"Paulbots"

[Trevorum]

This moniker, used by BS-87 in a self deprecating, tongue-in-cheek way, cracks me up. I haven't heard this before but it seems sort of apt. I mean no offense to the followers of Dr. Paul, but can someone explain to me the attraction of this candidate?? I don't seem to know any supporters among my family, friends or colleagues, and so no one has tried to explain this to me. Can anyone really think that the jumble of radical policies proposed would not result in swift catastrophe? His ideas are such a hodgepodge, that it is hard to take him seriously. Completely eliminate income tax? Return to the gold standard? Really???

 

 

[Kudu]

 

Free Trade + Free Minds = Free Scouts

[packsaddle]

"Can anyone really think that the jumble of radical policies proposed would not result in swift catastrophe? His ideas are such a hodgepodge, that it is hard to take him seriously. Completely eliminate income tax? Return to the gold standard? Really???"

 

Trevorum, "catastrophe"? Really? Did you slip into bed with Rip Van Winkle back in 2000?

I'll give Ron Paul this much. He's honest. Yes, he's quirky and so rock-solid consistent in his thinking so as to wonder if he actually does. And yes, the KKK really likes the guy.

But look where we are. Look where we went after 2000. What the heck, they WON!!! Don't you get it? It's already over. It's as if you're in the bus that just went over the cliff and now you're arguing with someone about who gets to drive or something. Wow. It doesn't matter anymore! Stop worrying! Sit back and enjoy the ride, for a little while, while you still can.

[acco40]

It is easy to fall in love with some of "Dr. No's" quips - e.g. It is easy to spend other peoples money.

 

I'd like to see more Ron Pauls in congress but not as a national leader.

 

As a nation, we do look to the government to act as a surrogate parent - bailing us out when natural disasters strike, feeling access to medical care is a "right", etc.

 

Keep in mind that as a Texan he is not just a "less government" type politician but a "less federal government" more "state government" type of politician.

[Trevorum]

Well, I was hoping for more than bumper stickers and post-apocalyptic drama. Pack, I didn't realize you were such a dismalist. But Acco has a good point, one I hadn't thought about before. Maybe Dr. Paul could be suited for a state Governor's office, if not president. I won't volunteer Texas, though.

[packsaddle]

Trev, When I look back on what could have been back in 2000 and compare that to what actually happened, what can I say?

If you think I'm a 'dry heave' when it comes to the future, I guess I deserve that tag.

If Texas wanted to secede with Ron Paul as the new president of the Republic of Texas, I'd be OK with that. Unfortunately it would greatly increase the amount of border the rest of us would have to guard in order to prevent uneducated 'illegals' from crossing the southern border to steal our jobs.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[BS-87]

Dr. Paul proposes a destination, being the radical but philosophically pure idea.

 

He does not propose overnight change, but rather that we head down the path in the direction of that philosophically pure idea.

 

As a congressman he can remain pure in voting as his objections are token in many cases. What's exciting is that as president he can make some pretty great radical changes alone like bringing home the troops. However, the constitution protects the law of the land from radical change, and so his monetary policy, budget balancing, etc would take a consensus that would be difficult to build.

 

He knows the right direction, and like a compass will always point towards it. In a weak executive position like the constitution creates the presidential position to be, a compass is the best form of chief.

[SR540Beaver]

Gosh Trev,

Ron Paul has been around for ages and info about his positions are readily available. Well, if you research it on your own. The media and other politicians won't help you out because Paul threatens the good deal they all have going on. All one has to do is look at the state of politics today to see where many of our problems come from. Obama uses a lot of fancy empty rhetoric about hope, change and fair share while doing as little as possible. That's to be expected from someone who voted present more than yes or no duing their short time as a legislator. Then you have guys on both sides who say one thing and constantly do another. The media doesn't help with picking who they like and only providing sound bites. Paul is consistent. He is consistent because he narrows his focus to the supreme law of the land, the Constitution. Remember how the advice around here is often that troops and packs don't need a 50 page bylaw when the oath and law will suffice. Well, that's Ron Paul and the constitution. He has carefully thought and weighed issues over time thru the lens of the constitution and he doesn't waver from it. Most other politicians on each side of the aisle simply pay lip service to the Constitution. We as a people have lived thru so much bastardization of the Constitution that we have lost sight of it's simplicity and it's true meaning. Paul has not, but his views unfortunately come across to many Americans as foreign because of it. When people are willing to look beyond the sound bites and invest a little time in learning his views on the issues, they usually come away agreeing with him. Take a look at http://www.ronpaul2012.com/.