Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

I'm seriously starting to think that Ron Paul could win the ticket.

It does appear now to be within the realm of possibility - but then I remember how the United States, globally, is truly in a terrible strategic position in every front but militarily. It's often said that this dire realization is the true cause of the bellicosity of the PNAC neo-conservatives presently in power; that they're basically leading the Empire with the only strength that remains to it. Keeping this in mind it seems far less likely, in my opinion, that a Ron Paul could win the ticket.

"The message is powerful, you know I have my short comings but the message has no short comings, the message of liberty is what America is all about". -Ron Paul

"The purpose of government is to eradicate the poor."
Hammurabi

qualm wrote:

"The purpose of government is to protect the weak from the powerful"
Hammurabi

You have no sense of humour, Grimm. I'm actually well-aware of Hammurabi -- don't need any more history lessons.

Grimm wrote: "Not that this quote has anything to do with anything Ron Paul does or does not stand for.."

Ron Paul is an anarcho-capitalist or right-wing libertarian. The point I was making is that given the chance to implement it, an anarcho-capitalist program will weaken whatever legal mechanisms remain, as recourse for the people, against massive corporate power. (It's a bitter irony that few seem aware of--that it's this same corporate power that historically has so subverted government to its aims, to the expense of the public good, to the point where people now are contemptuous of government, but not the other.)

I have a pretty good sense of humor. I just don't find that mischaracterizing Ron Paul or what he stands for as being "funny". You say things like "Ron Paul is an anarcho-capitalist" but then don't bother to back it up with anything. If Ron Paul is an anarcho-capitalist then so were our founding fathers.

Huh?

Ron Paul is a right-wing "libertarian" or, more accurately, an anarcho-capitalist. He makes no secret of this.

Do you actually think that because he's against the war in Iraq that he's somehow progressive?

The best way to return to the values of the founding fathers would be to reinstitute slavery.

I guess I'm not "getting" your jokes again. This is the second time you have said that he is an anarcho-capitalist and it is also the second time you have not backed that claim up with anything.

Do I think him being against the war makes him a progressive? I think it makes him what he claims to be...conservative, constitutionalist, and a non interventionist.

You forgot 'right-wing libertarian'. Minarchists like Ron Paul are just slightly watered down anarcho-capitalists. I'm not here to put on an introductory political science symposium for you personally. Ask me to back up something I've said that's controversial. In other words, "google is your friend."

No one here is asking for or needs a personal "introductory political science symposium". I thought you might be capable of a rational intelligent discussion. But if all you have is "he's a right wing libertarian ipso facto anarcho-capitalist" and "google is your friend" I can see I was wrong.

What are you blathering about with this "if that's all you have"?

As I stated earlier, my view is that Ron Paul will weaken whatever legal mechanisms remain, as recourse for the people, against massive corporate power. And It's quite ironic that this same corporate power is that which historically has subverted government, at the expense of the public good, to the point where people are highly contemptuous of government, but not of corporate power.

Supporters of Ron Paul are the biggest dupes imaginable.

I know what your view on Ron Paul is. You have said it several times. What you haven't said is why that is your view. I've asked you to support your view...you know something he has said or done as a politician or something he has promised to do as President. But so far you have come up with nothing. All you want to do is state your opinion and when your opinion is challenged you come up with nothing...nothing except the lame excuse that if I want to know why you are right I should "google it" because you apparently are not capable of explaining it on your own without giving a "introductory political science symposium".

"Supporters of Ron Paul are the biggest dupes imaginable." That statement doesn't carry much weight coming from someone who can't or won't back their opinions with any facts. Your like a Sean Hannity or a Bill O'Reilly...it just is because you say it is.

I have these concerns about Ron Paul because he self-identifies, ideologically, as a (right-wing) libertarian. All the evidence I require, supporting what I've said, derives from what is readily available information. This is what I meant by "google is your friend".

Shifting focus for a moment I want you to consider something:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/17/business/17leonhardt.html?ex=1326690000&en=7f221bfce7a6408c&ei=5090

Yes, I know Ron Paul is against the war in Iraq -- although we're not sure if it's for humanitarian reasons -- but he's also against public investment of the sort illustrated in the NYTimes article above.

It's hard to understand where someone is coming from when all they want to deal with is labels. You keep saying that Paul is a "right-wing libertarian" and therefor it should be self evident that he is an "anarcho-capitalist". People seem to think that libertarian views are alien to the Republican Party and that Paul really isn't a Republican but a Libertarian. The truth is there have always been Republicans with libertarian views, in fact the 1964 Republican candidate Barry Goldwater was such a Republican. Only after the increasing power of the Christian Right in the 70's were the Libertarian Republicans silenced or forced out to start their own party.

It seems like you just want to label him a "right-wing libertarian" and then make your statements against "right-wing libertarians". Why not just stick to the subject "Ron Paul" and make your arguments against him, what he has done, what he has said, what he has promised to do?

"I know Ron Paul is against the war in Iraq -- although we're not sure if it's for humanitarian reasons" we're not? What has he said that's confused you on this? He agrees with the Constitution...that we don't go to war putting American lives in danger and taking the lives of foreign soldiers unless we declare war and declaring war would be for defending the security of our country and it's people and not something the President can decide on his own.

Ron Paul is against the Federal government taxing us and spending money on programs that are not directly related to the function of the Federal government as it is outlined in the Constitution.

What happens at the state level is up to the people that live in that state. If they want to pay taxes to fund free pre-school care they can do it. But it should not be forced on all the states by a powerful and wasteful central government.

It's a "label" Ron Paul has repeatedly applied to himself.

"It's a "label" Ron Paul has repeatedly applied to himself."

When? Where? Since he has done it repeatedly and google is your friend you shouldn't have any problem of finding an example. I've heard him refer to himself as a conservative, a libertarian, and as a Republican. I don't think I have ever heard him label himself as a "right-wing libertarian".

As I doubt you were actually only born in the last few years I have to assume you're just trying to be a pest by feigning ignorance. If you are honestly unaware of the fact that libertarianism, in the USian sense, is a right-wing ideology, then I am very surprised.

Stand by, the Qualm and Grimm Show will return right after this short message

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

This deserves to make it out for the cantankerous, I'm not Rappaport 2-man show.

I'm surprised this video hasn't been flash-mobbed like all the other Rong Paul sifts.

Qualm, you have consistently avoided answering any of the short and simple questions I have asked of you. You have convinced me that you must be completely ignorant of facts as you have yet to present any.

Libertarians are generally "conservative" on economic issues and "liberal" on social issues. They are neither "left-wing" or "right-wing".

It doesn't really matter though since your goal here is to only spread misinformation without backing anything up. I'll ask you a simple one again and lets see what happens.

You said right-wing libertarian is "a "label" Ron Paul has repeatedly applied to himself." Give one example.

I've already responded to your comment re "right-wing libertarianism" versus "libertarianism". See above.

Have you even heard of the "Austrian School"?

Grimm wrote: "Libertarians are generally "conservative" on economic issues and "liberal" on social issues. They are neither "left-wing" or "right-wing"."

What you refer to as conservative orientations on economic issues is right-wing. There aren't strictly right or left approaches on social issues. There are progressive, liberal and conservative approaches on social issues though.

Having now skimmed some of the polls at this site it doesn't look very good for Rong Paul: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-192.html

i think you might have it the wrong way round...

corporations get away with things because they are protected by government.

make the government smaller and corporations might have to stand on their own before the public.

i think people who criticise ron paul just don't understand that removing PUBLIC funding for something doesn't mean NEVER funding ANYTHING.

it means leaving money in people's pockets for them to fund what they see is necessary (as opposed to what lobbyists see is necessary)

i am not sure i am as confident as ron paul in the ability of the people to sensibly rise up and make the right choices with their money, but i KNOW the government doesn't make sensible choices, so i would be willing to give something else a try.

so when are you guys getting married?

Mink, your views are very strange and illogical. Only governments can pass laws limiting the powers of corporations. Without such laws their powers are unchecked. The term "laissez-faire" refers to political environments that know largely unrestricted corporate power.

upvote. I like him.

unlike the rest of the republicans.

I've said before that there are a few things that are going to keep Ron Paul from winning office, money, the AARP vote and his Dr. No reputation. Let's say he does get a crap lot of money and convinces the skeptics he's not crazy, will he be able to win over the old folks who are not on the internet that have no knowledge of him? That's a question for you Ron Paul supporters out there.

His main hurdle in my opinion is going to be with voters not willing or capable of critical thinking. They'll only here the buzz words "eliminate social security", "eliminate department of education", etc..and that will be that. They won't be open to "why" we should do this or "what" better alternatives there are or "how" localizing many of these programs will help eliminate the waste and corruption we see at the Federal level.

I agree. Those are very radical ideas. The problem is he has to make conservative voters understand his ideas and that's a challenge considering he's running in the Republican primaries. Historically liberals are all about change. That's going to be a huge obstacle to overcome if he even makes it out of the primaries.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Election 08, republican, president' to 'ron paul, Election 08, republican, president' - edited by Grimm

*dead

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by eric3579.

Awarding videosiftbannedme with one star point for fixing this video's dead embed code.

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by geo321.

rasch187 has fixed this video's dead embed code - no Power Points awarded because rasch187's points are already fully charged.

*findthumb *length=13:21

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - findthumb requested by eric3579.


The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 13:21 - length declared by eric3579.