[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Ron Reagan sounding like Ron Paul:
Its even funnier than that, V. Here, Nominal Prospect–who certainly is not old enough to remember Reagan–is posting a film clip about which he understands nothing, to support his candidate. Instead, he offers evidence for his unschooled foolishness.
You, V, may remember that this speech was in Ronny’s General Electric to Barry Goldwater transition (1964), when he supported the conservative laundry list of lower taxes, balanced budgets, small government, etc.
And in 24 years, after his election, Ronny supported foreign interventions (Grenada, Lebanon, Nicaragua, etc. etc.), increased, massive defense spending; and he also lowered some taxes and in so doing, increased the national debt to new records. And the government grew nevertheless. He abandoned all that “Paul-like” crap because, love him or hate him, he had practical goals and they were prioritized: defense, defense, defense, and then, and only then, tax relief and smaller government.
So any attempt by the Paulnuts to enrobe Paul in Ronny’s bloody cloak is a farce, and underscores their youth and ignorance.
(You and Sloth and Mikeyali excepted, of course; not all idealists are fools, I warrant. But some fools mistake crap for ideals.)[/quote]
You’re assuming that I don’t know about the Reagan admins interventionist, big-budget defense policies. Why wouldn’t you stop to confirm before making such an assumption?
Unfortunately, you have failed in your noble effort to “educate” me with your post. Every thing you wrote about, I was well aware of. I read about Reagan’s policies several years ago. I know what his rhetoric was when he campaigned, what he did in office, and how he is perceived by conservatives today. The thing is, it is difficult to reconcile those 3 things. He is a major icon to the right despite the fact that he didn’t fully live up to his own rhetoric.
You’re taking me to be dumber than I am and, in so doing, misunderstanding why I post such videos. I’ll tell you the reason: It’s not to provoke a discussion of Reagan’s “true conservative” credentials. I post it with the full knowledge of his outstanding flaws - especially taken from a libertarian perspective - but nevertheless, the fact remains that he IS seen as “Mr. Conservative” by a great majority of the right.
Ron Paul isn’t going to get anywhere by arguing that he’s “more conservative than Ronald Reagan”, regardless of how true the statement may be. So, the invocation of Reagan imagery is an effort in pragmatism on the part of Paul’s campaign. Understand now?
You have to make compromises when running a political campaign. Every thinking person is well aware of this. I know that Ron Paul is a strict Libertarian Constitutionalist with laissez-faire economic views. When he adopts a moderate position on some issue, such as reducing benefits for the poor, it doesn’t cause me to question his devotion to those beliefs. I understand what he’s doing and why he’s doing it.
If you can’t be pragmatic in politics, you can’t win. And I want Ron Paul to win, because I know that he’s a good man who will do the right things in office. The last thing I want is for him to go down as some sort of martyr who only receives a fraction of the vote due to his uncompromising positions.
He’s already consistent enough with his beliefs - if he can adopt a slightly more moderate stance on the tougher issues, so as to make his platform an easier sell, then I’m all for it. That’s why you see him talking about gradually rolling back the domestic welfare state, even though his libertarian principles would have it abolished outright.
Do you imagine that I’m incapable of reading books? No doubt, I could list a slew of people, places, and events that you would know nothing about - having never experienced them, old as you may be. Forget about age - it won’t save you in this debate. I’m fully prepared to defend my point of view, as I have successfully done many times before.
Playing the “age card” is, really, a piss-poor way of getting your point across in an online forum. For one thing, you do realize that I could come up with a grand list of old farts who take the exact same position as I do on any given issue? How would you respond then, if I merely stood aside and let these venerable surrogates do the talking for me?
I reckon you’d then be compelled to produce a real argument. Perhaps you should do that now, and save me the trouble of digging up old farts to quote. But I’ll do it if you leave me with no other option.