MERGED--> So...Ron Paul + Vote Ron Paul - Page 28 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-14-2008, 10:12 PM   #406
Refugee
 
Infinity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,188
Local Time: 11:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26


Here's the thing:

I don't give a shit about liberal vs. conservative on this issue.

I don't care that Paul is "more liberal" than the worst option out there. I don't. It doesn't matter.

Paul's NOT for the civil rights and equality. Don't give me the BS line about him being better than the guys who are worse. I don't give a shit. He's not for civil rights and equality. Bottom line.

Why does this matter?

He's not and they're not. OK. He's not for equal rights.

Ron Paul's not for equal rights.
I don't really care what side of the issue you are or if you give a shit or not. If you are going to say that Ron Paul's stance on gay marriage is the same as the rest of the Republicans, I will respond and correct you.
__________________

__________________
Infinity is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 10:17 PM   #407
The Fly
 
CherokeeRose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: at zoo station throwing a brick through a window
Posts: 127
Local Time: 06:31 AM
Austin NAACP Defends Ron Paul
http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=227844

NAACP President: Ron Paul Is Not A Racist
Linder says Paul being smeared because he is a threat to the establishment

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Sunday, January 13, 2008

Austin NAACP President Nelson Linder, who has known Ron Paul for 20 years, unequivocally dismissed charges that the Congressman was a racist in light of recent smear attempts, and said the reason for him being attacked was that he was a threat to the establishment.

Linder joined Alex Jones for two segments on his KLBJ Sunday show this evening, during which he commented on the controversy created by media hit pieces that attempted to tarnish Paul as a racist by making him culpable for decades old newsletter articles written by other people.

"Knowing Ron Paul's intent, I think he is trying to improve this country but I think also, when you talk about the Constitution and you constantly criticize the federal government versus state I think a lot of folks are going to misconstrue that....so I think it's very easy for folks who want to to take his position out of context and that's what I'm hearing," said Linder.

"Knowing Ron Paul and having talked to him, I think he's a very fair guy I just think that a lot of folks do not understand the Libertarian platform," he added.

Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded "No I don't," adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.

Dr. Paul has also publicly praised Martin Luther King as his hero on many occasions spanning back 20 years.

"I've read Ron Paul's whole philosophy, I also understand what he's saying from a political standpoint and why people are attacking him," said Linder.

"If you scare the folks that have the money, they're going to attack you and they're going to take it out of context," he added.

"What he's saying is really really threatening the powers that be and that's what they fear," concluded the NAACP President.
__________________

__________________
CherokeeRose is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 10:26 PM   #408
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 01:31 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Infinitum98
I don't really care what side of the issue you are or if you give a shit or not. If you are going to say that Ron Paul's stance on gay marriage is the same as the rest of the Republicans, I will respond and correct you.


What I am saying is ... the differences between him and the other Republicans are a moot point. Making it a states issue isn't substantial.

I have said over and over and over that YES, he's "more liberal" on the issue than some of the other Republicans.

Honestly, it's like you read everything I write and just repeat yourself anyway.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 10:29 PM   #409
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 01:31 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Infinitum98
he is for individual liberty and equality,
He's not for equality.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 10:30 PM   #410
Refugee
 
Infinity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,188
Local Time: 11:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26




What I am saying is ... the differences between him and the other Republicans are a moot point. Making it a states issue isn't substantial.

I have said over and over and over that YES, he's "more liberal" on the issue than some of the other Republicans.

Honestly, it's like you read everything I write and just repeat yourself anyway.
You've said many times, including with your chart, that Paul's stance is unacceptable, so is the rest of the Republicans, and you've grouped them together as unacceptable. You have said that MANY times.
__________________
Infinity is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 10:33 PM   #411
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 01:31 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Infinitum98
You've said many times, including with your chart, that Paul's stance is unacceptable, so is the rest of the Republicans, and you've grouped them together as unacceptable. You have said that MANY times.
What the fuck?

Of course I did. When did I deny this?

My post was addressing you telling me that I'm saying his policy is exactly the same. It's not exactly the same. But it's not substantially different. Both are unacceptable.

It's amazing that I've made over 40 posts in this thread and you have no clue what the hell I'm talking about.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 10:39 PM   #412
Refugee
 
Infinity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,188
Local Time: 11:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26


What the fuck?

Of course I did. When did I deny this?

My post was addressing you telling me that I'm saying his policy is exactly the same. It's not exactly the same. But it's not substantially different. Both are unacceptable.

It's amazing that I've made over 40 posts in this thread and you have no clue what the hell I'm talking about.
Yes of course you did. THATS THE REASON WHY I'VE BEEN POSTING OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT PAUL DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME VIEWS AS THE REST OF THE REPUBLICANS.

You're point is that they are both unacceptable to you.

My point is that Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton's position on gay marriage is more liberal than the other Republicans.

I think we both proved our points, so lets just end it.
__________________
Infinity is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 10:44 PM   #413
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 01:31 AM
You have a point?

You keep posting that he does not have the same views.

Yes. I'll even write it clearly: Ron Paul does not have the same views as the rest of the Republicans.

We're past that? Good. You don't need to continually post it. Why? Because I understand it.

Now, my point, which is still continuing to sail over your head, is that, while Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton's position is "more liberal" and not the same as the other Republicans ... it's similar.

And it's not nearly different enough for me to not categorize it as unacceptable.

It's not unacceptable to me, as in my opinion. It's factually, morally, and intellectually unacceptable.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 11:02 PM   #414
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,234
Local Time: 12:31 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Infinitum98


Yes because he is for individual liberty and equality,
I thought this was covered already. You are essentially lying here.

If you want to leave the civil rights of an entire class of people up to a vote, you are not for equality. Period.

So since Ron Paul really isn't for true equality, it would perhaps serve his and your interests better if you didn't constantly misrepresent him by claiming he is.
__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 11:03 PM   #415
Refugee
 
Infinity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,188
Local Time: 11:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26


Now, my point, which is still continuing to sail over your head, is that, while Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton's position is "more liberal" and not the same as the other Republicans ... it's similar.

And it's not nearly different enough for me to not categorize it as unacceptable.

It's not unacceptable to me, as in my opinion. It's factually, morally, and intellectually unacceptable.
Okay, nothing is sailing over my head. I'm not going to agree or disagree with you when you say it is similar. Why? Because there is no way to quantify or characterize how similar or how different it is. And while Barack Obama's stance is DIFFERENT than Ron Paul's or Hillary Clinton's, in terms of TRUE equality, I would also call that immoral or unacceptable.
__________________
Infinity is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 11:05 PM   #416
Refugee
 
Infinity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,188
Local Time: 11:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Diemen


I thought this was covered already. You are essentially lying here.

If you want to leave the civil rights of an entire class of people up to a vote, you are not for equality. Period.

So since Ron Paul really isn't for true equality, it would perhaps serve his and your interests better if you didn't constantly misrepresent him by claiming he is.
In that post I was replying to martha about the race issue. So Ron Paul and all the other candidates (except Dennis Kucinich) are for equality of all except in cases of gay marriage. Fair?


The reason why I keep saying "equality" even though nobody (except Kucinich) is for TRUE equality is that the average person tends to think that "equality for all" only has to do with race. So I don't want the average person to think that Ron Paul or Hillary Clinton or anyone else is racist. If you are going to accuse me or Ron Paul of lying, then I can also accuse Barack Obama of lying since he said just today on the campaign trail:

"All Democrats are for equality. All Democrats are for civil rights."

When the average person sees that a person is not for true equality, they automatically think: RACIST. It is sad that the average person doesn't think about gay equality in this case, but nonetheless, it is true. So basically, I don't want to mistaken the casual observer. So let me rephrase telling the whole truth:

Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton are for true equality of all except in the case of gay marriage. The only candidate that is for TRUE equality of all is Dennis Kucinich.
__________________
Infinity is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 11:07 PM   #417
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 01:31 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Infinitum98
Okay, nothing is sailing over my head. I'm not going to agree or disagree with you when you say it is similar. Why? Because there is no way to quantify or characterize how similar or how different it is. And while Barack Obama's stance is DIFFERENT than Ron Paul's or Hillary Clinton's, in terms of TRUE equality, I would also call that immoral or unacceptable.
It's like talking to a brick wall, honestly.

Absolutely you can talk about degrees of similarity. Obama has a similar policy to Kucinich, as both, at the core, are guaranteeing rights.

Paul has a similar policy to the other Republicans, as both, at the core, are not guaranteeing rights.

Guaranteeing rights is the issue.

AND, you cannot accuse Obama as immoral or unacceptable and call Paul "for equality" at the same time. You're on one side or the other.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 11:08 PM   #418
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 01:31 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Infinitum98


In that post I was replying to martha about the race issue. So Ron Paul and all the other candidates (except Dennis Kucinich) are for equality of all except in cases of gay marriage. Fair?
You're either for it or not. None of this exception bullshit.

Kucinich and Obama are "for equality" (i.e.: guarantee of rights for everyone).
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 11:10 PM   #419
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,234
Local Time: 12:31 AM
Quote:
In that post I was replying to martha about the race issue. So Ron Paul and all the other candidates (except Dennis Kucinich) are for equality of all except in cases of gay marriage. Fair?
Sure. Though that certainly doesn't say much of Paul or the other candidates, so I don't know why you'd want to keep repeating it so often. Besides, as pfan pointed out, you can't be "for equality, except..." Equality is not equality unless everyone gets it.

Oh, I would add Obama to the exception, as he is for giving gays full rights under the law. How you can call that immoral or unacceptable is beyond me. He is giving them all the rights that everyone else has. The title of marriage is for religion to bestow.
__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 11:16 PM   #420
Refugee
 
Infinity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,188
Local Time: 11:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Diemen


Sure. Though that certainly doesn't say much of Paul or the other candidates, so I don't know why you'd want to keep repeating it so often. Besides, as pfan pointed out, you can't be "for equality, except..." Equality is not equality unless everyone gets it.

Oh, I would add Obama to the exception, as he is for giving gays full rights under the law. How you can call that immoral or unacceptable is beyond me. He is giving them all the rights that everyone else has. The title of marriage is for religion to bestow.
The title of marriage is also under legal terms. And would it or would it not be immoral to give African Americans civil unions but not the right to call themselves married? It would be immoral, hence Obama's position is also immoral.
__________________

__________________
Infinity is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com