America's Last Chance...?

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

General Brock
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1739
Joined: 2005-03-16 03:52pm
Location: Land of Resting Gophers, Canada

America's Last Chance...?

Post by General Brock » 2012-01-16 08:18pm

America’s Last Chance

January 14, 2012

America has one last chance, and it is a very slim one. Americans can elect Ron Paul President, or they can descend into tyranny.

Why is Ron Paul America’s last chance?

Because he is the only candidate who is not owned lock, stock, and barrel by the military-security complex, Wall Street, and the Israel Lobby.

All of the others, including President Obama, are owned by exactly the same interest groups. There are no differences between them. Every candidate except Ron Paul stands for war and a police state, and all have demonstrated their complete and total subservience to Israel. The fact that there is no difference between them is made perfectly clear by the absence of substantive issues in the campaigns of the Republican candidates.

Only Ron Paul deals with real issues, so he is excluded from “debates” in which the other Republican candidates throw mud at one another: “Gingrich voted $60 million to a UN program supporting abortion in China.” “Romney loves to fire people.”

The mindlessness repels.

More importantly, only Ron Paul respects the US Constitution and its protection of civil liberty. Only Ron Paul understands that if the Constitution cannot be resurrected from its public murder by Congress and the executive branch, then Americans are lost to tyranny.

There isn’t much time in which to revive the Constitution. One more presidential term with no habeas corpus and no due process for US citizens and with torture and assassination of US citizens by their own government, and it will be too late. Tyranny will have been firmly institutionalized, and too many Americans from the lowly to the high and mighty will have been implicated in the crimes of the state. Extensive guilt and complicity will make it impossible to restore the accountability of government to law.

If Ron Paul is not elected president in this year’s election, by 2016 American liberty will be in a forgotten grave in a forgotten grave yard.

Having said this, there is no way Ron Paul can be elected, for these reasons:

Not enough Americans understand that the “war on terror” has been used to create a police state. The brainwashed citizenry believe that the police state is making them safe from terrorists.

Liberals, progressives, and the left-wing oppose Ron Paul, claiming that “he would abolish the social safety net, privatize Social Security and Medicare, throw the widows and orphans into the street, abolish the Federal Reserve,” etc.

Apparently, liberals, progressives, and the left-wing do not understand that privatizing Social Security and Medicare and destroying the social safety net are policies that many conservative Republicans favor and are policies that Wall Street is forcing on both political parties. In contrast, a President Ron Paul would be isolated in the White House and would never be able to muster the support of Congress and the powerful interest groups to achieve such radical changes. Moreover, Ron Paul has made it clear that a welfare-free state cannot be achieved by decree but only by creating an economy in which opportunity exists for people to stand on their own feet. Ron Paul has said that he does not support ending welfare before an economy is created that makes a welfare state unnecessary.

Candidate Paul cannot take any steps to reassure Americans that he would not throw them to the mercy of the free market, because his libertarian base would turn on him as another unprincipled politician willing to sacrifice his principles for political expediency.
If libertarians were not inflexible, candidate Paul could endorse Ron Unz’s proposal to solve the illegal immigration problem by raising the minimum wage to $12 an hour, so that Americans could afford to work the jobs that are taken by illegals.

Economist James K. Galbraith is probably correct that Unz’s proposal would boost the economy by injecting purchasing power and that the unemployment would be largely confined to illegals who would return to their home country. However, if Ron Paul were to treat Unz’s proposal as one worthy of study and consideration, libertarian ideologues would write him off. Whatever liberal/progressive support he gained would be offset by the loss of his libertarian base.

Why can’t libertarians be as intelligent as Ron Unz and see that if the Constitution is lost all that remains is tyranny?

In short, Americans cannot see beyond their ideologies to the real issue, which is the choice between the Constitution and tyranny.

So we hear absurd accusations that Ron Paul, a libertarian “is a racist.” “Ron Paul is an anti-semite.” “Ron Paul would favor the rich and hurt the poor.”

We don’t hear “Ron Paul would restore and protect the US Constitution.”

What do Americans think life will be like in the absence of the Constitution? I will tell you what it will be like, but first let’s consider the obstacles Ron Paul would face if he were to win the Republican nomination and if he were to be elected president.

In my opinion, if Ron Paul were to win the Republican nomination, the Republican Party would conspire to refuse it to him. The party would simply nominate a different candidate.

If despite everything, Ron Paul were to end up in the White House, he would not be able to form a government that would support his policies. Appointments to cabinet secretaries and assistant secretaries that would support his policies could not be confirmed by the US Senate. President Paul would have to appoint whomever the Senate would confirm in order to form a government. The Senate’s appointees would undermine his policies.

What a President Ron Paul could do, assuming Congress, controlled by powerful private interest groups, did not impeach him on trumped up charges, would be to use whatever forums that might be permitted him to explain to the public, judges, and law schools that the danger from terrorists is miniscule compared to the danger from a government unaccountable to law and the Constitution.

The reason we should vote for Ron Paul is to signal to the powers that be that we understand what they are doing to us. If Paul were to receive a large vote, it could have two good effects. One could be to introduce some caution into the establishment that would slow the march into more war and tyranny. The other is it would signal to Washington’s European and Japanese puppets that not all Americans are stupid sheep. Such an indication could make Washington’s puppet states more cautious and less cooperative with Washington’s drive for world hegemony.

What America Without the Constitution Will Be Like

In the January 4 Huff Post, attorney and author John Whitehead reported on the militarization of local police. Some police forces are now equipped with spy drones. Whitehead reports that a drone manufacturer, AeroVironment Inc., plans to sell 18,000 drones to police departments throughout the country. The company is also advertising a small drone, the “Switchblade,” which can track a person, land on the person and explode.

How long before Americans will be spied upon or murdered as extremists at the discretion of local police?

Recognizing the privacy danger, if not the murder danger, the American Civil Liberties Union has issued a report, “Protecting Privacy From Aerial Surveillance.” https://www.aclu.org/files/assets/prote ... llance.pdf

The ACLU believes, correctly, that liberty is threatened by “a surveillance society in which our every move is monitored, tracked, recorded, and scrutinized by authorities.”

The ACLU calls on Congress to legislate privacy protections against the police use of drones. I support the ACLU because it is the most important defender of civil liberty despite other misguided activities, but I wonder what the ACLU is thinking. Congress and the federal courts have already acquiesced in the federal government’s warrantless spying on Americans by the National Security Agency. The Bush regime violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act many times, and all involved, including President Bush, should have been sent to prison for many lifetimes, as each violation carries a 5-year prison term. But the executive branch emerged scot free. No one was held accountable for clear violations of US statutory law.

The ACLU might think that although the federal executive branch has successfully elevated itself above the law, state and local police forces are still accountable. We must hope that they are, but I doubt it.

The militarization of local police has received some attention. What has not received attention is that state and local police are also being federalized. It is not only military armaments and spy technology that local police are receiving from Washington, but also an attitude toward the public along with federal oversight and the collaboration that goes with it. When Homeland Security, a federal police force, comes into states, as I know has occurred in Georgia and Tennessee, and doubtless other states, and together with the state police stop cars and trucks on Interstate highways and subject them to warrantless searches, what is happening is the de facto deputizing of the state police by Homeland Security. This is the way that Goering and Himmler federalized into the Gestapo the independent police forces of German provinces such as Prussia and Bavaria.

Homeland Security has expanded its warrantless searches far beyond “airline security.”
The budding gestapo agency now conducts warrantless searches on the nation’s highways, on bus and train passengers, and at Social Security offices. On Tuesday January 3, 2012, the Social Security office in Leesburg, Florida, apparently a terrorist hotspot, became a Homeland Security checkpoint. The DHS Gestapo armed with automatic weapons and sniffer dogs demanded IDs from local residents visiting their local Social Security office. http://www.dailycommercial.com/News/Lak ... 0412shield

Thomas Milligan, district manager for the Social Security Administration office, said staff were not informed their offices were about to be stormed by armed federal police officers. DHS officials refused to answer questions asked by local media and left with no explanation at noon, reports infowars.com.

The DHS gestapo justified its takeover of a Leesburg Florida Social Security office as being an integral part of “Operational Shield,” conducted by the Federal Protective Service to detect “the presence of unauthorized persons and potentially disruptive or dangerous activities.”

One wonders if even brainwashed flag-waving “superpatriots” can miss the message. The Social Security office of Leesburg, Florida, population 19,086 in central Florida is not a place where terrorists devoid of proper ID might be visiting. To protect America from the scant possibility that terrorists might be congregating at the Leesburg Social Security office, the tyrants in Washington sent the Federal Protective Service at who knows what cost to demand ID from locals visiting their Social Security office.

What is this all about except to establish the precedent that federal police, a new entity in American life, the Federal Protective Service, has authority over state and local police offices and can appear out of the blue to interrogate local citizens.

Why the ACLU thinks it is going to get any action out of a Congress that has accommodated the executive branch’s destruction of habeas corpus, due process, and the constitutional and legal prohibitions against torture is beyond me. But at least the issue is raised. But don’t expect to hear about it from the “mainstream media.”

Americans in 2012, although only a few are aware, live in a concentration camp that is far better controlled than the one portrayed by George Orwell in 1984. Orwell, writing in the late 1940s could not imagine the technology that makes control of populations so thorough as it is today. Orwell’s protagonist could at least have hope. In 2012 with the erasure of privacy by the US government, protagonists can be eliminated by hummingbird-sized drones before they can initiate a protest, much less a rebellion.

Never in human history has a people been so easily and willingly controlled by a hostile government as Americans, who are the least free people on earth. And a large percentage of Americans still wave the flag and chant USA! USA! USA!

The Bush regime operated as if the Constitution did not exist. Any semblance of constitutional government that remained after the Bush years was terminated when Congress passed and President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act. One wonders how the National Rifle Association, the defender of the Second Amendment, will now fare. If there is no Constitution, how can there be a Second Amendment? If the President, at his discretion, can set aside habeas corpus and due process and murder citizens based on unproven suspicions, why can’t he set aside the Second Amendment?

Indeed, it is folly to expect a police state to tolerate an armed population.

The NRA is very supportive of the police and military. Now that these armed organizations are being turned against the public, how will the NRA adjust its posture?

Many NRA members, pointing to the “Oath Keepers,” former members of the military who pledge to defend the Constitution, and to police chiefs who support the Second Amendment, believe that the police and military will disobey orders to attack citizens.
But we already witness constantly the gratuitous brutality of “our” police against peaceful protesters. We witness military troops all over the world murder citizens who protest government abuses. Why can’t it happen here?

If you don’t want it to happen here, you had better figure out some way to get Ron Paul into the Presidency and to get him a cabinet and subcabinet that will support him.

Meanwhile, the police state grows. On January 4, 2012, the Obama regime announced by decree, not by legislation, the creation of the Bureau of Counterterrorism which will among other tasks “seek to strengthen homeland security, countering violent extremism.” http://newsok.com/obama-launches-bureau ... eed/332475

Take a moment to think. Do you know of any “violent extremism” happening in the US?
The regime is telling you that it needs a new police bureau with unaccountable powers to “strengthen homeland security” against a nonexistent bogyman.

So who will be the violent extremists who require countering by the Bureau of Counterterrorism? It will be peace activists, the Occupy Wall Street protesters, the unemployed and foreclosed homeless. It will be whoever the police state says. And there is no due process or recourse to law.

Given the facts before you, you are out of your mind if you think Ron Paul’s rhetoric against the welfare state is more important than his defense of liberty.
Link: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/01 ... st-chance/


Article says it all.

It seems very possible, and its not something to find out the hard way, that if the torch of liberty goes out in the USA, its not going to last much longer anywhere else it was lit on the planet.

User avatar
madd0ct0r
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6229
Joined: 2008-03-14 07:47am

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by madd0ct0r » 2012-01-16 08:39pm

Yeah, becuase everyone knows that America is the bastion of liberty and democracy, and should it drift into a dictatorship (which itself is pretty damn unlikely) the rest of the world will be simply overcome by the testostorone of the new dear leader and fall at their feet.

No longer will it be US and them, all of Europe, all of South America, all of Asia, South East Asia, Ocenia and the middle east will look to America and go "Oh my god, We've been doing it Wrong!"

and then like a schoolgirl who's picked the wron colour bows on their shoes, we'll all hasten to ditch that awful hangover of the 21st century - representative democracy and embrace full blown dictatorship.

Ron Paul, he's only sensible choice!

*Advert brought to you by the Freedomizer Assco(allblacksareevil)ation.
"Aid, trade, green technology and peace." - Hans Rosling.
"Welcome to SDN, where we can't see the forest because walking into trees repeatedly feels good, bro." - Mr Coffee

User avatar
JME2
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12258
Joined: 2003-02-02 04:04pm

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by JME2 » 2012-01-16 09:07pm

Just one little problem: Out of all the GOP candidates, Ron Paul scares the hell out of me.

So, no thanks.

User avatar
Crossroads Inc.
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9055
Joined: 2005-03-20 06:26pm
Location: Defending Sparkeling Bishonen
Contact:

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by Crossroads Inc. » 2012-01-16 09:42pm

Ah, another Ron Paul Loony. Time to bring out my favorite quote:

Ron Paul:
The Prosecution rests
Praying is another way of doing nothing helpful
"Congratulations, you get a cookie. You almost got a fundamental English word correct." Pick
"Outlaw star has spaceships that punch eachother" Joviwan
Read "Tales From The Crossroads"!
Read "One Wrong Turn"!

User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70027
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by Darth Wong » 2012-01-16 09:55pm

You seriously believe that steaming pile of horseshit?
Why is Ron Paul America’s last chance?

Because he is the only candidate who is not owned lock, stock, and barrel by the military-security complex, Wall Street, and the Israel Lobby.
Yeah, he's owned instead by the wealthy plutocracy and southern confederate lobby.
All of the others, including President Obama, are owned by exactly the same interest groups. There are no differences between them.
No differences except for the various differences which have been observed, of course. What this person is saying is "there are no differences that I choose to recognize as significant".
Every candidate except Ron Paul stands for war and a police state, and all have demonstrated their complete and total subservience to Israel. The fact that there is no difference between them is made perfectly clear by the absence of substantive issues in the campaigns of the Republican candidates.
Yes, it's quite unfortunate that it's impossible for mainstream politicians to go against Israel. Having said that, only an idiot would vote for the near-total demolition of government infrastructure in order to kill the military-industrial parasite. It's like shooting yourself in the head in order to kill a cancer. People who advocate radical realignment of complex systems are invariably fools who don't understand how much suffering is caused by instability.
Only Ron Paul deals with real issues, so he is excluded from “debates” in which the other Republican candidates throw mud at one another: “Gingrich voted $60 million to a UN program supporting abortion in China.” “Romney loves to fire people.”
Only Ron Paul says things as idiotic as "nobody would pollute in a free market" or "we need to go back to the gold standard" or "let's shut down the department of education". He's a nutjob who, like all nutjobs, thinks he's a genius because he has simplified every single problem in the entire complex economy into a single sentence: "we need smaller government."

A lot of people do this: they have a pet peeve and they try to blame every problem in the world on that single pet peeve. You see this a lot in the "alternative medicine" industry, where each person comes up with an idea about what's wrong with our health, be it "electromagnetic radiation" or "vaccines" or "hormones" or anything "artificial", and then finds a way to show that every health problem in the planet can be somehow traced back to this single issue. In Ron Paul's case, he has an elegantly simple explanation for everything wrong with the economy: "too much government". No matter what the problem is, he can always find a way to tie it back to that single slogan.

His "small government" mantra is the political version of snake-oil: it cures cancer, gunshot wounds, fatigue, hyperactivity, whatever ails you! Whatever the problem, it's always the same solution!
The mindlessness repels.
Wow. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
More importantly, only Ron Paul respects the US Constitution and its protection of civil liberty. Only Ron Paul understands that if the Constitution cannot be resurrected from its public murder by Congress and the executive branch, then Americans are lost to tyranny.
Oh I'm sorry, I must have missed the memo where overheated rhetoric is considered a perfectly adequate substitute for a cogent point.
There isn’t much time in which to revive the Constitution. One more presidential term with no habeas corpus and no due process for US citizens and with torture and assassination of US citizens by their own government, and it will be too late. Tyranny will have been firmly institutionalized, and too many Americans from the lowly to the high and mighty will have been implicated in the crimes of the state. Extensive guilt and complicity will make it impossible to restore the accountability of government to law.

If Ron Paul is not elected president in this year’s election, by 2016 American liberty will be in a forgotten grave in a forgotten grave yard.
(sigh) Americans say this sort of thing because Americans actually believe their own jingoistic bullshit about how they're the "land of the free". America was never the "land of the free". It had restrictions on personal liberty just like any other nation, and certain subgroups of its population historically laboured under restrictions that were worse than those of other nations. Ron Paul would turn back the clock on civil rights laws, and give places like Mississippi and Alabama free reign to mistreat blacks, all under the banner of "liberty".
Having said this, there is no way Ron Paul can be elected, for these reasons:

Not enough Americans understand that the “war on terror” has been used to create a police state. The brainwashed citizenry believe that the police state is making them safe from terrorists.
That is somewhat true. However, Ron Paul opposes the police state for entirely the wrong reasons. He opposes the police state because of his single-minded obsession with "small government", not because he hates injustice. If he hated injustice, he would not say it's OK for state governments or businesses to go back to their historical behaviour of openly discriminating against black people.
Liberals, progressives, and the left-wing oppose Ron Paul, claiming that “he would abolish the social safety net, privatize Social Security and Medicare, throw the widows and orphans into the street, abolish the Federal Reserve,” etc.
And is that not true?
Apparently, liberals, progressives, and the left-wing do not understand that privatizing Social Security and Medicare and destroying the social safety net are policies that many conservative Republicans favor and are policies that Wall Street is forcing on both political parties. In contrast, a President Ron Paul would be isolated in the White House and would never be able to muster the support of Congress and the powerful interest groups to achieve such radical changes.
So ... Ron Paul is the best candidate because he will be unable to implement his nutjob agenda? Why don't we just elect a fucking potato to the presidency? A potato would be unable to implement any dangerous policies too.
Moreover, Ron Paul has made it clear that a welfare-free state cannot be achieved by decree but only by creating an economy in which opportunity exists for people to stand on their own feet. Ron Paul has said that he does not support ending welfare before an economy is created that makes a welfare state unnecessary.
Ah, so true Communism cannot be implemented by decree, but by the People choosing to throw off the shackles of the established order ... oh wait, I forgot: this is Ron Paul, not Karl Marx. OK, just exchange "communism" for "libertarianism" and then repeat the sentence.
Candidate Paul cannot take any steps to reassure Americans that he would not throw them to the mercy of the free market, because his libertarian base would turn on him as another unprincipled politician willing to sacrifice his principles for political expediency.

If libertarians were not inflexible, candidate Paul could endorse Ron Unz’s proposal to solve the illegal immigration problem by raising the minimum wage to $12 an hour, so that Americans could afford to work the jobs that are taken by illegals.

Economist James K. Galbraith is probably correct that Unz’s proposal would boost the economy by injecting purchasing power and that the unemployment would be largely confined to illegals who would return to their home country. However, if Ron Paul were to treat Unz’s proposal as one worthy of study and consideration, libertarian ideologues would write him off. Whatever liberal/progressive support he gained would be offset by the loss of his libertarian base.

Why can’t libertarians be as intelligent as Ron Unz and see that if the Constitution is lost all that remains is tyranny?
So ... pragmatism is OK in some circumstances, but not in others?
In short, Americans cannot see beyond their ideologies to the real issue, which is the choice between the Constitution and tyranny.

So we hear absurd accusations that Ron Paul, a libertarian “is a racist.” “Ron Paul is an anti-semite.” “Ron Paul would favor the rich and hurt the poor.”

We don’t hear “Ron Paul would restore and protect the US Constitution.”
*wank wank wank* Founding Fathers *wank wank wank*
What do Americans think life will be like in the absence of the Constitution? I will tell you what it will be like, but first let’s consider the obstacles Ron Paul would face if he were to win the Republican nomination and if he were to be elected president.

In my opinion, if Ron Paul were to win the Republican nomination, the Republican Party would conspire to refuse it to him. The party would simply nominate a different candidate.

If despite everything, Ron Paul were to end up in the White House, he would not be able to form a government that would support his policies. Appointments to cabinet secretaries and assistant secretaries that would support his policies could not be confirmed by the US Senate. President Paul would have to appoint whomever the Senate would confirm in order to form a government. The Senate’s appointees would undermine his policies.

What a President Ron Paul could do, assuming Congress, controlled by powerful private interest groups, did not impeach him on trumped up charges, would be to use whatever forums that might be permitted him to explain to the public, judges, and law schools that the danger from terrorists is miniscule compared to the danger from a government unaccountable to law and the Constitution.
So ... president Ron Paul would have exactly the same power as non-president Ron Paul, ie- the ability to get on TV and spread his message? What's the point of electing him, then?
The reason we should vote for Ron Paul is to signal to the powers that be that we understand what they are doing to us. If Paul were to receive a large vote, it could have two good effects. One could be to introduce some caution into the establishment that would slow the march into more war and tyranny. The other is it would signal to Washington’s European and Japanese puppets that not all Americans are stupid sheep. Such an indication could make Washington’s puppet states more cautious and less cooperative with Washington’s drive for world hegemony.
Oh please, Americans had far fewer civil liberties in the 1950s, and they still survived. There are certainly some very real qualms that Americans should have about the direction of their society, but that direction is largely being driven by democracy: the peoples' fears and prejudices are driving the acceptance of these policies. Ron Paul would, if he had his way, force policies upon the people that they do not collectively agree with, all in the name of "liberty" without realizing the paradoxical nature of what he's doing.

This is the problem with "liberty" as a self-contained ideology: it doesn't really mean anything, and it can easily turn on itself. Is it "liberty" to tell people that they are not allowed to support certain policies which you feel would impinge upon their liberty? There's no neat solution to that problem, no matter how much libertarians would like there to be.
What America Without the Constitution Will Be Like
Frankly, I'm not even going to quote the rest of that militia-nutjob wankery. I'm just going to paraphrase it as a wild-eyed lunatic running around waving his arms and screaming "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

Here's an example of the lunacy: "In 2012 with the erasure of privacy by the US government, protagonists can be eliminated by hummingbird-sized drones before they can initiate a protest, much less a rebellion." As I said, it's a wild-eyed lunatic running around waving his arms and screaming "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"
General Brock wrote:Article says it all.

It seems very possible, and its not something to find out the hard way, that if the torch of liberty goes out in the USA, its not going to last much longer anywhere else it was lit on the planet.
Holy fucking Batshit, just listen to yourself. You sound like a character who was edited out of "Red Dawn" for being too jingoistic.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

User avatar
madd0ct0r
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6229
Joined: 2008-03-14 07:47am

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by madd0ct0r » 2012-01-16 09:58pm

Weirdly, I waded further down the post after replying, and he's basically saying we should vote ron paul as a protest vote - that the power that be would never let him win anyway, so don't worry.

But a protest vote for policies I don't support is stupid. If i win (by accident) I'm stuck with policies I don't support. If I loose and affect nothing, I've wasted a vote. If I loose and cause the party to swing closer to the policies, I also loose, because I don't support those policies.

Now, it may be that I support some policies and not others. But there's little of Ron's I support and quite a lot I'd run away from screaming. So why would voting for him be good?
"Aid, trade, green technology and peace." - Hans Rosling.
"Welcome to SDN, where we can't see the forest because walking into trees repeatedly feels good, bro." - Mr Coffee

User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70027
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by Darth Wong » 2012-01-16 10:00pm

madd0ct0r wrote:Weirdly, I waded further down the post after replying, and he's basically saying we should vote ron paul as a protest vote - that the power that be would never let him win anyway, so don't worry.

But a protest vote for policies I don't support is stupid. If i win (by accident) I'm stuck with policies I don't support. If I loose and affect nothing, I've wasted a vote. If I loose and cause the party to swing closer to the policies, I also loose, because I don't support those policies.

Now, it may be that I support some policies and not others. But there's little of Ron's I support and quite a lot I'd run away from screaming. So why would voting for him be good?
A protest vote might very well ensure that the Republicans win. If this guy is as anti-police state as he claims to be, he should consider that possibility, because the Republicans love the police state and the military-industrial complex. The Democrats are doing a piss-poor job of shutting it down, but at least they don't wank over it every night.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

User avatar
madd0ct0r
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6229
Joined: 2008-03-14 07:47am

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by madd0ct0r » 2012-01-16 10:08pm

ah this is a protest vote within the Republican primaries.

I'm pretty sure a republican is guaranteed to win this one ;)
"Aid, trade, green technology and peace." - Hans Rosling.
"Welcome to SDN, where we can't see the forest because walking into trees repeatedly feels good, bro." - Mr Coffee

User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70027
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by Darth Wong » 2012-01-16 10:12pm

madd0ct0r wrote:ah this is a protest vote within the Republican primaries.

I'm pretty sure a republican is guaranteed to win this one ;)
If Ron Paul somehow won the Republican primary, he would use the exact same argument to explain why you should vote for him in the general election.

People like this are never sincere in their arguments. Every argument they make is just a means to an end. Nobody with this kind of absurdly floric rhetoric and wild-eyed conspiracy theories can possibly be a rational pragmatist. He's a True Believer, and he's saying anything that he thinks will convince people to vote for his preferred candidate.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

User avatar
Sidewinder
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5419
Joined: 2005-05-18 10:23pm
Location: Feasting on those who fell in battle
Contact:

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by Sidewinder » 2012-01-16 10:19pm

General Brock wrote:It seems very possible, and its not something to find out the hard way, that if the torch of liberty goes out in the USA, its not going to last much longer anywhere else it was lit on the planet.
I find it terribly ironic that the people trying the hardest to protect the Torch of Liberty, are the very people who're extinguishing it, thanks to ham-fisted efforts and policies. (Remember the Communists' efforts to promote workers' rights? It's clear the historical lesson is lost to American libertarians- not to mention their own hypocrisy.)
Please do not make Americans fight giant monsters.

Those gun nuts do not understand the meaning of "overkill," and will simply use weapon after weapon of mass destruction (WMD) until the monster is dead, or until they run out of weapons.

They have more WMD than there are monsters for us to fight. (More insanity here.)

User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere
Contact:

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by SirNitram » 2012-01-16 10:26pm

I remain amazed that the title of sensible and principled is awarded to a man simply because he doesn't change his mind every poll.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter

User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70027
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by Darth Wong » 2012-01-16 10:35pm

SirNitram wrote:I remain amazed that the title of sensible and principled is awarded to a man simply because he doesn't change his mind every poll.
Yeah, people praise Ron Paul for his "consistency". Apparently, they would prefer someone who is consistently insane, over someone who vacillates between rational and irrational positions.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

General Brock
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1739
Joined: 2005-03-16 03:52pm
Location: Land of Resting Gophers, Canada

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by General Brock » 2012-01-16 11:31pm

While the torch of liberty in American hands may raise... concerns... as to its true ratio of light to smoke in the last couple hundred years, the gradual regression of a major military and economic power into something approaching half-workable police state is not likely to help things elsewhere.

The natural actions of those in power appears to be to preserve it, so when their time has come they cheat like hell to resist turnover, even if it means subverting and terminating the healthy governance that enabled prosperity. A lot of governing systems have attempted to mitigate the problems this can cause, and democracy seems to work best.

However imperfect the reality, an ideal of responsible governance by just law was aspired to once in the United States. To believe that honest responsible democratic governments can survive without nations with economic and military muscle backing the the ideal seems as unrealistic as America winning all the irresponsible wars the neocons want to start and producing healthy democratic governments in their wake happily bankrolling their conquerors.

Without a positive ideal of law and behavior taken seriously, as in, with leaders willing and able to make good laws and enforce them, the lowest common denominator takes over. Its been proven time and time again across many endeavors, that without the political will good governance doesn't happen on its own. Sometimes it takes a real shakeup to make it happen.

Bill Black's studies on banksters proved as much. Once deregulated, disconnected from meaningful connection to some more workable ideal of the banking system reflected in those regulations, the positive ideal became so much public relations fluff and a rather big expensive joke on the middle class. The answer was not to deregulate the industry more. The neocons have promised security and prosperity is just over the next burning hill of beans... or the next, or the next...

I don't see the other GOP candidates as exemplifying anything other than the dark side of American exceptionalism, and delivering anything other than the same end times conditions except at a different rate of descent. Ron Paul is at least not a warmonger, which indicates some respect for the lives and rights of his people, whatever the motivation, in a manner that may respect the rights of other people in other countries and begin to rebuild some shattered bridges.

How well he can back that with constructive action, deserves to be seen over "same-old, only worse" - which is all an anti-Paul position realistically amounts to. The worst that could be projected from an (admittedly unlikely) Ron Paul presidency is "Not same old - but still FUBAR". The worst case scenario at least has the dignity of going down fighting still with the hope of getting back up. Willful compliance with a known pattern of failures hoping for something different in the next repeat, is the definition of insanity, not hope.

It didn't matter if one voted for Obama or any other candidate because stated policies reflected one's own. They didn't manifest as hard policy when Obama confronted the domestic political reality. It does not appear he really intended to confront anything, just grant it the absolution of his then-clean rep. This promise breaking is getting so that it the 'new normal', as in calling broken promises, doesn't even score points anymore. Even though it always happened to some degree, its like now the measure has been tossed.

One thing for sure, Americans did not get the move away from militancy and corruption and a return to peace, freedom and prosperity that many thought they were voting for in Obama. Apart from Ron Paul, I don't see any candidate from any party even pretending to try and deliver something close to that anymore, which is more scary than Paul himself.

For sure, anyone good with the status quo of musical chairs will fight as dirty as needed to perpetuate it. It won't be that hard to attack Paul. There isn't going to be a high quality perfect candidate to reboot America from either party, because that cannot be produced by a system at rock-bottom, having bust through a few layers of strata to get there. Paul is the only one that might begin the baby steps in the direction of ground-level. However imperfect a candidate he may be, Paul appears to be the only one consistently willing to try.

User avatar
madd0ct0r
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6229
Joined: 2008-03-14 07:47am

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by madd0ct0r » 2012-01-16 11:51pm

TL:DR version

People with power try to keep it and get more. They need shaking up (paragraphs 1-3)

eg, we shouldn't have deregulated the banks (paragraph 4)

We should vote ron because if he crashes the country, at least everybody looses power. No point listening to what any of the candidates say, because they all lie. except ron. (paragraph 5 -10)
"Aid, trade, green technology and peace." - Hans Rosling.
"Welcome to SDN, where we can't see the forest because walking into trees repeatedly feels good, bro." - Mr Coffee

General Brock
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1739
Joined: 2005-03-16 03:52pm
Location: Land of Resting Gophers, Canada

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by General Brock » 2012-01-16 11:55pm

Darth Wong wrote:
SirNitram wrote:I remain amazed that the title of sensible and principled is awarded to a man simply because he doesn't change his mind every poll.
Yeah, people praise Ron Paul for his "consistency". Apparently, they would prefer someone who is consistently insane, over someone who vacillates between rational and irrational positions.
Would a sane person would try and reform the system as it has become? How long would a politician last being consistent with an unpopular position like reforming cozy corruption?

That's what's wrong with high IQ types; they don't get the stupid and crazy and just plain ordinary and couldn't get elected dog catcher to save the world. Shrub got in two terms as a mediocre president and New Kids on the Block made tens of millions of bucks selling mediocre music, because they were smart enough to somehow connect with the people that could empower them.

General Brock
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1739
Joined: 2005-03-16 03:52pm
Location: Land of Resting Gophers, Canada

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by General Brock » 2012-01-17 12:02am

madd0ct0r wrote:TL:DR version

People with power try to keep it and get more. They need shaking up (paragraphs 1-3)

eg, we shouldn't have deregulated the banks (paragraph 4)

We should vote ron because if he crashes the country, at least everybody looses power. No point listening to what any of the candidates say, because they all lie. except ron. (paragraph 5 -10)
More like, the country is crashed, its going to crash again because it was a spectacular first impact and the bouncing and spinning has just begun, so why not plug someone like Paul in who thinks it might be a good idea to try and steer away from some of the bigger drops and sharper rocks as best that can be done instead of another of the chain of idiots who crashed everything in the first place and are only interested in making sure their end of the vehicle doesn't land first.

Grumman
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2488
Joined: 2011-12-10 09:13am

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by Grumman » 2012-01-17 12:32am

madd0ct0r wrote:But a protest vote for policies I don't support is stupid.
Do you support not invading other countries on false pretenses? Do you support a rollback of the War on Drugs? Do you support not kidnapping and torturing innocent people, and then extinguishing all accountability with the accursed words "state secrets"?

If you don't think the good outweighs the bad, fine, whatever. But that's what makes it a protest vote and not just a vote for the guy you want as President.

General Brock
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1739
Joined: 2005-03-16 03:52pm
Location: Land of Resting Gophers, Canada

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by General Brock » 2012-01-17 12:43am

Sidewinder wrote:
General Brock wrote:It seems very possible, and its not something to find out the hard way, that if the torch of liberty goes out in the USA, its not going to last much longer anywhere else it was lit on the planet.
I find it terribly ironic that the people trying the hardest to protect the Torch of Liberty, are the very people who're extinguishing it, thanks to ham-fisted efforts and policies. (Remember the Communists' efforts to promote workers' rights? It's clear the historical lesson is lost to American libertarians- not to mention their own hypocrisy.)
At that level, people are interested in their own power and an enlightened cause is more often decoration than motivation, if it ever was a factor in the first place. The test of time is a three-parter, how well one they gain power, then how well they wield power, and finally, how well they let it go.

Systems that allow the empowered never to let go regardless of, and especially in spite of objective merit, usually fail in the long term. Doesn't matter if its people or ideologies, or how inherently sound the foundations and clever the trappings of the system of governance at the onset of decadence.

It doesn't matter that in the long term the inherent contradictions of libertarianism make it seem hypocrisy. The inherent contradictions of the present system are also unworkable, and that's come due right now, and there was never any true reward for the real sacrifices made. Its just that neoconservatism is a kind of christian ultra-nationalism, and failure appears to be excused based on a mechanism of faith to the point where failure, no matter how materially serious, can never be seen for what it is. The right chosen few people get paid off and the rest don't matter.

Its like telling a psychopath or sociopath doing harm is wrong. The psycho will only see that as an obstacle to be removed while the sociopath will seek to restate it.

User avatar
MKSheppard
Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger
Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger
Posts: 29566
Joined: 2002-07-06 06:34pm

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by MKSheppard » 2012-01-17 01:00am

To be fair, If I became POTUS Shep, I would terminate the Department of Erectile Dysfunction.

[sidenote: yes, that is what the Education Department (ED) is called; because there's already a DoE - Department of Energy taking up the obvious acronym]

I mean, it's obvious that the ED isn't working the way we intended it to work back when Carter created it in 1979 and it began operating in 1980; if we go by test score comparisons with other furriner countries; and we got along just fine before 1980 without the ED.
"If scientists and inventors who develop disease cures and useful technologies don't get lifetime royalties, I'd like to know what fucking rationale you have for some guy getting lifetime royalties for writing an episode of Full House." - Mike Wong

"The present air situation in the Pacific is entirely the result of fighting a fifth rate air power." - U.S. Navy Memo - 24 July 1944

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by Thanas » 2012-01-17 01:02am

Wouldn't that suggest a need for reform instead of cutting it completely?
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30155
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by Simon_Jester » 2012-01-17 01:06am

Brock, your argument seems to boil down to:

"The system is bad. Ron Paul will smash bits of the system, causing chaos. Therefore, vote Ron Paul."

This invites a few important questions:

Is chaos better, as in less bad, than the current system? What if we have 15% unemployment under the current system and 30% under the chaos created by Ron Paul? Or if minor rights are endangered under the current system and major ones are endangered under Ron Paul? You have not sought to answer this- your argument for Ron Paul has nothing to do with Ron Paul himself.

Will Ron Paul actually break the parts of the current American system that are wrong? Or will he just go into office, start trying to break shit, and have uneven success. What if the many normal politicians in America just block him when he endangers the rich, and let him go ahead when he endangers the poor? Or block him when he threatens the 'right' of Wall Street to own everything, and let him go ahead when he threatens the right of black people to buy houses and attend schools in the same neighborhoods as anyone else?

And, to cap it all off, how do we know Ron Paul is as honest and sincere a man as you make him out to be? What, is he the only exception to the rule that anyone smart enough to go into politics is cynical enough to become a lying bastard? And if he's the exception, why?
________________

So all your noise about torches and liberties and sociopaths is just... silly. It doesn't have anything to do with the questions that need to be asked.

Your whole argument boils down to "We need to do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do it."
Last edited by Simon_Jester on 2012-01-17 01:13am, edited 1 time in total.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov

User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70027
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by Darth Wong » 2012-01-17 01:07am

Some people seem to have trouble distinguishing between the words "reform" and "demolish".

I didn't make the comparison between Ron Paul and Karl Marx idly. Both of them saw inequities in the system as-is, and neither of them believed it made sense to try to improve the system gradually. Both of them wanted "peaceful revolution", in which an oppressed mass rises up, throws off the shackles of the ruling class, demolishes his corrupt systems of government, and creates a magical utopia where people achieve great things through collective action. Marx thought people could work together to produce goods and services without management parasites ruining everything. Paul thinks people can work together to use "market forces" to enforce standards of ethical, rational, and socially beneficial behaviour upon powerful corporations, without government parasites ruining everything.

The reality is that only an idiot thinks in such impractical, grandiose terms. It is the height of foolishness to prefer demolition and reconstruction as a policy. They tried that in Iraq, remember? Everyone pointed fingers, laughed at their stupidity, and said "what kind moron destroys the entire government and army, and then tries to build up a brand new society from nothing while people starve in the chaos?" And now we have morons here, saying that the exact same approach is our best option.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

User avatar
madd0ct0r
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6229
Joined: 2008-03-14 07:47am

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by madd0ct0r » 2012-01-17 01:33am

Grumman wrote:
madd0ct0r wrote:But a protest vote for policies I don't support is stupid.
Do you support not invading other countries on false pretenses? Do you support a rollback of the War on Drugs? Do you support not kidnapping and torturing innocent people, and then extinguishing all accountability with the accursed words "state secrets"?

If you don't think the good outweighs the bad, fine, whatever. But that's what makes it a protest vote and not just a vote for the guy you want as President.
So if I agree with enough of Ron Paul's policies I should hold my nose and vote for him, and if I don't agree with enough of his policies I should vote for him in a protest vote designed to encourage the policies I don't like enough to vote for!
Man, that's me convinced.
General Brock wrote: At that level, people are interested in their own power and an enlightened cause is more often decoration than motivation , if it ever was a factor in the first place. The test of time is a three-parter, how well one they gain power, then how well they wield power, and finally, how well they let it go.

Systems that allow the empowered never to let go regardless of, and especially in spite of objective merit, usually fail in the long term. Doesn't matter if its people or ideologies, or how inherently sound the foundations and clever the trappings of the system of governance at the onset of decadence.

It doesn't matter that in the long term the inherent contradictions of libertarianism make it seem hypocrisy. The inherent contradictions of the present system are also unworkable, and that's come due right now, and there was never any true reward for the real sacrifices made. Its just that neoconservatism is a kind of christian ultra-nationalism, and failure appears to be excused based on a mechanism of faith to the point where failure, no matter how materially serious, can never be seen for what it is. The right chosen few people get paid off and the rest don't matter.

Its like telling a psychopath or sociopath doing harm is wrong. The psycho will only see that as an obstacle to be removed while the sociopath will seek to restate it.
General Brock wrote:
Would a sane person would try and reform the system as it has become? How long would a politician last being consistent with an unpopular position like reforming cozy corruption?

...snip...
Bolding added by me.
So what you are saying is that all the politicians are heavily corrupt, that all systems fail and that there is nothing we can do about it.
So why should I vote Ron Paul again? You've just said he'd be unable to stop corruption, fight wall street, or prevent inherent contradictions ripping the system apart. Why should I see he get's paid off instead of Obama, who at least tried to get Healthcare through, which is an issue slightly closer to my heart.
All we have as evidence of Ron Paul's character is he that's he's very consistent, except when it comes to stuff his signature was on. oh goody. I feel so reassured.

General Brock wrote:
More like, the country is crashed, its going to crash again because it was a spectacular first impact and the bouncing and spinning has just begun, so why not plug someone like Paul in who thinks it might be a good idea to try and steer away from some of the bigger drops and sharper rocks as best that can be done instead of another of the chain of idiots who crashed everything in the first place and are only interested in making sure their end of the vehicle doesn't land first.
But he's not trying to steer away from the debris, he's trying to shoot enough of it into small pieces that is little piece will get out. And I'm not sure his aim is very good, or even that I'm sitting on the same rock.
"Aid, trade, green technology and peace." - Hans Rosling.
"Welcome to SDN, where we can't see the forest because walking into trees repeatedly feels good, bro." - Mr Coffee

User avatar
MKSheppard
Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger
Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger
Posts: 29566
Joined: 2002-07-06 06:34pm

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by MKSheppard » 2012-01-17 02:14am

Thanas wrote:Wouldn't that suggest a need for reform instead of cutting it completely?
I also want to destroy the Department of Veteran's Affairs. I mean yes; I know Veterans are important, but to have a CABINET level department devoted specifically to them?

For the ED; we go back to the pre-1979 status when we had the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

In 1979, HEW was split up into the two departments we know today by hiving off the Education portion into it's own department.
"If scientists and inventors who develop disease cures and useful technologies don't get lifetime royalties, I'd like to know what fucking rationale you have for some guy getting lifetime royalties for writing an episode of Full House." - Mike Wong

"The present air situation in the Pacific is entirely the result of fighting a fifth rate air power." - U.S. Navy Memo - 24 July 1944

Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30155
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: America's Last Chance...?

Post by Simon_Jester » 2012-01-17 02:31am

What's the benefit to subordinating the Department of Veteran's Affairs under some other department? Do you actually save much of anything? You still need to run the same administration, just with a lower-ranking boss man.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov

Post Reply