Ron Paul for president

[hammer6]

You are so totally getting quoted on Facebook.

i will share that post lol

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Why not? (This is just the tired, old argument that if you don't vote, you can't complain. I thought we put that one to bed a few years ago. Guess I gotta do it again.)

Sorry. My right to complain is not affected by whether or not I vote. All that is required is that I be aggrieved. In fact, my right to complain is constitutionally protected. See the last clause of the First Amendment. "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom...to petition the government for redress of grievances."

Notice it doesn't say only voters can complain.


I notice nobody has yet explained how I'm wrong about both parties being bad for the country. And, nobody has been able to touch me for my unwillingness to afflict my countrymen with either candidate. One does wonder why nobody argues with those two points.

On the other side of the coin, I'll just make careful note that Walking Wolf is willing to afflict me and mine with a looting expropriator. Thanks a lot, jerk.

Short term memories, all people have to do is to look at recent history to see how true your post is.

I remember when being told vote Bush, he's better than Clinton and Gore/Kerry, yet what did we get? Wars, debt, increase in the police state, more shredding of the constitution. How can anyone say Romney will be better when the past 100 years or more have mostly been a succession of each president being worse than the prior.

 

[Citizen]

Maybe I should say if you vote for Obama, or intentionally not vote so Obama gets elected again, those people should lay in the bed they made. Don't blame Obama when you(general) put him willingly in office. It is one thing to not vote, it is another to campaign for him, especially because Ron Paul got his bum spanked. Revenge is not so sweet when it comes back to bite on the back side.

No, I did not make the bed. Obama (or Romney) made the bed. They are the criminals. They are responsible for their actions that harm me and mine and my countrymen. Assigning responsibility to me is literally identical to blaming the rape victim for being raped. Oh, her skirt was too short. Oh, she should have known better than to run with that crowd. Oh, she shouldn't have accompanied him home for a couple drinks. Bul(lshi)t!. The rapist is the first person responsible for his actions. The looting expropriator and his gang are the first people responsible for their actions.

You also have to realize that such thinking leads to an abdication of Jefferson's "it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." Declaration of Independence 7/4/76. Just toss that phrase in the ashbin. You voted wrong, so you just have to lie in the bed you made.

When the "choice" is between two looting expropriators, the error is to believe their is a choice. There is not.

 

[Citizen]

The No-Vote: Not voting is the weakest form of protest vote an individual can ever perform, simply because it is a protest that will never be heard. Staying home and not voting is quite possibly the worst thing a supporter of the Liberty Movement can do on Election Day.

False premise--that the no vote is a protest.

Mine is withheld consent. It is not a protest. It is a refusal to vote to afflict my countrymen with a looting expropriator. There is nobody I hate that much.

 

[Citizen]

The Incomparable George Carlin

"I have solved this political dilemma in a very direct way: I don't vote. On Election Day, I stay home. I firmly believe that if you vote, you have no right to complain. Now, some people like to twist that around. They say, 'If you don't vote, you have no right to complain,' but where's the logic in that? If you vote, and you elect dishonest, incompetent politicians, and they get into office and screw everything up, you are responsible for what they have done. You voted them in. You caused the problem. You have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote — who did not even leave the house on Election Day — am in no way responsible for what these politicians have done and have every right to complain about the mess that you created." — George Carlin

 

[carsontech]

Good stuff Citizen.

Voting is much worse than giving consent that you want masters to rule your own life. Your vote gives the State credence to rule other's lives. It's enslavement of more than yourself.

I don't care if you want someone else to be your master, but don't force me to be a slave when I don't consent to being one.


"But Holmes, by what means would society...?"

"Voluntary, my dear Watson! Voluntary!"

 

[since9]

Voting is much worse than giving consent that you want masters to rule your own life. Your vote gives the State credence to rule other's lives. It's enslavement of more than yourself.

I don't care if you want someone else to be your master, but don't force me to be a slave when I don't consent to being one.

This is our country, and was established this way long before you were born. As for your claim of slavery, you're not a slave - you're free to leave at any time.

Seriously, folks - what sort of anarchist mish-mash mush is this? And why are we giving any credence to it by listening to it?

 

[RetiredOC]

And why are we giving any credence to it by listening to it?

Listening? or reading?

 

[marshaul]

Maybe I should say if you vote for Obama, or intentionally not vote so Obama gets elected again, those people should lay in the bed they made. Don't blame Obama when you(general) put him willingly in office. It is one thing to not vote, it is another to campaign for him, especially because Ron Paul got his bum spanked. Revenge is not so sweet when it comes back to bite on the back side.

Again, the choice is not binary, and the false dilemma of partisanship is exactly that.

 

[PistolPackingMomma]

This is our country, and was established this way long before you were born. As for your claim of slavery, you're not a slave - you're free to leave at any time.

Did you choose to be born here? Do you know of any country that hasn't been established in some way by now? The mere fact that someone was born does not automatically equate to consent to be governed by a system that controls you from the moment you arrive into this world.

Do you have the choice to opt of paying taxes without penalty? Do you have the fundamental right to eat whatever foods you want? (The FDA says you don't.) Do you have the choice to run a business the way you want, or are you forced to comply with governmental regulations? Oh yes, sounds VERY free.

Seriously, folks - what sort of anarchist mish-mash mush is this? And why are we giving any credence to it by listening to it?

The sort of Abolitionist mish mash mush that prefers ZERO lashes as opposed to ten or twenty, as certain Statists here believe is acceptable.

 

[carsontech]

This is our country, and was established this way long before you were born. As for your claim of slavery, you're not a slave - you're free to leave at any time.

I am not free to leave at anytime. It would cost me $450 to break my ties with the United States of America:

http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20120202/NEWS02/120209953

Seriously, folks - what sort of anarchist mish-mash mush is this? And why are we giving any credence to it by listening to it?

If you want to play the name game, I guess you could call this mish-mash mush abolitionist "talk".

Sort of on-topic with this next part... from many of your previous posts, it appears you are a "constitutionalist". I'm not sure how one could support the U.S. Constitution if one has researched how it came to be. Have you read the "Federalist Papers" and "Anti-Federalist Papers". Have you read any of the articles or diaries of the delegates that attended, or refused to attend, a certain convention where the Articles of Confederation were suppose to be revamped, but instead was done away for a strong central government? Have you read "Hologram of Liberty" by Boston T. Party?

If someone were to read at least one of the articles/diaries/books listed above, I can't understand how that someone would still support the U.S. Constitution.

 

[marshaul]

If you want to play the name game, I guess you could call this mish-mash mush abolitionist "talk".

Sort of on-topic with this next part... from many of your previous posts, it appears you are a "constitutionalist". I'm not sure how one could support the U.S. Constitution if one has researched how it came to be. Have you read the "Federalist Papers" and "Anti-Federalist Papers". Have you read any of the articles or diaries of the delegates that attended, or refused to attend, a certain convention where the Articles of Confederation were suppose to be revamped, but instead was done away for a strong central government? Have you read "Hologram of Liberty" by Boston T. Party?

If someone were to read at least one of the articles/diaries/books listed above, I can't understand how that someone would still support the U.S. Constitution.

It's sort of a "lesser of two evils" thing.

Do I, deep within my soul, find the constitution acceptable? Not particularly.

Will I pretend to be its stalwart champion in public, as it is the one means by which my fellow countrymen agree government ought to be limited? Yes, I will.

That said, I don't just see Spooner in your avatar, I hear him in your words. Me likey.

 

[Citizen]

I am not free to leave at anytime. It would cost me $450 to break my ties with the United States of America.

Moreover, the real test is not whether you can leave. It is whether you can stay---and be left alone, meaning free.

No, you cannot. You cannot opt out from under the existing governments. Which is just another way of saying you cannot really refuse consent, for if you could, you could say, "I know longer consent to be ruled by the governments at hand" and you would be left alone and free while remaining right there in the same house on the same street in the same...

Helpful Hint: Recall what Spooner said about consent and the constitution in No Treason.

 

[Brimstone Baritone]

And do you know who I'm going to complain to most? Do you know who I'm going to personally blame for this – the person whose feet I will hold to the fire?

You. And everyone who advances the bogus argument you advance. You are the enemy of liberty and progress. Inadvertently, you and your ilk are to blame. You condone the racket, and do so more than merely tacitly by advancing what is tantamount to its apologia. You and your ilk are the closest thing to a head for the headless blunder, an actual conspirator in the conspiracy of ignorance, a defender of an otherwise spontaneous parasitism. (The real irony is that you do so entirely unknowingly.)

I care. Why don't you? Is it really that much easier to simply hate and blindly oppose the imaginary "other" side than it is to pursue meaningful political change? Any case ya shouldn't complain when Obomney (Obama) does something you don't like.

This. Every bit of it. Thank you for doing a better job expressing it than I could, marshaul.

 

[DangerClose]

Romney's fair warning
http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/romneys-fair-warning/

It is deeply ironic that paranoid Republicans, who suspect Obama of secretly planning to circumvent the law in order to rule the country with an iron fist, should turn to Mitt Romney to save them when Romney has already shown his ready willingness to do the very thing they fear. Romney’s ruthless actions at the Republican convention show every sign that in turning to him, America will be jumping out of the frying pan and right into the fire.

When attempting to understand what truly motivates an individual, it is always important to pay more attention to his actions than to his words. This is particularly true in the case of Mitt Romney, whose words are often in direct contradiction to those he has uttered in the past. In this light, perhaps we should appreciate Mitt Romney’s dictatorial actions at the Republican National Convention, as they have provided America with a fair warning about the kind of president he is likely to be."

 

[marshaul]

This. Every bit of it. Thank you for doing a better job expressing it than I could, marshaul.

You're welcome. Nice sig line btw.

 

[Brimstone Baritone]

You're welcome. Nice sig line btw.

Thanks.


As for picking the lesser of two evils, I want to point back to 2008. We had a choice between Obama and John McCain. According to that same logic, McCain would have been the better choice. The same John McCain who is responsible for, and supports, the indefinite detention aspect of the NDAA. That man could (should?) have been president. The lesser of two evils between G.W. Bush and Al Gore got us into an unprovoked war in Iraq, and then mishandled the whole affair from the start.

I think, if we insist on voting for an "evil" at all, we should throw our support behind the greatest evil imaginable. That's why I support the Cthulhu/Lucifer ticket in 2012.

 

[twoskinsonemanns]

I believe the most likely scenario at this point, given the shabby treatment of Ron Paul at the RNC, is for Ron to endorse Gary Johnson.

Unfortunately I believe this will never happen. Dr Paul will not do it for fear of the consequences for his son.

 

[DangerClose]

As for picking the lesser of two evils, I want to point back to 2008. We had a choice between Obama and John McCain. According to that same logic, McCain would have been the better choice. The same John McCain who is responsible for, and supports, the indefinite detention aspect of the NDAA. That man could (should?) have been president.

Amnesty McCain would probably have had us in WW3 with Iran and Russia and China already. The guy's a nut.