"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
It's like a non stop Ron Paul Commercial! There are going to be a lot of disappointed people on this board next November when Paul helps reelect Barack Obama.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
It's like a non stop Ron Paul Commercial! There are going to be a lot of disappointed people on this board next November when Paul helps reelect Barack Obama.
And you are a non-stop commercial for your communist President...the difference is that Paul and his supporters get it...while you and the rest of the dumbed down and brainwashed confuse convenient delusions with facts.
Gadfly, My point is that unless Paul gets the Republican nomination, he will run as some kind of independent, splitting the Republican vote and electing Obama.
The same thing happened when Ralph Nader helped elect George Worst Bush in 2000. Bush 50,456,002votes Gore 50,999,897 Nader 2,882,955 (Gore actually had half a million more popular votes than Bush.)
With Ralph Nader taking votes from Al Gore, Gore only took 266 electoral votes to Bush's 271. With out Nader in the election, Gore would have likely been elected.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Box-Ron Paul will never run as an independent , he is a Republican and always will be. And I will NEVER be dissapointed being a Ron Paul supporter : ) Take a look at this video that shows his predictions in 2008, he knew what was happening while McCain and Ronmey smirked at him but it all has come true. And if Obama or one of the carbon copy Republicans do win it is our loss, for some people just vote party lines and listen and believe in empty promises.
It's like a non stop Ron Paul Commercial! There are going to be a lot of disappointed people on this board next November when Paul helps reelect Barack Obama.
Winning is one part but what's even more important about this movement is to wake others up and to spread the message of liberty. Unlike your average dem and rep we won't sell out our principles just to elect a person because of what party they're under. Choosing the lesser of 2 evils doesn't work, the outcome will remain the same like we seen in the previous administrations including the one we are under now.
As far as it being a non stop Ron Paul commercial what does it matter, we are spreading the message just like you have the right to spread Obama's message. I personally made a post here which I asked everyone to post their candidates videos, you posted one for Obama if I remember right. It takes a well informed citizen to make a good judgement come election day, I'm just doing my part. We got a lot of time Box, I think I can make a believer out of you by election day to vote for Paul
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
We got a lot of time Box, I think I can make a believer out of you by election day to vote for Paul
Henry, I'm a firm believer in the Civil Rights act of '64. One hundred years after the Civil War, and the "all men are created equal" part of the Deceleration of Independence was a lie. Unless Paul reverses his bogus "property rights" view, I don't see how I can ever support him. Paul may actually believe his "Property Rights" stance, but it's side effect is to attract racists and bigots who'd like nothing more than to return to the era of Jim Crow racism.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Henry, I'm a firm believer in the Civil Rights act of '64. One hundred years after the Civil War, and the "all men are created equal" part of the Deceleration of Independence was a lie. Unless Paul reverses his bogus "property rights" view, I don't see how I can ever support him. Paul may actually believe his "Property Rights" stance, but it's side effect is to attract racists and bigots who'd like nothing more than to return to the era of Jim Crow racism.
Libertarianism protects us all Box, we do believe all men are created equal and that's why we would never support any discrimination at a government level. It was governments after all who had segregation in schools, military, public transportation and what not, even today you see fighting about gays in the military or gay marriage. Libertarians are fighting for their rights also because we believe they're just as equal as you or me. Property rights though must be protected as they are just as important as our 1st amendment. The problem we have with that is the government is trying to enforce moral issues onto those with laws. If you drink or smoke I shouldn't be allowed to force you to quit just because I don't like it, the same applies here. There is a big difference between public property and private property.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Already we disagree. The ONLY thing that protects Americans is the Constitution of the US. Libertarianism (Conservationism, Liberalism) sells a view, and has no power to protect anything or anyone.
Discrimination exists today... with out the Civil Rights act of '64, it would be rampant. Soon whites in this country will become a minority. Then the civil rights act of '64 will take on an entirely different meaning to many people.
With out a NATIONAL civil rights law, enforced NATIONALLY, we would still have segregated states and state sponsored racism. Libertarians would be powerless to prevent it.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Already we disagree. The ONLY thing that protects Americans is the Constitution of the US. Libertarianism (Conservationism, Liberalism) sells a view, and has no power to protect anything or anyone.
Discrimination exists today... with out the Civil Rights act of '64, it would be rampant. Soon whites in this country will become a minority. Then the civil rights act of '64 will take on an entirely different meaning to many people.
With out a NATIONAL civil rights law, enforced NATIONALLY, we would still have segregated states and state sponsored racism. Libertarians would be powerless to prevent it.
What I meant by libertarianism is a strong belief in following the constitution and protecting peoples rights, sorry I should have made myself more clear. We do not need a law that infringes on 1 right to protect another, that is what the Civil Rights Act has done. No government weather federal,state,or local has the right to infringe on another's rights, you and me would probably be side by side fighting against this. But again you fail to understand you have no right to tell me how to run my business, home, or body, those are my property.
Think of it this way, do I have the right to enter your home or business without your permission, no because that is your property. Do I have the right to tell you what you eat or drink, no because your body is your property.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
But again you fail to understand you have no right to tell me how to run my business, home, or body, those are my property.
So take your libertarian "rights" but don't infringe on mine. The Taxi owner who refuses to serve minorities, because of his "property rights" should not use MY ROADS, that the rest of America built with OUR tax dollars. (You know... libertarian independence and freedom) If he wants to use the roads paid for by the 'rest of America' (including minorities) he will have to follow some of our rules as well... He can always build his own roads. Would you ask a minority to pay taxes to build roads, then deny him the opportunity to use HIS Roads?
Commerce will always be regulated for various reasons. AMERICA wants it that way. I don't want to worry weather the food in the grocery store is safe to eat, because Libertarians "Property Rights" BS. If you want to do business here, follow some simple rules, regulated by the government for the public benefit. Part of those rules would include serving everyone regardless of race, sex or religion. If you don't like those rules, go some where else where "all men are created equal" doesn't apply.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Statists like Box can't understand that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is only a reflection of the direction the country was going in socially WITH OR WITHOUT legislation. Legislation is passed for political reason, for a political party to claim a victory for what was socially inevitable anyway. Laws are the reflection not the catalyst. I'm sure Box believes the Declaration of Independence is the REASON for the Revolutionary War. Box thinks social movements only occur at the states direction. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 probably did a greater disservice to the targeted minorities, but assured the Democrat Party a permanent voting bloc,,,and that of course is more important
So take your libertarian "rights" but don't infringe on mine. The Taxi owner who refuses to serve minorities, because of his "property rights" should not use MY ROADS, that the rest of America built with OUR tax dollars. (You know... libertarian independence and freedom) If he wants to use the roads paid for by the 'rest of America' (including minorities) he will have to follow some of our rules as well... He can always build his own roads. Would you ask a minority to pay taxes to build roads, then deny him the opportunity to use HIS Roads?
Box, your argument assumes that if the Civil Rights Act of 1964 wasn't passed, whites or any other race of person wouldn't provide service for a paying customer because of race, religion of sexual orientation. That's pure fiction! The Democrats staking their flag in the Civil Rights Movement is like me taking credit for the sun rising today.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 probably did a greater disservice to the targeted minorities, but assured the Democrat Party a permanent voting bloc,,,and that of course is more important
I'm sure everyone that has a job because of the Civil Rights Act of '64 really feels that it's passage was a "DISSERVICE"! And those minorities who were prevented from voting, riding public transportation, eating in a restaurant, going to a good school... I bet they really HATE that it allowed them the freedom of every other American. Just hate it!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
I'm sure everyone that has a job because of the Civil Rights Act of '64 really feels that it's passage was a "DISSERVICE"! And those minorities who were prevented from voting, riding public transportation, eating in a restaurant, going to a good school... I bet they really HATE that it allowed them the freedom of every other American. Just hate it!
Again, you assume that only WITH the passage of such a law people have these jobs. You believe that only by social engineering and legislation can equality be attained. A Black, Hispanic, Asian, Catholic, Protestant, Jew or any other race or religion does not have to wait on me, sell me their service, sell me a product, or give there property to me for ANY reason they want. It is not my property, it is theirs. It was the government legislation forcing business to have race specific seating or race specific bathroom fixtures that were illegal and an infringement on people’s civil liberties. It was the government that was forcing businesses to segregate. Me not selling my product or services to a person for whatever reason isn't a civil liberties violation. Forcing me by law to sell my private property to a person is actually a violation of MY civil liberties.
But in the liberal mind, up is down and down is up.
Logged
