Objective review of Republican candidates for President

[snyprrr]

Ron Paul just keeps saying smart stuff. I know the Vermont governor called him an idiot, but,... oh, I can see I'm not going to be able to say anything more...

I JUST HAPPENED to hear both Rush and Hannity (just have talk radio on all the time, no affil here) get per-fluxomed by callers raving about Paul. Both hate Paul, so, it was nice to see them squirming trying to politely tell the little old ladies that they just had a difference of opinion of things with Paul.

I'd say Paul is the only one who doesn't want to attack Iran and Syria.

I think Paul would decimated Obama in a one on one.


These are just things that I, the perfect innocent bystander, see, and report, and opine.

[karlhenning]

Ron Paul just keeps saying smart stuff.

That's one of the most curious remarks about the campaign I've heard yet.

[Todd]

I'd say Paul is the only one who doesn't want to attack Iran and Syria.

I must have missed the calls for attacking Syria.  Are they widespread?

[kishnevi]

That's one of the most curious remarks about the campaign I've heard yet.

Think of it this way: most Republican politicians trot out conservative/libertarian talking points in order to keep their voters in line, and apply the principles only when it suits them.  Paul actually applies those principles and sticks to them.  Dislike of the Federal Reserve, for instance--if you're for a much smaller government than we have now, then a central bank able to manipulate the money supply and other economic matters, even to a limited degree, is highly suspect. 

[karlhenning]

Think of it this way: most Republican politicians trot out conservative/libertarian talking points in order to keep their voters in line, and apply the principles only when it suits them.  Paul actually applies those principles and sticks to them.  Dislike of the Federal Reserve, for instance--if you're for a much smaller government than we have now, then a central bank able to manipulate the money supply and other economic matters, even to a limited degree, is highly suspect.

Aye, but that's a different matter to concluding that the stuff wot he has to say is smart.

[snyprrr]

Aye, but that's a different matter to concluding that the stuff wot he has to say is smart.

ok, you're right. The smart thing to say (to get elected), or do, is what Clinton and Bush did: pander to the base, and then betray them. I'd believe there are more Democratic politicians who secretly back Paul, than Republicans.

On the Fox show 'The Five', Bob Beckel, the token liberal , was going through the GOP candidates and completely did not even say Paul's name, and the rest of them (the libs pretending to be consrvs) continued the silence, even though he (Paul) apparently won their (fox's) poll.





My new theory is that, at the last moment, Obama will not run, and give the nomination to Hillary. This theory is running into lots of problems though.

[karlhenning]

ok, you're right. The smart thing to say (to get elected), or do, is what Clinton and Bush did: pander to the base, and then betray them.

Droll.  You cannot really think that disbanding the Fed is "smart." What fills the void? [An intelligent answer, please.]

GK Chesterton: Don't tear down a fence until you know why it was put up.

[Todd]

What fills the void?

Well, JP Morgan is still around.  Alas, Mr Dimon doesn't have the same sway Mr Morgan did.

[karlhenning]

Well, and for those who really think the private sector would do just fine on its own without governmental oversight, two words: Merrill Lynch

[snyprrr]

Droll.  You cannot really think that disbanding the Fed is "smart." What fills the void? [An intelligent answer, please.]

GK Chesterton: Don't tear down a fence until you know why it was put up.

Of course 'they''ve got it to the point where you can't extract the 'evil' without killing the 'host', meaning, how do you do the right thing (kill the private central bank) without causing the bankers to...

you know, Karl, my SMART answer is to let the old people DIE!!! Yea, let all this Medicare and SS go!!! Let the bank GO!!! Let HEARTY, FRONTIER DRIVEN real men and women survive this apocalypse like so many post-apocalypse films do.

I'm not running for Liar-in-Chief, so, let me lay it down. A Nanny State is not in the US Constitustion. Except for the fact that Perry is so creepy and obviously a shill for oil and israel, all the stuff... forget him, Paul says the same stuff...

Look, OLD PEOPLE NEED TO START DYING like they USED to. Right now they are ALL artificially being propped up and used as  a 'bloc' for no other reason than to get liberal social policies enacted.

AAAAAARRRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

You all really think that the STATUS QUO can go on and on and on??? AT SOME POINT the camel's back will break, and all the politician's promises will be shown for what they are: WORDS words, and only hot air.

Let granny die so her great grand children will live.

My own mother has taken the 'fuck em' attitude: I'm old and I just want to live out my days in peace, and I could care less about feeling guilty about selling my legacy into slavery to the chinese, and dying in endless wars for israel.

AAAARRRRGGGHHHH!!!!

FED = out
IRS = out
New Deal = out

Go clone Andrew Jackson, then maybe I'll vote.





oh yea, and I HAVE sucked the teat of Unemployment Benefits many many times. Gladly I would have forgone this safety net shit for a more hearty constitution (in me).




OF COURSE you want a 'smart' answer, because there is no nice way of saying that the only way to get us out of this mess is to totally fuck with the status quo of largesse driven public policy. Yes, you're gonna have to 'let' some old people die,... and no politician is going to ask that of their selfish constituants.

Maybe THAT's the problem: the people of the US. Maybe WE SUCK as a people??? Why can't we REFUSE government assistance?

Oh, that's right, the government ENCOURAGED all this, to the point we are at now. Everybody's a victim.

EVERYBODY'S A VICTIM!!







Anyhow, you asked about the Fed. Have you seen the film 'Creature from Jekyll Island' about what happened in 1913? Hey, it's ONLY been 100 years. Everybody acts like ANY tradition is worth saving.

Why do you want foreign, private, bankers running our fiscals? Why why why? Are they that trustworthy? Have they shown themselves capable of stopping ANYTHING???

Isn't it obvious that everything is cronyism?





The government should be made of America is fucked. We have reached polarization, and when the riots hit HERE, it looks like it's going to be muuuuuch worse than what we've already seen.

Imagine... all those people on pyschotropics when they can't get their meds. Imagine, just imagine.

And the answer to the question in your head, is, No!!!






Yea,... a 'smart' answer on getting rid of the Fed? Just tell the people what they want to hear, and, as soon as you're elected, do whatever you please (Clinton & Bush). Obama is showing that he didn't get that memo.

The government is just TOO BIG, Karl,... no??? Do I need someone to tell me when I can wipe my butt, too? Do I really need someone to tell me what to eat? how to drive?

IF I CAN PUT UP A LEMONADE STAND??(look this one up,... it's been happening a lot lately)


Maybe I WANT raw milk. No one's gonna tell me I can't. Fuckers.



All you people who wan What's that quote (from Franklin?): Those who would trade 'rights' for 'security' deserve neither?

The next president (and it probably won't be Paul) will no doubt try to fuck us worse than all the rest combined. I say either Hillary or Perry/Cheney/Bolton/Romney.




No, my simple answer is to let it all fall. Had we let it fall in 2008, we wouldn't be so concerned about letting it fall in 2011 (and next year, and after that, and...). Had we let nature happen in 2008, maybe SOME of us would still be around to pick up the pieces and start over (unless of course we'd be speaking chinese?).


SMART ANSWER: LEARN CHINESE!!!!!!!!

[Todd]

See what you did Karl.

[karlhenning]

. . . [An intelligent answer, please.]

Suppose I ought to have asked for an intelligible answer, as well.]

[Josquin des Prez]

Republicans, a lot of them anyway, love immigration, particularly of the illegal kind, because it gives them a dirt-cheap compliant workforce lacking in any legal protections. It also gives them access to highly-skilled legal labor which works for peanuts, via the H1B1 program, among others. I'm betting there are a lot more Indians working for tech companies than writing for National Review.

Indeed. Republicans are just as bad as the Democrats from any white nationalist point of view. Damn, did i mention the "w" word? My bad.

[Brahmsian]

Is it just me, or does it seem like Americans talk about 'the next election' basically the day after the previous election?     All the 'hype' for the 'next election' seems to start like at least 3 years in advance.

Is this commonplace in some other countries?

[DavidRoss]

The circus is always in town.

If you wanted high-flying acrobats, tightrope walkers, and lion tamers, you may be disappointed.  These days it features almost nothing but clowns.

[DieNacht]

Years ago we actually had a in-a-strange-way-post-modern-yet-not-intellectual comedian elected to parliament here, promising "more tail wind on every bicycle path", "generally better weather", "shorter queues in supermarkets", "nutella in soldier´s field rations" (this was actually accomplished) etc.

He did become somewhat more serious though, realizing that his vote meant something, and was also modest enough not to seek re-election.

[Josquin des Prez]

"nutella in soldier´s field rations" (this was actually accomplished)

Nice.

[kishnevi]

Well, and for those who really think the private sector would do just fine on its own without governmental oversight, two words: Merrill Lynch

Consider how much damaged Goldman Sachs et al did because they got Freddie Mac et al to buy their mortgages, and otherwise how much the various government agencies were involved in greenlighting all that mess. 

Had there been no Freddie Mac buying all the mortgages in sight (without apparently bothing to check on their validity or risk), perhaps Goldman Sachs might have gone down, or Bank of America, or one or two major institutions--but it would have never developed to the point it did, and threaten to bring down the whole complex of American finance.

We libertarians don't believe that the free market will always deliver a good result--or even deliver a good result most of the time.  What we believe is that government interference in the market will always end up delivering a worse result than the free market would on its own--by inappropriate regulation, by existing companies bringing the regulatory and legislative process under their control so as to hinder new competition and to become rent seeking (ie, get tax money to end up being part of their revenue stream no matter what the merits might be).   To say we would be better off without the Fed is not the same thing as saying we would be at an optimal state without the Fed.  It's being relative to the mess we're in now.

And it has to be mentioned that unlike Snyperr, I'm not at all eager to see Granny die off.

[Gurn Blanston]

And it has to be mentioned that unlike Snyprr, I'm not at all eager to see Granny die off.

Especially since I am now married to Granny....

But in any case, I am in agreement with more of your post than most others. I would be a Libertarian myself if I identified with anyone at all. We Haydnists are anarchosyndicalist more than anything else....

[snyprrr]

Indeed. Republicans are just as bad as the Democrats from any white nationalist point of view. Damn, did i mention the "w" word? My bad.

haha!