Ok, so tell us why.
[/quote]
Because being a libertarian racist means that your actions won’t actually harm the people in question. If I’m a libertarian and I fucking hate red heads, they are no worse off than if I simply didn’t exist. The non-aggression axiom harmonizes to such an extent that even blind hatred like that doesn’t actually matter.
As a side benefit a libertarian society would actually force racists to pay the penalty for the shitty views, so it’s a win win.[/quote]
What on earth does any of that utter nonsense have to do with Ron Paul being a racist? Perhaps you could explain why he was happy for his newsletter, bearing his name to print racist material for more than a decade? You know, like saying black children should be tried as adults and so forth.[/quote]
It has everything to do with it. You being too stupid to realize it is of no consequence to me.
[/quote]
Heh. ShitMachine as usual needs it spelled out for him by his 1st grade teacher. It tells me he simply doesn’t WANT to get it. Now that the typical LEFTIST “my opponent is a racist” argument is out of the way its time to get back to praising “glorious” imperialism. This dope manages to make both leftist and neocon arguments. LOL! Entertaining.
Ok, so tell us why.
[/quote]
Because being a libertarian racist means that your actions won’t actually harm the people in question. If I’m a libertarian and I fucking hate red heads, they are no worse off than if I simply didn’t exist. The non-aggression axiom harmonizes to such an extent that even blind hatred like that doesn’t actually matter.
As a side benefit a libertarian society would actually force racists to pay the penalty for the shitty views, so it’s a win win.[/quote]
What on earth does any of that utter nonsense have to do with Ron Paul being a racist? Perhaps you could explain why he was happy for his newsletter, bearing his name to print racist material for more than a decade? You know, like saying black children should be tried as adults and so forth.[/quote]
It has everything to do with it. You being too stupid to realize it is of no consequence to me.
[/quote]
Heh. ShitMachine as usual needs it spelled out for him by his 1st grade teacher. It tells me he simply doesn’t WANT to get it. Now that the typical LEFTIST “my opponent is a racist” argument is out of the way its time to get back to praising “glorious” imperialism. This dope manages to make both leftist and neocon arguments. LOL! Entertaining.[/quote]
Actually the reason I didn’t respond to Gaius is because I took his reply to be a sad cop out. If you don’t agree then please enlighten us. How does Gaius’ profession that libertarianism is not racist alter whether Ron Paul is racist or not? Is Ron Paul libertarianism like Hitler was the party or something? I don’t get it. I’m slow. Be patient with me. Explain it for me please.
They’ve been very patient in explaining that it does not matter to them a libertarian’s personal views on race because he will not inflict them through force on anyone else.
Personally I am against voting and couldn’t endorse a creationist (or a racist if he is, although the evidence is not overwhelming) but I am sure that neither of those unfortunate traits have any bearing on what Paul would do politically.
They’ve been very patient in explaining that it does not matter to them a libertarian’s personal views on race because he will not inflict them through force on anyone else.
[/quote]
Still don’t get it. You’re saying that Ron Paul can’t break the libertarian rulebook why? Is he a perfect libertarian who is incapable of an unlibertarian action or thought? Perhaps it is you and your fellow Paulites who are unable to understand me.
They’ve been very patient in explaining that it does not matter to them a libertarian’s personal views on race because he will not inflict them through force on anyone else.
[/quote]
Still don’t get it. You’re saying that Ron Paul can’t break the libertarian rulebook why? Is he a perfect libertarian who is incapable of an unlibertarian action or thought? Perhaps it is you and your fellow Paulites who are unable to understand me.[/quote]
I’m not a “Paulite” - I’ve already said that I have no interest in voting and I think Paul’s philosophy far from perfect, but he has done an excellent job educating a wider audience on good economics.
Of course Paul could break the “rulebook”. He could say all these things then get in to office and do the opposite and that is a perfectly valid concern given the history of politics. But the evidence suggests that he won’t. His positions have been consistent as far as I can tell since he entered politics and this is because his fundamental principles which guide his positions have clearly not changed.
People who understand the philosophy understand that if he remains consistent then he won’t interfere in their personal lives - regardless of his own views.
They’ve been very patient in explaining that it does not matter to them a libertarian’s personal views on race because he will not inflict them through force on anyone else.
[/quote]
Still don’t get it. You’re saying that Ron Paul can’t break the libertarian rulebook why? Is he a perfect libertarian who is incapable of an unlibertarian action or thought? Perhaps it is you and your fellow Paulites who are unable to understand me.[/quote]
I’m not a “Paulite” - I’ve already said that I have no interest in voting and I think Paul’s philosophy far from perfect, but he has done an excellent job educating a wider audience on good economics.
Of course Paul could break the “rulebook”. He could say all these things then get in to office and do the opposite and that is a perfectly valid concern given the history of politics. But the evidence suggests that he won’t. His positions have been consistent as far as I can tell since he entered politics and this is because his fundamental principles which guide his positions have clearly not changed.
People who understand the philosophy understand that if he remains consistent then he won’t interfere in their personal lives - regardless of his own views.[/quote]
Don’t bother dude. ShitMachine can’t think for himself.
They’ve been very patient in explaining that it does not matter to them a libertarian’s personal views on race because he will not inflict them through force on anyone else.
Personally I am against voting and couldn’t endorse a creationist (or a racist if he is, although the evidence is not overwhelming) but I am sure that neither of those unfortunate traits have any bearing on what Paul would do politically.[/quote]
Who gives a crap if he believes the world was created in six days or simply appeared from nothing over billions of years? Why not just consult his voting record to see if you agree it? You’re not voting though so I guess it doesn’t matter.
As for the racism charge, again, look at how he votes. Many people say our foreign policy is racist. They also say the war on drugs is racist since it affects minorities the most. Well, he wants to end BOTH. Actions people. Look at people’s ACTIONS not what some ghost writer allegedly wrote 2 million years ago. Sheesh.
As for the racism charge, again, look at how he votes.
[/quote]
Rosa Parks gets a medal? Rest of congress = Yes, Ron Paul = No
Israel is allowed to defend itself? Most of congress = Yes, Ron Paul = No
Let us see if we can do anything to stop the genocide in the Sudan. Congress = Yes, Ron Paul = No
And do YOU believe this to be true? Please elaborate.
Well that MUST be racist. Affects minorities more than the rest? And the judiciary is racist because there are more minorities in prison right? Is that how this works?
Cloakmanor told me to “look at how (Ron Paul) votes” to see if he’s racist. Well, considering Paul can use federal legislation to tie the hands of the states over abortion why not over giving a medal to a little old lady? And I didn’t say his voting record is racist. I’m sure Ron Paul has a very important constitutional reason for denying Rosa that medal. It might lead to some sort of tyranny with the federal government awarding medals left, right and centre.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Cloakmanor told me to “look at how (Ron Paul) votes” to see if he’s racist. Well, considering Paul can use federal legislation to tie the hands of the states over abortion why not over giving a medal to a little old lady? And I didn’t say his voting record is racist. I’m sure Ron Paul has a very important constitutional reason for denying Rosa that medal. It might lead to some sort of tyranny with the federal government awarding medals left, right and centre.[/quote]
He would gave paid it himself.
They however would not.
So, again, what about that was racist.
Also, you idea of what he voted for and why when it comes to abortion is still way off and I see that you did not bother to look it up.
Because, as we all know, it is very hard to find out why Paul voted for something, secretive as he is.
I’ve heard why Paul says he was against the medal. On constitutional grounds. The federal government doesn’t have the right to award medals to ANYONE - black, white or blue. It leads to tyranny. I agree, Ron Paul’s voting record is not racist. Rosa Parks was a threat to us all.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I’ve heard why Paul says he was against the medal. On constitutional grounds. The federal government doesn’t have the right to award medals to ANYONE - black, white or blue. It leads to tyranny. I agree, Ron Paul’s voting record is not racist. Rosa Parks was a threat to us all.[/quote]
Well, glad we cleared that up, now go read up on Roe vs Wade and why you grossly distort his position.
As for the racism charge, again, look at how he votes. [/quote]
M’kay - so the voting records of members of Stormfront and/or the KKK would reflect their racism then, right?[/quote]
Guilt by association anyone? You’re not really THAT simple minded are you?[/quote]
Huh? Didn’t his racist publications have his name at the top? [/quote]
Dimwit, look at his ACTIONS, not what some ghost writer wrote 20 years ago. Geez you morons are unreal. Can we come up with something other than the race card and guilt by association? Try again.
