cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Glen Greenwald--- Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies

That is simply not the case. The first thing I like about Paul is that he means what he says. He does not change his position to match the crowd he is talking to. He pretty much has been saying today what he was saying several years ago.

 

Secondly bring the troops home and stop all the military intervention throughout the world.

 

I have no interest in dividing the republican vote. I want you to nominate the best candidate that will make the best president should he win. I will not vote for candidate Paul but to wish for a poor candidate would be insanity. Sometime the repubs win and they better have a honest smart man on the ballot.

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: Glen Greenwald--- Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies

I don't think that you've picked up over time that neither of is is all that happy with the Obama adminisstration over a number of issues.   And some of those issues are being broached by the Paul campaign and as for me I see it taking on more of a head wind as  one hope that I see out there for some meaningful dialogue to develop on them.   I don't agree wtih all of the Paul or the basic libertarian platform, but I damned well don't agree with hardly any of the platform of the Bachman-Perry-Santorum gang and personally think that Newt is a total Clintonesque POS, have for almost 30 years now since he was in the House.  I see Romney as a plastic puppet of, and a part of fo rthat matter, the reigning oligarchy and representing almost total assurance that the extraction by the top of the rest of us would continue, if not pick up speed.

 

My best hope remains in a better Democratic party.   You've got me on that.   But I'd like to see someone move it to where it once was on a numbr of issues and, ironically, a conversatin with the Paul campaign would do that more so than the pro-wrestling that has become the Boehner v. Reid staged battle wherin they both represent essentially the same nefarious interests will.

 

 

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: Glen Greenwald--- Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies

Ron Paul would lose to Obama if he becomes the nominee. Your guys would get out the old Barry Goldwater commercials, and show the kid with the flower and the nuclear cloud and somehow reverse the charge that nailed Goldwater...instead of the world ending because the Nutty Goldwater nuked everyone, this time the world ends because the Nutty Paul guy fails to blast Iran back to the stone age, and THEY nuke the rest of the world.

 

That is why you like Paul, one guy that your quarteback can throw a touchdown against.Paul is smart and realizes that unfettered government growth has destroyed America....you are not a smart man, and don't realize that.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: Glen Greenwald--- Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies

sell me short on picking things up all you want, I have made a good living by having others take me for being stupid. I think there is very little that you agree with Paul on, you are a fan of government just like Mr. Kraft. Whatever employment that you and the missus were in where you both ended up paying the max each year in ss taxes sure wasn't farming, and like I have long suspected, was most likely some form of government, probably education. You are a decent person, but not someone that can make money in the world of production agriculture. I never get that feeling.And that doesn't make you either good or bad...it just colors those lenses at which you look at life through.

 

The classic liberal view is to limit miltary spending, and thus have more money to spend on social programs. I think this is the part of what you agree with Paul on. Limited Military spending to free up more money to give away. You are a relic today...A 60's liberal in the 2010 decade.

 

I grew up poor....I hate to say it, but there were times when I probably did not eat as much junk food as I would have liked. Thats the way life was...there were free lunch programs available that we could probably have taken advantage of, but that was not the Steele way. I was lucky,we grew our own milk and eggs and meat. Plus, I had smarts and athletic ability and got a decent business education partly paid for because of it.

 

I  have made money not by ever getting very high wages but by working long hours at jobs that most won't or can't do.My agricultural holdings have been shrewd buys in retrospect, but always with competitive bidding...everything I own I had to acquire by paying more than anyone else would have on the day I bought,with the exception of the home quarter that I still rent for competitive rates.

 

Not bragging , just pointing out that is the lense at which I look at life through. Many in life have times when they could have given up and taken the government dole, too. Some would say that I am a hypocrite to be in farm programs and to turn around and criticize big government. I think we have rode that old horse to death on here....find one post where I ever advocate for government to be involved in farming and where I think the payment system should go on.

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: Glen Greenwald--- Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies

  Maybe you were not around in '64 and have no idea how different Paul's campaign is from Goldwater's.  First and foremost, the nation considered that LBJ would follow Kennedy's program and America felt they had been robbed by his death, idealists.

 

At the moment Johnson was pretending to be a anti-war candidate, and Goldwater was talking about using nucs.  Another big difference was Goldwater's support came from the older voting  population which was in the majority at the time.   Today younger voters outnumber crinklies, and they are being very engaged and informed, they are very aware they will spend their lives paying off the idiotcy of the neocons.--- 

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/01/on-caucus-day-dont-forget-about-ron-paul/250807/  

In Cedar Falls, two hours northeast of Des Moines and the home of the University of Northern Iowa, a typically youthful crowd numbering in the hundreds packed into a meeting room to catch Paul.
 
The event's emcee, local Tea Party activist Judd Saul, asked how many in the crowd were registered Republicans. Virtually all the hands went up. Then he asked how many were registered Republicans six months ago -- about three-quarters. And how many were Democrats before that? About a third.
 
 

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: Glen Greenwald--- Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies

i agree with you john that Red is lost in te woods in his comparisom of the Paul and Goldwater campaigns.  But not sure what you mean when you say the old folks who supported Goldwater were the majority.  How'd he lose 486-52 if that was the case?  Maybe I read what you said wrong, but I've gone back through it a few times.

 

Goldwatter was for all practical purposes a social liberal, BTW.  His GOP creds came through the military complex that was certain that Kennedy-LBJ were soft on "the reds" and might actually sue for peace at any time.   Johnson's war and militiary policy after the election was to appease the defense industries. 

 

 

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Glen Greenwald--- Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies

Barry Goldwater won my respect when he stated that Jerry Falwell needed a good swift kick in the ass!

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Glen Greenwald--- Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies

Buddy Roemer could capture the attention of alot of folks if they would only let him on the stage.

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: Glen Greenwald--- Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies

You are wrong about just about everything.  Have made quite a bit of money in production agriculture and raised a family on it along with help from a spouse who works in the private sector.  Not sure what I said about paying into SS but we've always paid what our taxable income allowed.  Made a point of it.

 

Got a daughter and a couple of sisters who teach though.  Darned good at it from what I hear from their contemporaries and their students.   And form what I've observed,  it darned hard work these days,

 

Good to see that you have summarily declared that the matter of whether or not someone is offically to be considered as having been subsidized upon having taken subsidies doesn't naturally mean that anyone subsidizes them or that it costs anybody anything settled.  A genuine relief, not having that horse to kick any more.

 

Who hasn't done something that he wasn't necessarily thrilled with or that somebody else didn't want to do if they grew  up in rural America and other hardscrabble environs?   I see allot of farm kids today who won't have to.  To their detriment, I might add.  Ain't hardscrabble anymore.  Not by a damned site.

 

Personally, I'm not sure what anybody's politics that they happen to be holding right now will be relevant in teh relatively near future.  So many people are going to find out that they ain't got no where near what they thought they had that nothing they know or hold dear will be useful in contemplating or ultimatley understanding where they are at.   And to top that off, it will be those who were certain that they had the most who wil be expecting the most out of the government that they were sure up until then was trying to help them lose it or take it from them.  I think that thye are going to expcet that everybody recognize them for as exceptional (and therefore entitled) as it is that they've been seeing themselves, and as you sound as though you (uncharacteristicly) do here in this post

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: Glen Greenwald--- Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies

Not so sure about any of these conservatives" here.  Buddy doesn't seem to me like the kind of guy who'd build his career around fulfilling arbitrary pledges, and that's what they are looking for in every corner of life.  Of the universe.