I'm trying to figure out something about Ron Paul.

[Bounce]

Apologies to those of you who cry, "Oh, God, not another Ron Paul thread!" I'd very much like to simply interject my thoughts into a pre-existing thread, but they seem to have all devolved into back-and-forth name-calling and I fear I'd never get the answers I'm looking for.

Here's what I'd like to know: I've seen plenty of sources attacking Ron Paul for having "crazy" ideas, calling him a "loon" or something to that effect. Similarly, many people of other political persuasions seem to consistently dismiss Paul's supporters as insane, tin-foil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists who believe that the X-Files are real.

I've watched this all as an independent observer - I'm not a Paul supporter. I'm still trying to find out more about most of the candidates. In fact, I was initially biased against Paul, because my uncle, who worked on Capitol Hill for many years, said that he remembered Paul as being "a bit of a nut," and I took his word for it. He's a very smart guy, very experienced, so I had no reason to doubt him. In fact, if anything, I'm still trying to find evidence that he was right, because it's so difficult for me to believe that he would say something like that with nothing to back it up. That's just not like him.

But, honestly, the more I look... I just can't figure it out. I mean, sure, I suppose some people could just be making knee-jerk reactions to some of his ideas like, "Wait, he wants to get rid of the Fed? He must be crazy!" Just a little bit of research shows that plenty of well-respected economists actually agree with him on that point, though. I suppose it could be that question about the North American Union in the YouTube debate, but if you listen to what he actually said, it was nowhere near what any of his detractors constantly claim - that he's paranoid about black helicopters and a New World Order or somesuch. All he said was that there are some people who want to unite Canada, Mexico, and the US, and that those people have organized themselves. There's nothing untrue about that. I mean, hell, they have their own website. It's not a conspiracy. I don't even see what's so crazy about talking about it - after the EU, how does it surprise anyone that there might be a few people out there who think doing the same thing on this continent could work well? It's just an idea. It could be right or wrong, but what's so "insane" about discussing it?

Other issues can't possibly be the answer. Paul wants to eliminate the IRS, but so does Huckabee, and no one's calling him a loon. He's anti-war, but so are most of the Democratic candidates. I get that part of the criticism has come from the fact that several well-known fringe groups have announced their support of Paul, like the 9/11 "Truthers," but, really, what does that have to do with anything? It's not like Paul's come out and said that he thinks Bush blew up the towers to further an evil scheme of world domination. I'm pretty sure their support stems mainly from the fact that the whole reason they worry about the conspiracy is that they're afraid that the government is becoming Big Brother, and Ron Paul is easily the most conservative "big party" candidate out there when it comes to where he'll draw the lines of the government. What does that have to do with him being crazy?

Basically, what I want to know is if anyone can provide me with some actual facts about Paul that would demonstrate some of his... less "conventional" policies. And I don't want to hear from Paul supporters about what they think are the "real" reasons behind the characterization of their candidate, like "The media is afraid of him!" or "They just don't like him because he's different!" Trust me, I've got a degree in Psychology - it's easy enough to spot certain social reactions, and, yes, I even agree that some of the negative backlash really is simply because he's so different from the other Republican candidates. However, that's incredibly simplistic, and I'd really like to see evidence that has to do with the man's philosophy.

So, for those of you who seem to think that Ron Paul is a few beers short of a six-pack... why?

[speardog1]

I've watched this all as an independent observer - I'm not a Paul supporter.

Are you sure about that?

I don't expect that you'll get many answers. We'll see.

[PokerPacker]

I think They just don't like him because he's different, and lets be realistic, The media is afraid of him.

[TrumanB]

So, for those of you who seem to think that Ron Paul is a few beers short of a six-pack... why?

I suggest you read through the other threads. There's been a lot of good debate (and some not so good debate) in those threads. I'm not knocking you for starting this thread, it's just what you are asking has been discussed at length in those other threads. Hell, I started a thread yesterday about Paul's appearance on next week's Meet the Press show. Since that will be his first big exposure at the national media level, I'm curious to get everyone's view on his performance.

I believe Paul is a decent, honest man who truly believes what he says. I do have an issue about the racial remarks he allegedly wrote a while back, not so much that I reallly believed he lied about it, but more for the poor judgement of letting someone write those things under his name.

Do I think he is a loon? Not really. I think he has some crazy ideas. I think some of his views don't really deal with the world as it exists, especially his foreign policy views. I also believe he has brought some of the "loony" allegations on himself with his language. References like "THEY want to do this" or statements implying various "conspiracies" and "cover-ups" reinforces those perceptions. And it lends itself to drawing support from fringe people and groups like the 9/11 truthers.

[zoony]

The info is out there, you just have to look.

For instance, he wants to do away with the TSA and any gov sponsored airline security. His reasoning is that 911 could have been prevented had citizens been able to cary guns on board and stop the hijackers.

As someone who travels roughly 40 weeks out of the year, let me be the first to say that Ron Paul can shove it. He's a loon.

Now imagine if Hillary or Romney said that? They'd be crucified. But not Paul, because his legion of 25 year old half-wits will argue with you on the internet.

The Paul phenomenon is nothing special or new. Extremist positions appeal to the feeble minded. Look no further than cults, the KKK, etc. All organizations with uncompromising views.

Jesus Christ himself said that if you want to know the tree, pay attention to the fruit it bears. Roughly half the Ron Paul crowd are 9-11 "truthers" and people who think that the Illuminati control the Federal Reserve. That should tell you all you need to know about the tree.

luckydevil to quote this post with drive-by drivel in 3, 2, 1.....

[zoony]

I think They just don't like him because he's different, and lets be realistic, The media is afraid of him.

That's a substitute for thought.

....

[SkinsTerps26]

I think people dislike his libertarian agenda. Think his policy sounds archaic because so much is based on the founding fathers.

I also think people have a much different view as to what Government should do for us. Paul wants a very limited federal government, whereas the majority seem to want government to do everything for us (education, healthcare, homeland security and fighting terror, war on drugs, immigration etc)

[GibbsFactor]

The info is out there, you just have to look.

For instance, he wants to do away with the TSA and any gov sponsored airline security. His reasoning is that 911 could have been prevented had citizens been able to cary guns on board and stop the hijackers.

As someone who travels roughly 40 weeks out of the year, let me be the first to say that Ron Paul can shove it. He's a loon.

Now imagine if Hillary or Romney said that? They'd be crucified. But not Paul, because his legion of 25 year old half-wits will argue with you on the internet.

Actually, he wants to put security in the hands of the airlines. Make them more responsible and not the inefficient government. He has made statements saying that if people knew others were armed, they certainly wouldn't get away with some of these mass murders they do in today's society. This is a second amendment argument, one that supports Paul's position. Just look at DC and all the recent shootings as an example.

You disagree with his views but have yet to ever provide why they don't work other then blanket "not in today's world".

Have you looked around? Today's world is f'ed up. What we are doing isn't working. But god forbid anyone who stands up for change.

[PokerPacker]

That's a substitute for thought.

....

if you didn't notice, i was directly quoting what he didn't want to hear...

[zoony]

Actually, he wants to put security in the hands of the airlines.

they can't even make a microwave meal. great plan.

Make them more responsible and not the inefficient government.

There are several things that the government can do more efficiently and effectively than the private sector. The trick is in having the wisdom to recognize that and plan/budget/delegate accordingly. But like I said, that requires independent thought and rationalization... 2 qualities the RP crowd are largely incapable of.

Hey... if you want to paint with the 'gov is bad" brush like a good little Ron Paul lapdog, fine. But any reaonable mind could embarass you rather quickly pointing out things that the government has accomplished throughout this nation's great history... that private industry was completely incapable of handling on their own.

BTW, prior to 911, the airlines were responsible for security.

has made statements saying that if people knew others were armed, they certainly wouldn't get away with some of these mass murders they do in today's society.

WTF are you talking about? I thought we were talking about the TSA and Airline security. Okay, lets do both.

1. If people were allowed to bring guns on board planes... if I'm a terrorist, I simply bring a bomb. Not rocket science there sparky.

2. People ARE allowed to carry guns today. Concealed even. Didn't help with the VT shootings / mall shootings / etc.

This is a second amendment argument, one that supports Paul's position.

Yes, because Ron Paul is the only candidate that supports the 2nd ammendment :doh:

He also will put Coke machines in the cafeteria and make every Friday pizza day!

You disagree with his views but have yet to ever provide why they don't work other then blanket "not in today's world".

I just did chief.

Have you looked around? Today's world is f'ed up.

Sounds like as good a reason as any to vote for a loon.

...

[zoony]

sorry, double post.

have a nice day.

[TrumanB]

Yes, because Ron Paul is the only candidate that supports the 2nd ammendment :doh:

He also will put Coke machines in the cafeteria and make every Friday pizza day!

:laugh: It is amusing that Paul supporters think they have a monopoly on the Constitution. I think more people take issue with his supporters than they do the man himself. At least I do.

[twa]

The reason he is dismissed as a nut is because he calls for real changes and that is not what the established parties nor their supporters really want.

Most Americans are perfectly happy with simply pushing minor agendas and playing the party politics blame game and want no part of real fundamental changes....just the thought of some of his policies scare them to death.

And that's a sad thing. :2cents:

[rincewind]

Does he really want to allow passengers to carry loaded weapons on planes???? That's ****ing cuckoo bananas right there.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I think more people take issue with his supporters than they do the man himself. At least I do.

Agreed.

[zoony]

The reason he is dismissed as a nut is because he calls for real changes and that is not what the established parties nor their supporters really want.

Most Americans are perfectly happy with simply pushing minor agendas and playing the party politics blame game and want no part of real fundamental changes....just the thought of some of his policies scare them to death.

And that's a sad thing. :2cents:

Sad? really? It's EXTREMELY sad that you and others find that sad. This nation is spoiled beyond belief.

This nation is the only global superpower. We have the most powerful economy in the history of the planet. Military too.We have a standard of living in this country unparalleled in history. Wealth is there for the taking, all you have to do is work for it. Our society by and large is safe, prosperous, diverse... and opportunity abounds.

Yet still people whine. They want more. They've been wronged. They need what others have. Lifes done them wrong, they want to level the playing field again.

But a bunch of retards on the internet want to tear it all down and put their senile candidate in office. Why? So we can be a 3rd world country? What exactly is the plan here? Throw the baby out with the bathwater?

Sure there are problems. Our society has plenty of problems that need to be addressed. But now is not the time for radicalism. Now is the time for pragmatism.

[zoony]

Does he really want to allow passengers to carry loaded weapons on planes???? That's ****ing cuckoo bananas right there.

Yes. yes it is.

Like I said, imagine one of the other candidates saying that. It would be a media circus.

[Zguy28]

The reason he is dismissed as a nut is because he calls for real changes and that is not what the established parties nor their supporters really want.

Most Americans are perfectly happy with simply pushing minor agendas and playing the party politics blame game and want no part of real fundamental changes....just the thought of some of his policies scare them to death.

And that's a sad thing. :2cents:

Its what gets people killed.

Just look at MLK jr. for an example. :2cents:

[speardog1]

Does he really want to allow passengers to carry loaded weapons on planes???? That's ****ing cuckoo bananas right there.

I believe he was saying that a gun belongs in the ****pit. The pilot should carry a gun. This is how people get the wrong impression.

[rincewind]

I believe he was saying that a gun belongs in the ****pit. The pilot should carry a gun. This is how people get the wrong impression.

Yes. yes it is.

Like I said, imagine one of the other candidates saying that. It would be a media circus.

Can we get a Ron Paul leg humper in here to clarify this? If he really thinks civilians should be allowed to carry loaded weapons on planes, that alone is enough for me to vote against him. If you support insanely crazy **** like that, what other whacked out crap would you back?

[Prosperity]

Zoony, most RP see a few key issues that are really important to them and assume that the rest of the libertarian platform will just won't get implemented. Passengers w/ guns... yes that's dumb, his stance on environmentalism, also dumb.

His stances on foreign policy, and the war on drugs are what really get me to support him. His stances on taxes gets a lot of other type people to support him as well. Ultimately most of his supporters recognize that there are some nutty things about him, but then again those particulars aren't all that important especially when there implementation is unlikely.

[zoony]

Can we get a Ron Paul leg humper in here to clarify this? If he really thinks civilians should be allowed to carry loaded weapons on planes, that alone is enough for me to vote against him. If you support insanely crazy **** like that, what other whacked out crap would you back?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=KmKkZJrpQzo

Ron Paul of course backtracks a bit. I'm trying to find the clip where he originally said it. I think it was on the Bill Maher show, iirc. Gimme some time

[zoony]

Here you go. :laugh:

Check out his comments on the Civil War circa 1:30. :laugh:

He wants to make the FAA private. :doh: The freak show starts around 4:05

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xo6KIusCBoU

[twa]

Sure there are problems. Our society has plenty of problems that need to be addressed. But now is not the time for radicalism. Now is the time for pragmatism.

Thats why I'm a Fred Head :laugh: , that, and some of RP's loony supporters.

[Bounce]

Does he really want to allow passengers to carry loaded weapons on planes???? That's ****ing cuckoo bananas right there.

As I've come to understand it, what he has said was that he doesn't want the government to tell people what they can and cannot bring onto planes. He wants the airlines to be able to establish their own rules. Apparently, he was questioned about this at some event in much the same way that you just asked. His response was essentially this: Do you think any of the airlines will permit guns on their planes?

He's not arguing to allow guns on the planes, he's arguing that the airlines should be able to decide for themselves. If one service wants to allow passengers to carry guns, they can do so, and anyone who wants to be packin' at 35,000 feet can buy a ticket.

Are you sure about that?

I figured some would see my posts as supporting Ron Paul, simply because I'm refuting arguments against him that I've found to be erroneous (like the above one). I don't know how I can convince you of my internal beliefs, all I can say is that I'm doing this because I'm trying to find out the truth. That's what I'm interested in. Ron Paul has become a very interesting microcosm of that search for me, because he generates so much controversy.

The Paul phenomenon is nothing special or new. Extremist positions appeal to the feeble minded. Look no further than cults, the KKK, etc. All organizations with uncompromising views.

Jesus Christ himself said that if you want to know the tree, pay attention to the fruit it bears. Roughly half the Ron Paul crowd are 9-11 "truthers" and people who think that the Illuminati control the Federal Reserve. That should tell you all you need to know about the tree.

See, Zoony, I very much want to hear what people like yourself have to say - but you make it hard when you attempt to dismiss everyone who supports Ron Paul as either dumb or a cult member. I know several Ron Paul supporters, and they're neither - in fact, all except one are registered Republicans who have told me that they simply feel that the party isn't really conservative anymore, and Paul is.