that we should wish to cast down the Federal gov't and have nothing take its place, is an idea beyond their grasp.