Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
-----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...back-backlash/
If that is your own view and not just of that photo, yes there are questions.
If they is same, why almost all respected neocons/Wall Streety money baggers/zionism lobbies and even their mid level puppet like DGP are supporting Hillary and opposing Trump?
But if it is just photo talking, questions can remain unanswered.
MAGA Allies: 'Bully Israel with undeclared nukes steals land'
Dangerous conspiracy theories on Right claim MAGA fake frontgroup
Poll: Should US apologize for financing radicalization of Afghan children in 80s?
Obama-Clinton Years: A Violent Chapter in World History
Trump: If (Neocon) Adelson Backs Rubio "He'll Have Total Control" Over Him
Delta variant, death of 9 Chinese engineers in terror attack led to airport chaos & quick Kabul fall?
That's funny because I consider Trump one of those high and mighty elitists. Look at the way he treats Rand Paul and Ron Paul. Just because he says a few things you like, you are ready to bend over and let him have his way with you. Even worst than that, you can't seem to fathom why the rest of us (including Ron Paul himself) don't feel the same way. Sorry you got your feelings hurt. Perhaps there are other forums out there who are more sympathetic to you and your authoritarian causes. Around here liberty is the goal and the lesser of 2 authoritarians is a step on the wrong direction no matter how you try to spin it.
A sense of danger gives birth to fear. And fear is the time-honored cross for the crucifixion of liberty.
MAGA Allies: 'Bully Israel with undeclared nukes steals land'
Dangerous conspiracy theories on Right claim MAGA fake frontgroup
Poll: Should US apologize for financing radicalization of Afghan children in 80s?
Obama-Clinton Years: A Violent Chapter in World History
Trump: If (Neocon) Adelson Backs Rubio "He'll Have Total Control" Over Him
Delta variant, death of 9 Chinese engineers in terror attack led to airport chaos & quick Kabul fall?
Any man who has a history of using the government to take away private property for his own commercial interests, as well as supporting foreign invasions just so we can take a country's national resources is a tyrant. If you can't see that, then you're simply blinded by your pragmatism.
"Then David said to the Philistine, 'You come to me with a sword, a spear, and a javelin, but I come to you in the name of Yahweh of hosts, the God of the battle lines of Israel, Whom you have reproached.'" - 1 Samuel 17:45
"May future generations look back on our work and say that these were men and women who, in moment of great crisis, stood up to their politicians, the opinion-makers, and the Establishment, and saved their country." - Dr. Ron Paul
I wonder if somebody put a gun to Ron Pauls head and said pick one or I shoot and he was forced to pick Hillary or Trump to live through the moment I wonder who he would pick?
I really would like to know the answer to that question.
Et cognoscetis veritatem et veritas liberabit vos
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
I have acknowledged Trump's bad positions or posturings, but reject the black-hat Manichean absolutism and "he's all bad" fear mongering being exercised by his bashers. The ongoing discussion is about Trump's overall usefulness to the movement, strategic or interim, and not making the perfect (e.g., Ron Paul) the enemy of the good (i.e., that overall use).
-----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...back-backlash/
I can't find it but I swear @Suzanimal posted a RP video a while back where he said Trump would be worse because he'll have a republican legislature that would feel 'compelled to go along with his plan' sort of thing...
Your statement above proves again what I mean by your being blinded of Trump's tyrannical nature because of your pragmatism. There is no "overall usefulness" to Trump's candidacy to the "liberty movement" because Trump does not stand for liberty. Just because the establishment types in both parties don't like Trump does not make him pro-liberty. In fact, the leader of the "liberty movement," Dr. Ron Paul, has even mentioned several times that Trump is just as much of an authoritarian as the establishment folks who are against him.
But the fact that you can overlook Trump's obvious carelessness towards principles like the right to private property for the sake of his "overall usefulness to the movement" really demonstrates that you're not seeking to advance "the movement" at all. That's what we critics of Trump and his supporters (including Dr. Ron Paul) keep trying to tell you; your pragmatism does not protect the very things (like respect for private property) that you believe it does. In fact, it undermines those principles, and stifles what the "liberty movement" is all about.
"Then David said to the Philistine, 'You come to me with a sword, a spear, and a javelin, but I come to you in the name of Yahweh of hosts, the God of the battle lines of Israel, Whom you have reproached.'" - 1 Samuel 17:45
"May future generations look back on our work and say that these were men and women who, in moment of great crisis, stood up to their politicians, the opinion-makers, and the Establishment, and saved their country." - Dr. Ron Paul
Simply, his form of leftist economic policies are worse than her form of leftist economic policies, where they differ... which isn't much. Not entirely, it is perceived he'll be better with regulations. But he is advocating for tariffs which will predictably hurt the economy and he is advocating deporting a great number currently in the workforce. Business people don't like it when the government comes in and starts $#@!ing with the economy in a way that they couldn't have predicted when they made investments and so forth.
And Trump has gotten support from the neocons as well.
Cuck
I would respectfully restate I am not ignoring or overlooking lapses in Trump's positions in order to prioritize pragmatism instead of advancing the movement, but putting pragmatism at the service of principle, and by so doing, completing the picture of what the movement needs to do better. Setting the two at odds with one another is not productive, when they are both needed. Nor are cartoonish overstatements about Trump's views helpful, when many of them weren't meant to be taken seriously to begin with.
When Ron Paul has evaluated Trump's "usefulness" it has been on the basis of the consistency of his stated positions with liberty, or lack thereof. My evaluation factors in the majority/plularity vote-gaining, 'beyond the base' engagement and establishment busting elements that Paul foregoes, which are the main elements needed to win national campaigns (by reaching the blocs the movement should have sought to appeal to). Our inability to do so at all through the issue-only evaluation of campaigns is a main reason Ron failed to win. so judging Trump's usefulness to liberty solely through that standard is misleading or incomplete. Whether Trump had ever existed or not, the movement still needs to address vote-gaining, 'beyond the base' engagement and establishment busting in order to succeed nationally.
I re-stress those aspects because 1) we've failed three times doing things the other way (which is the real thing that hasn't advanced the movement), and 2) the movement itself has always thought of itself as innately "better than the LP" because it presumed that by running within a major party we had a better chance to win, yet proceeded to do none of the things needed to win a major party race. In that context, not attracting the voting blocs the liberty movement should have, or successfully overcoming the elite, while piling on the candidate who did, is the height of folly. Our approach going forward should be cognizant of being both pro-liberty, and pro-effective strategy, but for too many here, that is sadly not the case.
It's as if the proponents of the issue-only approach are perfectly content to lose electorally for decades following that losing formula, so long as it's within the GOP, while still ridiculing the LP for losing electorally for decades. If you're content with that fate, that is your preference, but I am not, and so will press on with a both-and approach to advancing liberty.
Last edited by Peace&Freedom; 08-16-2016 at 06:43 AM.
-----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...back-backlash/
Saying Trump is worse than Hillary is not the same as saying Hillary is not the opposite of what our country needs. It's basically saying they both have irredeemable qualities that disqualify them from receiving my support or my vote.
The Trump approach rarely won majorities until everyone else dropped out of the race. It is definitely not winning majorities now, and the only coalitions the campaign built were coalitions with white nationalists, the party elite (to help secure the nomination), and people who want to vote against his opponent. 2 of those groups will be gone by mid November.
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
I love Ron and Rand but the atmosphere sure did change when Rand made a run, and his policies just didn't reflect the current state of affairs. If Rand was more about jobs, building a wall to reduce illegal immigration and protecting America from ISIS then he would of had a much better shot.
I don't really see Trump as an authoritarian and I support many of his policies. Jobs is the #1 concern for most people.
Trumps plan to build a wall is by adding stuff to the patriot act, I think if Rand would of ran on adding stuff to the patriot act it would of not helped at all..
Trump purportedly plans on shrinking the number of such transactions — called remittances — by changing a rule in the USA Patriot Act anti-terrorism law.
Connect With Us