Results 1 to 30 of 30

Thread: Purism is Practical

  1. #1

    Purism is Practical


    Purism is Practical

    Written by Ron Paul - Sunday January 3, 2016

    Those who advocate ending, instead of reforming, the welfare-warfare state are often accused of being “impractical.” Some of the harshest criticisms come from libertarians who claim that advocates of “purism” forgo opportunities to make real progress toward restoring liberty. These critics fail to grasp the numerous reasons why it is crucial for libertarians to consistently and vigorously advance the purist position.

    First, and most important, those who know the truth have a moral obligation to speak the truth. People who understand the need for drastic changes in foreign, domestic, and, especially, monetary policy should not pretend that a little tinkering will fix our problems. Those who do so are just as guilty of lying to the public as is a promise-breaking politician. Attempting to advance liberty by lying is not just immoral; it is also a flawed strategy that is doomed to fail.

    The inevitable failure of “reforms” that do not eliminate the market distortions caused by government intervention will be used to discredit both the freedom philosophy and its advocates. The result will be increased support for more welfare, more warfare, and more fiat money. Thus, those who avoid discussing the root causes of our problems, not those they smear as impractical purists, are the ones undermining liberty.

    For example, many Obamacare opponents refuse to advocate for true free-market health care. Instead, they propose various forms of “Obamacare lite.” By ceding the premise that government should play a major role in health care, proponents of Obamacare lite strengthen the position of those who say the way to fix Obamacare is by giving government more power. Thus, Obamacare lite supporters are inadvertently advancing the cause of socialized medicine. The only way to ensure that Obamacare is not replaced by something worse is to unapologetically promote true free-market health care.

    This is not to suggest libertarians should reject transitional measures. A gradual transition is the best way to achieve liberty without causing massive social and economic disruptions. However, we must only settle for compromises that actually move us in the right direction. So we should reject a compromise budget that “only” increases spending by 80 percent. In contrast, a budget that actually reduces spending by 20 percent would be a positive step forward.

    Those who advocate a so-called extreme position can often move the center of political debate closer to the pure libertarian position. This can actually increase the likelihood of taking real, if small, steps toward liberty. More importantly, the best way to ensure that we never achieve real liberty is for libertarians to shy away from making the case for the free society.

    Sometimes ideological movements are able to turn yesterday’s “fringe” ideas into today’s “mainstream” position. Just a few years ago it was inconceivable that a significant number of states would legalize medical, and even recreational, marijuana or that a majority of states would have passed laws allowing citizens to openly carry firearms. The success of these issues is not due to sudden changes in public opinion, but to years of hard work by principled advocates and activists.

    The ever-growing number of Americans who are joining the liberty movement are not interested in “reforming” the welfare-warfare state. They also have no interest in “fixing" the Federal Reserve via “rules-based” monetary policy. Instead, this movement is dedicated to auditing, then ending, the Fed and stopping the government from trying to run the economy, run the world, and run our lives. If this movement refuses to compromise its principles, we may succeed in restoring a society of liberty, peace, and prosperity in our lifetimes.

    Copyright © 2016 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

    Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

    http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/arch...-is-practical/
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
    They are what they hate.” - B4L


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    I doubt most of the current users of this place ever visit Ron's forum, but I can imagine how well this would go over with most of them.

  4. #3
    Thanks Ron! I figured you'd understand, and "get it".

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    Those who advocate ending, instead of reforming, the welfare-warfare state are often accused of being “impractical.” Some of the harshest criticisms come from libertarians who claim that advocates of “purism” forgo opportunities to make real progress toward restoring liberty. These critics fail to grasp the numerous reasons why it is crucial for libertarians to consistently and vigorously advance the purist position.

    [...]

    This is not to suggest libertarians should reject transitional measures. A gradual transition is the best way to achieve liberty without causing massive social and economic disruptions. However, we must only settle for compromises that actually move us in the right direction. So we should reject a compromise budget that “only” increases spending by 80 percent. In contrast, a budget that actually reduces spending by 20 percent would be a positive step forward.

    Those who advocate a so-called extreme position can often move the center of political debate closer to the pure libertarian position. This can actually increase the likelihood of taking real, if small, steps toward liberty. More importantly, the best way to ensure that we never achieve real liberty is for libertarians to shy away from making the case for the free society.

    [...]
    As is so often the case, Ron Paul is exactly and entirely correct ...

    "Those who advocate a so-called extreme position can often move the center of political debate closer to the pure libertarian position ..."

    By definition, any compromise will always be a reconciliation between extremes (where an "extreme" is the full set of whatever a given side of a compromise actually wants, as distinct from what that side will actually be able to get). If gradualist reformers are to be effective, then for any reformative compromise to significantly skew our way, gradualist reformers must be "backstopped" by those who are willing and able to be more vocally absolutist and radical. Otherwise, the "spectrum of possibility" (so to speak) will be foreshortened, and gradualist reformism (rather than absolutist radicalism) will be the "extreme" upon which any compromise will be erected (to the dissatisfaction and disappointment of both gradualist reformers and absolutist radicals).

    "This is not to suggest libertarians should reject transitional measures ..."

    As Murray Rothbard emphasized, we should always keep in mind the critical fact that there is no necessary contradiction between "absolutism in theory" and "gradualism in practice." In fact, gradualism in practice is fine. It has to be, if only because "gradualism" is almost always the only means by which things will actually change. As the great abolitionist (and absolutist) William Lloyd Garrison noted: "Urge immediate abolition as earnestly as we may, it will, alas! be gradual abolition in the end. We have never said that slavery would be overthrown by a single blow; that it ought to be, we shall always contend."

    But it is just as important to understand that acknowledging the place of gradualism in practice is NOT an excuse for eschewing absolutism in theory. Serious (indeed, fatal) problems arise when "absolutism in theory" is misguidedly discarded and "gradualism in practice" is promoted to "gradualism in theory." As Garrison also pointed out, "gradualism in theory is perpetuity in practice."

    Properly understood, "absolutism" (or "purism") and "gradualism" (or "pragmatism") should be regarded as complements, NOT as opposites.

    Many absolutists and gradualists tend to forget this (assuming they ever understood it in the first place) ...


    Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)

    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law." - The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." - Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      - Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      - Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

    · tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito ·
    MOFA (Make Orwell Fiction Again)

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    As is so often the case, Ron Paul is exactly and entirely correct ...

    "Those who advocate a so-called extreme position can often move the center of political debate closer to the pure libertarian position ..."

    By definition, any compromise will always be a reconciliation between extremes (where an "extreme" is the full set of whatever a given side of a compromise actually wants, as distinct from what that side will actually be able to get). If gradualist reformers are to be effective, then for any reformative compromise to significantly skew our way, gradualist reformers must be "backstopped" by those who are willing and able to be more vocally absolutist and radical. Otherwise, the "spectrum of possibility" (so to speak) will be foreshortened, and gradualist reformism (rather than absolutist radicalism) will be the "extreme" upon which any compromise will be erected (to the dissatisfaction and disappointment of both gradualist reformers and absolutist radicals).

    "This is not to suggest libertarians should reject transitional measures ..."

    As Murray Rothbard emphasized, we should always keep in mind the critical fact that there is no necessary contradiction between "absolutism in theory" and "gradualism in practice." In fact, gradualism in practice is fine. It has to be, if only because "gradualism" is almost always the only means by which things will actually change. As the great abolitionist (and absolutist) William Lloyd Garrison noted: "Urge immediate abolition as earnestly as we may, it will, alas! be gradual abolition in the end. We have never said that slavery would be overthrown by a single blow; that it ought to be, we shall always contend."

    But it is just as important to understand that acknowledging the place of gradualism in practice is NOT an excuse for eschewing absolutism in theory. Serious (indeed, fatal) problems arise when "absolutism in theory" is misguidedly discarded and "gradualism in practice" is promoted to "gradualism in theory." As Garrison also pointed out, "gradualism in theory is perpetuity in practice."

    Properly understood, "absolutism" (or "purism") and "gradualism" (or "pragmatism") should be regarded as complements, NOT as opposites.

    Many absolutists and gradualists tend to forget this (assuming they ever understood it in the first place) ...
    Any time you're ready to start, go for it.

  7. #6
    "If this movement refuses to compromise its principles, we may succeed in restoring a society of liberty, peace, and prosperity in our lifetimes."
    Can we see more results really soon, please?
    $$$$$$$$$$


    Negativity is ignorance, and ignorance is your own personal tyranny. It tells you how to act, how to talk, how to think, and what to feel. You will never see a world without tyrants until you release your own. ~Honored to be Among You

    How does Ron stay so calm?

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Any time you're ready to start, go for it.
    Start what? (Or is this just more empty heckling from the peanut gallery ... ?)

  9. #8
    Those who advocate a so-called extreme position can often move the center of political debate closer to the pure libertarian position.
    Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by BuddyRey View Post
    Do you think it's a coincidence that the most cherished standard of the Ron Paul campaign was a sign highlighting the word "love" inside the word "revolution"? A revolution not based on love is a revolution doomed to failure. So, at the risk of sounding corny, I just wanted to let you know that, wherever you stand on any of these hot-button issues, and even if we might have exchanged bitter words or harsh sentiments in the past, I love each and every one of you - no exceptions!

    "When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will." Frederic Bastiat

    Peace.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Rand Paul supports this also.
    "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it."
    James Madison

    "It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams



    Μολὼν λάβε
    Dum Spiro, Pugno
    Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

  12. #10
    mmmmm..... I love me some Ron Paul! There will only be 1 Ron Paul.
    A sense of danger gives birth to fear. And fear is the time-honored cross for the crucifixion of liberty.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    Start what? (Or is this just more empty heckling from the peanut gallery ... ?)
    Fixing the world the Ron Paul way.

  14. #12
    I think Ron just called Cruz a fake conservative.
    They confronted me in the day of my calamity, but the Lord was my support.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Any time you're ready to start, go for it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    Start what? (Or is this just more empty heckling from the peanut gallery ... ?)
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Fixing the world the Ron Paul way.
    No one said anything about "fixing the world" (whatever that is supposed to mean). Ron certainly didn't, and neither did I.

    So, the peanut gallery it is, then ...

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    No one said anything about "fixing the world" (whatever that is supposed to mean). Ron certainly didn't, and neither did I.

    So, the peanut gallery it is, then ...


    Originally Posted by Occam's Banana
    As is so often the case, Ron Paul is exactly and entirely correct ...

    "Those who advocate a so-called extreme position can often move the center of political debate closer to the pure libertarian position ..."

    By definition, any compromise will always be a reconciliation between extremes (where an "extreme" is the full set of whatever a given side of a compromise actually wants, as distinct from what that side will actually be able to get). If gradualist reformers are to be effective, then for any reformative compromise to significantly skew our way, gradualist reformers must be "backstopped" by those who are willing and able to be more vocally absolutist and radical. Otherwise, the "spectrum of possibility" (so to speak) will be foreshortened, and gradualist reformism (rather than absolutist radicalism) will be the "extreme" upon which any compromise will be erected (to the dissatisfaction and disappointment of both gradualist reformers and absolutist radicals).

    "This is not to suggest libertarians should reject transitional measures ..."

    As Murray Rothbard emphasized, we should always keep in mind the critical fact that there is no necessary contradiction between "absolutism in theory" and "gradualism in practice." In fact, gradualism in practice is fine. It has to be, if only because "gradualism" is almost always the only means by which things will actually change. As the great abolitionist (and absolutist) William Lloyd Garrison noted: "Urge immediate abolition as earnestly as we may, it will, alas! be gradual abolition in the end. We have never said that slavery would be overthrown by a single blow; that it ought to be, we shall always contend."

    But it is just as important to understand that acknowledging the place of gradualism in practice is NOT an excuse for eschewing absolutism in theory. Serious (indeed, fatal) problems arise when "absolutism in theory" is misguidedly discarded and "gradualism in practice" is promoted to "gradualism in theory." As Garrison also pointed out, "gradualism in theory is perpetuity in practice."

    Properly understood, "absolutism" (or "purism") and "gradualism" (or "pragmatism") should be regarded as complements, NOT as opposites.

    Many absolutists and gradualists tend to forget this (assuming they ever understood it in the first place) ...

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    No one said anything about "fixing the world" (whatever that is supposed to mean). Ron certainly didn't, and neither did I.

    So, the peanut gallery it is, then ...
    [snip repost of post #4]
    And? I merely agreed with, repeated and emphasized what Ron said, regarding which you remarked:
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Thanks Ron! I figured you'd understand, and "get it".
    If you're thankful that Ron "understands and gets it," then why - other than that you just get off on being a contrary ass - are you mocking what he said and making cracks about "fixing the world the Ron Paul way" (whatever you imagine that is supposed to mean)?

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    And? I merely agreed with, repeated and emphasized what Ron said, regarding which you remarked:


    If you're thankful that Ron "understands and gets it," then why - other than that you just get off on being a contrary ass - are you mocking what he said and making cracks about "fixing the world the Ron Paul way" (whatever you imagine that is supposed to mean)?
    Ron says I'm practical. So there.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Attempting to advance liberty by lying is not just immoral; it is also a flawed strategy that is doomed to fail.
    This was really my only ever major gripe with Rand Paul. I believe this statement 100% and applies to politicians first and foremost. Glad to hear it come out of Ron's mouth. I admit to being nit-picky with Rand, not as of late, but earlier in the year on this account. I feel that some of his earlier talking points and compromise positions fell dangerously close to essentially lying.

    Of course, even if Rand lied 50% of the time, which he certainly doesn't, I've always maintained that he's still would have reputation beyond repute compared to his counterparts running for office.

    There are numerous times on this forum where people have essentially said that "you have to lie to the people in order to win and get the power, then you can change things" which goes against this idea.

    So I'm glad to hear (as usual) Ron speak that "purism is practical" because there's still a lot of people around that disagree with this. Maintaining the rhetoric of purism is not only practical but necessary in my opinion to maintain credibility in a movement which is based on it.

  21. #18
    Bump for current relevence and serious need.
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  22. #19
    Purism is practical but it must work in concert with pragmatism.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  23. #20

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Purism is practical but it must work in concert with pragmatism.

    You know, I know a LOT of "purists" and not a single one of them would object to this. NOT ONE.

    On the other hand, I've met very few realists/pragmatists who don't immediately resort to denigrating "purists" as "Utopian dreamers" who need to "wake up to reality and get with the program" when the "purist" objects to anything the realist advocates or anyone they support on moral or principled grounds. I've also met very few realists/pragmatists who don't also regularly blame "purists" for the lack of progress toward liberty, and wish they'd just STFU or leave, or both.

    Interesting.
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post
    You know, I know a LOT of "purists" and not a single one of them would object to this. NOT ONE.

    On the other hand, I've met very few realists/pragmatists who don't immediately resort to denigrating "purists" as "Utopian dreamers" who need to "wake up to reality and get with the program" when the "purist" objects to anything the realist advocates or anyone they support on moral or principled grounds. I've also met very few realists/pragmatists who don't also regularly blame "purists" for the lack of progress toward liberty, and wish they'd just STFU or leave, or both.

    Interesting.
    I'd say the same in reverse.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I'd say the same in reverse.



    "I know you are but what am I?"
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post


    "I know you are but what am I?"
    I can't help it if you project.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    As is so often the case, Ron Paul is exactly and entirely correct ...

    "Those who advocate a so-called extreme position can often move the center of political debate closer to the pure libertarian position ..."

    By definition, any compromise will always be a reconciliation between extremes (where an "extreme" is the full set of whatever a given side of a compromise actually wants, as distinct from what that side will actually be able to get). If gradualist reformers are to be effective, then for any reformative compromise to significantly skew our way, gradualist reformers must be "backstopped" by those who are willing and able to be more vocally absolutist and radical. Otherwise, the "spectrum of possibility" (so to speak) will be foreshortened, and gradualist reformism (rather than absolutist radicalism) will be the "extreme" upon which any compromise will be erected (to the dissatisfaction and disappointment of both gradualist reformers and absolutist radicals).

    "This is not to suggest libertarians should reject transitional measures ..."

    As Murray Rothbard emphasized, we should always keep in mind the critical fact that there is no necessary contradiction between "absolutism in theory" and "gradualism in practice." In fact, gradualism in practice is fine. It has to be, if only because "gradualism" is almost always the only means by which things will actually change. As the great abolitionist (and absolutist) William Lloyd Garrison noted: "Urge immediate abolition as earnestly as we may, it will, alas! be gradual abolition in the end. We have never said that slavery would be overthrown by a single blow; that it ought to be, we shall always contend."

    But it is just as important to understand that acknowledging the place of gradualism in practice is NOT an excuse for eschewing absolutism in theory. Serious (indeed, fatal) problems arise when "absolutism in theory" is misguidedly discarded and "gradualism in practice" is promoted to "gradualism in theory." As Garrison also pointed out, "gradualism in theory is perpetuity in practice."

    Properly understood, "absolutism" (or "purism") and "gradualism" (or "pragmatism") should be regarded as complements, NOT as opposites.

    Many absolutists and gradualists tend to forget this (assuming they ever understood it in the first place) ...

    Excellent post. +rep
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post


    "I know you are but what am I?"
    You just summarized 47,306 of his posts.
    Quote Originally Posted by UWDude View Post
    We could pay off the debt with the money raised from live broadcast executions.

    Be just like 1984. Truckloads of em, people betting on which one gets shot first, all sorts of fun stuff
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I don't really care if I happen to be wrong about your positions, you are wrong about mine.
    A POX ON BOTH YOUR PARTIES

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    You just summarized 47,306 of his posts.

    Wow! I didn't realize I was THAT good! ROTFL!
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post
    Wow! I didn't realize I was THAT good! ROTFL!
    47,307

    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...77#post6868177

    Last edited by acptulsa; 10-01-2019 at 06:22 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by UWDude View Post
    We could pay off the debt with the money raised from live broadcast executions.

    Be just like 1984. Truckloads of em, people betting on which one gets shot first, all sorts of fun stuff
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I don't really care if I happen to be wrong about your positions, you are wrong about mine.
    A POX ON BOTH YOUR PARTIES

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post

    He's on fire!
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post
    He's on fire!
    We should do something. Want to pee on him?
    Quote Originally Posted by UWDude View Post
    We could pay off the debt with the money raised from live broadcast executions.

    Be just like 1984. Truckloads of em, people betting on which one gets shot first, all sorts of fun stuff
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I don't really care if I happen to be wrong about your positions, you are wrong about mine.
    A POX ON BOTH YOUR PARTIES



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •