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.
No
Yes
Undecided
Undecided, very likely no
-unless Johnson and Weld start confessing and repenting before and at, like say, the big L + D + R debate. <-- THAT ain't likely.
Weld: "I want to tell you about the evils of the CFR..."
Johnson: "I want to tell you about the evils of using force to make someone do something "moral".
lol
If someone wants to go from brand R&D to brand L, I say great, knock yourself out, do some research and resist how ya think ya gotta resist -this is RPFs!
Fear of man will prove to be a snare, but whoever trusts in the LORD is kept safe. Proverbs 29:25
"I think the propaganda machine is the biggest problem that we face today in trying to get the truth out to people."
Ron Paul
Please watch, subscribe, like, & share, Ron Paul Liberty ReportBITCHUTE IS A LIBERTY MINDED ALTERNATIVE TO GOOGLE SUBSIDIARY YOUTUBE
Undecided at this point, we'll see how the race turns out and how serious of a candidacy this is.
I put in with the undecided camp. If Weld swears off of CFR and gun grabbing and Gary suddenly decides he want to be libertarian then at least I can support the message even if I'm skeptical. As things stand they represent something I'm not interested in being associated with.
"The Patriarch"
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
Maybe the reason we haven't fixed it yet is because I'm the one who's got it right and too many folks like you don't get it.
I've never heard it, and even if I had, every *other* sentence is another expansion of fedgov power in the name of some social liberal god.Gary talks about doing all these I believe.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
He said he doesn't agree with the nazi cake part because it would go against the Jewish baker's first amendment rights - but if a nazi came into a Jewish bakery and ordered a cake or a bagel, he thinks they should have to serve them. So a wedding cake baker won't have to make a penis shaped wedding cake, but they can come in and order something that they would normally make for a straight couple.
In principle he is wrong, but in reality he will gain a lot more traction this way - the country isn't ready for that yet, NOBODY on the left is ready for a candidate who supports businesses be able to hang signs that say "No Blacks Allowed". Rand would have had a tough time in the general on this issue alone, even though he has backtracked there is plenty out there to show that he had supported this idea (which he is right about, and he had balls to bring it up, but it was probably a bad strategy for a Presidential run). Gary Johnson was right in the debate when he said it was a "black-hole issue".
We can pick out liberty ideas that are popular, and the most important, like economics, individual liberty, privacy, foreign policy and get people rallying around them, and slowly introduce them to other concepts and over time hopefully they will accept more of them.. or we can be purists about all of our pet issues and have a difficult time getting anybody on our side..
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
In principle he expands the federal power over the states, and I cannot and will not support it, because this is the #1 issue that keeps the leviathan fed.
ETA every other issue you mention is resolved at the federal level by restoring the correct balance of power. Therefore I do not think insisting on a Constitutionally oriented federal/state balance of power is not too much to ask for. This is a drop-dead issue for me.
Last edited by GunnyFreedom; 05-31-2016 at 01:08 AM.
Here is his full statement...
https://www.facebook.com/govgaryjohn...53109454754364In a nationally-televised debate among three of the Libertarian candidates for President (A debate that should, by the way, have been more inclusive of all the candidates.), a highly unlikely hypothetical question was raised about whether a Jewish baker has the right to refuse to serve a Nazi sympathizer asking for a “Nazi cake”. I responded to that question in the legal context of whether a public business has the right to refuse to serve a member of the public, as distasteful as it might be.
The simple answer to that question is, whether all like it or not, U.S. law has recognized the principle of public accommodation for more than 100 years: The principle that, when a business opens its doors to the public, that business enters into an implied contract to serve ALL of the public. Further, when that business voluntarily opens its doors, the owners voluntarily agree to adhere to applicable laws and regulations -- whether they like those laws or not.
To be clear, anti-discrimination laws do not, and cannot, abridge fundamental First Amendment rights. I know of no one who reasonably disagrees. In the highly unlikely event that a Nazi would demand that a Jewish baker decorate a cake with a Nazi symbol, the courts, common sense, and common decency -- not to mention the First Amendment -- all combine to protect that baker from having to do so. It’s not an issue, except when distorted for purposes of gotcha politics.
Does a public bakery have to sell a cake to a Nazi? Probably so. Does that bakery have to draw a swastika on it? Absolutely not. And that’s the way it should be.
Of course, we all know that this conversation is really “code” for the current, and far more real, conversation about society’s treatment of LGBT individuals. I have even heard some talk of a “right to discriminate”. And of course, we have states and municipalities today trying to create a real right to discriminate against the LGBT community on religious grounds -- the same kinds of “religious” grounds that were used to defend racial segregation, forbid interracial marriages and, yes, defend discrimination against Jews by businesses. That is not a slope Libertarians want to go down.
Once again, my belief that discrimination on the basis of religion should not be allowed has been distorted by some to suggest that a legitimate church or its clergy should be “forced” to perform a same-sex marriage. That is absurd. The various ballot initiatives I supported across the country to repeal bans on same-sex marriage all had one provision in common: A specific provision making clear that no religious organization, priest or pastor could be required to perform any rite contrary to that organization’s or individual’s faith. That protection was supported almost universally by the LGBT community -- even though most legal scholars agreed that such a protection already exists in the Constitution. We just wanted to leave no doubt.
This site has a specific purpose defined in our Mission Statement.
Members must read and follow our Community Guidelines.
I strive to respond to all queries; please excuse late and out-of-sequence responses.
A "Nazi" is not currently a protected class. If a Jew baker refused to sell cookies to a Nazi today, nothing would happen. Johnson's vision is an expansion of the social collective enforcement that government already does, only his vision would expand it even further than Obama already has.
NeoReactionary. American High Tory.
The counter-revolution will not be televised.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
My biggest issues are foreign policy and corporate welfare/special interest control. GJ is excellent on these issues. Nazi cake baking is a non-issue for me. The NRA directs congress as far as the second amendment is concerned, so I see no danger of guns rights being reduced.
The fact that the president has so much direct control over foreign policy and GJ is so strong, makes this a strong yes vote for me.
The veto is my biggest reason. I'm not a fan of him essentially sticking up for the worst part of the civil rights act, but it is a non issue to me, much like the transgender issue.
Currently under federal law you cannot make a Jew sell a Nazi cupcakes. In Johnson's world the fedgov has the right to force the Jew to sell cupcakes to a Nazi. Johnson can SAY this is not a change until he is blue in the face. He is either lying, ignorant, or incompetent. None of which belongs in any office in the US, much less POTUS.
Are you a bakery owner? A rational pragmatic person would be more concerned with topics like foreign military intervention, the drug war, domestic spying, health care regulation, and social security, things that really threaten our country. You seem more worried about Mr. & Mrs. Bakery owner.
Johnson is pro-abortion, up to the point that the baby can live outside of the womb.
He is for "humanitarian" wars.
Won't take drone strikes off the table.
Does not want to close ANY military bases
Does not believe in setting any limits on the sheer numbers of "immigrants".
Chose a VP that is not only a high-ranking CFR member, but co-chaired the CFR's Task Force to build a North American Union.
If this is the current definition of a liberty candidate, this site is in big trouble.
================
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.
Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America
The Property Basis of Rights
All I'm saying is that Johnson damn sure isn't a liberty candidate. Personally, I won't be voting for anyone who is CFR, or chooses a CFR running mate.
Yeah, scroll up in this thread. I'm pretty sure Bryan copied everything over from the other thread and I gave plenty of links in it.And you got links to support all your claims?
================
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.
Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America
The Property Basis of Rights
Trump is pro-abortion, up to the point that he wants to take money from you to pay for other peoples' abortions up to the point of birth itself. That's worse than Johnson, who, when he was governor, signed every bill the New Mexico Right to Life Committee wanted him to and vetoed every bill they wanted him to.
Trump is for non-humanitarian wars.
Trump would have used drones to kill peaceful American citizens protesting at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge.
That's one relatively small point against Johnson.
That's a good thing. That's the free market position. This issue is a huge mark against Trump, especially from the perspective of this website's positions.
Who's Trump's VP going to be? Someone any better than that? We don't even know yet. And don't forget, when I asked you to find what was so bad in that task force's recommendations when you used that against Cruz, you couldn't find anything serious. You had to keep posting links to other know-nothings making the same sweeping statements you made.
Not when you compare him to the competition.
Johnson also was the highest level elected official to endorse Ron Paul for president and actively campaigned for him in 2008.
There are tons of other positive things to say about him. But you choose to focus on only negatives (except for his free market/Ron Paul approach to immigration).
This is because you're a Trump troll.
Connect With Us