>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Ron Paul is just as bad as Romney, if not worse. Consistency is not a plus when your core ideology is that exceedingly foolish.


agreed ... sigh =o(

Tags for this video have been changed from 'flip flop, scary, changes position, mixed messages, lack of character, robotic' to 'ron paul ad, flip flop, changes position, mixed messages, lack of character, robotic' - edited by dystopianfuturetoday

Ron Paul is just as bad as Romney, if not worse. Consistency is not a plus when your core ideology is that exceedingly foolish.

>> ^VoodooV:

I'm ok with foreign aid especially when it comes to humanitarian aid, we're all on this planet together after all, but we can't buy good relations and times ARE tight now and that money could be put to good use here.


Naiveite. Overly-simplistic view of Government(s) in the current paradigm. Flowers in gun barrels???
Guns still fire bullets unless you fill the barrel completely. Humanitarian aid invariably involves coop.

Your video, Ron Paul's Maine delegates protest RNC, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

^Fairbs

I do not get my information from Youtube, it's great for entertainment - not so much for accurate Information.

Here are some relevant points I found from a Washington Post article dated April 6, 2012 entitled "Why Ron Paul rallies never translate into votes".

Ron Paul recently held a rally at UCLA, and between 6,000 and 10,000 people attended. The rally itself was a complete success. Yet while Ron Paul has consistently attracted larger, more enthusiastic crowds than his GOP competitors, those events always fail to translate into victories at the ballot box. Ron Paul has never won a presidential primary or caucus.

The media bias argument is nonsense. The media could never hate Ron Paul with the pure passion and ferocity that they despise Rick Santorum. The liberal media loathes social conservatives. They love Republicans who bash other conservatives. This is how John McCain in 2008 and Jon Huntsman in 2012 became the darlings of the liberal media. The media will end up despising whomever the GOP nominee is, and Ron Paul has suffered much less abuse than Newt Gingrich. Every day there are calls for Gingrich, and now even Santorum, to drop out. Dr. Paul does not face those calls.

As for election fraud, the GOP should just agree to give the Virgin Islands and Maine to Ron Paul in exchange for a vow of silence from the movement. The Paul movement uses complaints as their oxygen. All the voter fraud in the world cannot explain Florida, Illinois, and many other big states where Dr. Paul was rejected by more than 90% of the voters.

For those Paul supporters who are still unable to understand these repeated, huge rejections at the polls, the answer can be found right in front of their faces. The Ron Paul movement consists of too many supporters who are completely certifiable. They run up and down the hallways of GOP conventions screaming about revolutions. Decorum is replaced with degradation and debasement.

They shout down speakers they disagree with. They have zero interest in freedom and liberty for anybody except those who agree with them. Decent human beings would just accept this under the rule of "live and let live." The verbal carpet-bombers in the Ron Paul movement consist of some intolerant zealots who will harass, bully, and intimidate anybody just for thinking differently. The same hypocrites who are against undeclared wars engage in undeclared wars against their fellow Americans just for not worshipping Ron Paul. It makes the David Koresh movement look moderate.

Tell a Ron Paul supporter you disagree with his candidate. The responses will be:
1) You just do not understand. You're an idiot.
2) You are an uninformed tool of the political machine.
3) You don't care about the Constitution, freedom or liberty.
4) You are corrupt, bought and paid for, a shill for the status quo or some other powerful, mythical, nefarious entity.

These lines of thought are pure bile. The idea that a person can be decent, well educated, intelligent, have a sophisticated gift of analysis, be a clear thinker, and reject Ron Paul is totally incomprehensible to his supporters.

There are serious allegations in a number of states that Romney used illegal tactics to manipulate the results during the GOP primaries. Do a search on youtube. Some of the states were Maine, Minnesota, OH, and OR. Also the GOP changed the rules right before the convention so that a states delegates couldn't vote against the primary outcome even as a protest. So if you felt that the primary was stolen and your role as a delegate was usurped, I'd imagine you'd be pretty upset.


In reply to this comment by truth-is-the-nemesis:
I am seriously having difficulty understanding the logic of the Ron Paul supporters, they knew that Paul was not speaking, they knew that Romney was the candidate for the republican party & they also know that Paul did not agree to the terms of speaking & not choosing to opt for a third-party run. So, it seems like they just wanted to rant and rave at how corrupt the system is because THEIR guy didn't win.

I am seriously having difficulty understanding the logic of the Ron Paul supporters, they knew that Paul was not speaking, they knew that Romney was the candidate for the republican party & they also know that Paul did not agree to the terms of speaking & not choosing to opt for a third-party run. So, it seems like they just wanted to rant and rave at how corrupt the system is because THEIR guy didn't win.

to be fair, Paul is not a republican, so dunno why he seeks the Republican nomination.

I swear, this is the 2000 and the 2004 elections all over again. Ron Paul is "republican" version of Ralph Nader who will siphon off republican votes and give Obama an even bigger victory.

and it's just like 2004 in that the republicans are chanting "anyone but obama" just like dems chanted "anyone but Bush" in 2004. Kerry is a weak candidate just like Romney is.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This is happening in Utah as well. It's merely Tea Party members hiding under the guise of The Republican Party and getting in. Since the Republican Party doesn't seem to even care about this, NOW OLD-SCHOOL Republicans are getting forced out of the GOP by these new guys at their OWN CONVENTIONS. Like Cenk said these are ALREADY hard-line Republicans getting booted from even being in their own party's actions, conventions, which ultimately means they cannot get on the ballot unless they turn Independent.

People should be very concerned over this as the Tea Party and their related idiots (which include lots of Ron Paul's buddies and further on buddies of Ross Perot) are getting in wonderfully this way. People just don't like their old politician since there have been hard times, so without looking or really caring our idiotic brothers and sisters across the nation are voting them all in...

Utah, during this last year's session had some wonderful bill's put up by these idiots, like getting rid of the 12th grade (who needs that?, plus we save money!!!)... I'd have to look up the other one, but it was just as stupid--BOTH these bills created a LARGE uproar in Salt Lake City and surrounding areas (it's a far more Democratic area than anywhere else in the state--our lawmakers even "reorganized" our districts due to this fact so that all the Democrats would be stuck in one area and they could setup everywhere else to have a higher Republican base--basically gerrymandering 4 districts that were ALL Democratic before, now one is and the rest aren't...I have no idea how they got away with something so absolutely blatant) and were on national news and T.V., with interviews of the two "R.eally Tea Party" buffoons trying to explain why 12th grade was useless on CNN to Anderson Cooper...

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 7 Badge!

@rbar sorry I didn't see your last post. I think this UDHR is pretty noble but unknowingly evil, because it states that people have all sorts of rights, but what happens to the costs and demands those rights impose? To enforce them would imply a huge amount of force that would deny people of even more basic rights the declaration supposedly claims to protect. Take for example, "Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work". Does that mean the price of labor should be controlled?? By whom? To see that policy enforced, would be an egregious assault on economic freedom.

My ideal is a society where most if not all of these problems that socialists and liberals are also concerned about, like people's material needs being met, living happy productive lives, etc. are handled in an environment where the right incentives and freedoms allows creative solutions and resources to be best allocated voluntarily, rather than by mandates that are noble and well intended, and seem to handle the problem in the short run, but cause a lot more trouble than they are worth because they destroy this very environment in which society thrives.

Your video of Noam Chomsky commenting on Ron Paul's answer in a republican debate, "what if some guy is on a coma and he's going to die" to which he supposedly replied, "it's a tribute to our liberty", is a gross misrepresentation, that was never the answer Ron Paul gave. I'll bet Noam Chomsky wouldn't like to be paraphrased into saying the opposite of what he meant, he just understood what he wanted based on his own preconceptions.

Watch the actual footage here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMHY21VA8WE
(And please don't confuse a few members of the audience yelling "Yes!" with the position of the Tea Party (not that I care what they think) or Ron Paul's)

Before you talk about capitalism and democracy balancing each other out, you must first question what really happens when people are given economic freedom. A contrived scenario is playing out in your mind.

It's like if someone told you that if people had freedom of expression, people would just start spewing lies on top of lies and society would bury every shred of truth and dignity until it became unrecognizable. All I'm saying is that freedom of expression is beautiful, it's far from perfect, a lot of people will say terrible things, but it's a much better environment than censorship, and that it's not naive to expect freedom of expression to improve society with time, making truth more and more available and affordable to everyone, not only making our society more civilized but effectively raising our standards of living.

Only I'm not arguing about freedom of expression, but economic freedom.

@renatojj

Whether or not everyone is entitled to a job or money is a question I never thought about. The universal declaration for human rights (UDHR) states it as follows:
"The UDHR included both economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights because it was based on the principle that the different rights could only successfully exist in combination" -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights (parts classification and indivisibility)

Its really interesting to read the declarations 22 to 28 of the UDHR. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Article_22)

For instance:
Article 23
(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment. (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work. (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection. (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

I havent thought this through, but all of the above seem to me to not be inline with free market policies as free market policies dictate against the above rules favoring the natural motion of the market to guide the market along. Natural motion meaning that if there are moments of superfluous workers (large unemployment like today), they dont have a job and dont get paid, which forces them to either start working for themselves or die out which in both cases balance the market again.

A question inline with this: I just dont understand what your ideal is. Is there some country that comes close to your ideal or can you describe what you want to achieve?

Just having less government IMHO isnt a goal, its a means. Is your goal to maximize individual freedom (Ayn Rand style)? Though she has some ideas I fully agree to (rationalism as the only mean to knowledge vs faith for instance) her objectivism has never had much success with academia and for good reason.

Someone much more eloquent then me explained it this way (though he was talking about libertarian-ism, a close relative):
http://videosift.com/video/Noam-Chomsky-on-Ron-Paul-Hes-a-nice-guy-but

One reason democracy and capitalism have done so well for so long is because they keep each other in balance. Democracy is the rights of the majority over the minority. Capitalism (of which free market policy is a part) is the right of the individual, ie the minority over the majority. Both in and off themselves are disastrous. The balance is just where its at. Free market policies push in the direction of capitalism and away from balance. IMHO not what we want.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'live free, gary johnson, libertarian, ron paul' to 'live free, gary johnson, libertarian, president, candidate' - edited by xxovercastxx