General Discussion

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)

170. Close but no cigar, but extremely close...

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 01:28 AM

Jan 2012

Yes, he wants to do all those things, but not because he wants to dismante government, just the federal government. Theoretically if the state of Texas decided to have a Texas EPA that's fine, 10th Ammendment and all. This is a small distinction missed by both friends and enemies of Paul.

That said, he is a fan of ending the wars...it goes back to the traditional isolationism of the paleo cons. And his war on drugs shtick, again if the state of Texas goes after it, that's fine. Just not the Feds.

This is way too much inside Paul basebal, but when you gotta explain paulese to potential targets you need to understand it too well. This is usually shocking since Paul always writes federal government in campaign bullet points. This shit can be done, and supported, at the state level is not usually that obvious.

In fact in Paul's ideal us some states would look like 1984, while others will look like Somalia. Now to say that is a worst nightmare...

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

198 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The real question that the Ron Paul candidacy poses for Democrats [View all] JackRiddler Jan 2012 OP

Good point - he has basically robbed the MSG of 'change' from them got root Jan 2012 #1

it was hardly "robbed" SixthSense Jan 2012 #23

true, and it is a common political theme that can be highly effective during times of stress got root Jan 2012 #26

If by rob you mean a reversion to... ellisonz Jan 2012 #159

Ron Paul is an insane racist maniac JoePhilly Jan 2012 #2

Yes, yes, we know he is an 'insane, racist, maniac' and that's the point raised in the sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #141

Ron Paul does not care about the "racial" aspect of the drug war ... JoePhilly Jan 2012 #146

Close but no cigar, but extremely close... nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #170

The question is ProSense Jan 2012 #3

Your usual black-and-white misrepresentation of what I say begs the question... JackRiddler Jan 2012 #10

Ah ProSense Jan 2012 #13

Are you for the current levels of defense spending? Are you for the drug war? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #15

Newsflash ProSense Jan 2012 #24

You are evading the question by pointing to irrelevancies about Paul. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #27

Simply ProSense Jan 2012 #30

Nonsense: He's just like the rest of the Republican field... JackRiddler Jan 2012 #35

Hmmm? ProSense Jan 2012 #37

Gingrich. Racist, misogynist, homophobe... Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #129

Wow, you're really good at avoiding questions, aren't you? ClassWarrior Jan 2012 #176

"Doesn't matter if Paul in office would really reduce defense spending" MilesColtrane Jan 2012 #157

Do you really want to portray your reasoning as clueless? ClassWarrior Jan 2012 #178

Bingo. Scuba Jan 2012 #162

So much greater is the shame for allowing such a shitbrick to steal space we should occupy TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #18

What ProSense Jan 2012 #25

It isn't being a racist that is putting wind into Paul's sails and you well know it. TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #128

You are arguing a completely distinct point and ignoring the one presented to you. TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #154

You seem to believe any mention of Paull here means he's being "hyped"... Scuba Jan 2012 #163

So do you have answer to the question in the OP? sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #142

Actually, no, that's not the question DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2012 #185

This message was self-deleted by its author leeroysphitz Jan 2012 #4

I don't see Democrats offering -anything- right now. Fire Walk With Me Jan 2012 #5

our campaign message is "People First-Politics Last" BlueToTheBone Jan 2012 #31

Happy new year to you and thank you for your Blue work! Fire Walk With Me Jan 2012 #126

I would so like to see him in a debate with Obama. HopeHoops Jan 2012 #6

So would I, particularly with regard to issues like NorthCarolina Jan 2012 #33

I would like to see that also. sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #144

Me too. Aside from the Machiavellian consideration that Paul would be coalition_unwilling Jan 2012 #36

It would be a jaw dropper of an evening, BlueToTheBone Jan 2012 #106

Because racist, knuckle-dragging right-wingers Autumn Jan 2012 #7

there was a young man, who was filming the OWS protestors in NYC bring up his name as a canidate got root Jan 2012 #12

Sooner or later, someone is going to come up who is not Autumn Jan 2012 #20

We have them already. Paul's on the other side, which means he might have to be answered. DirkGently Jan 2012 #130

They'll quickly come out against peace and personal liberty if the GOP deigns to own those issues Leopolds Ghost Jan 2012 #136

So Ron Paul candidacy could actually cause the Democ. party to have an auto-immune reaction against Leopolds Ghost Jan 2012 #137

Plus, keep in mind lots of Anonymous are or were Ron Paul supporters. Leopolds Ghost Jan 2012 #139

And how would the resident reflexive Obama defenders approach this fact? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #124

I am seeing lots of support for him in my young nephews and their friends Mojorabbit Jan 2012 #152

I would only change the drug wars portion to civil liberties in general quinnox Jan 2012 #8

Bullshit ProSense Jan 2012 #11

you got root Jan 2012 #14

You ProSense Jan 2012 #17

are got root Jan 2012 #22

Which ProSense Jan 2012 #28

I believe you owe answers to several in the thread--not the other way around DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2012 #187

You are missing the point. It doesn't matter what anyone on DU thinks of Paul. sabrina 1 Jan 2012 #145

kicking out the DLC will do wonders for our message BlueToTheBone Jan 2012 #114

Instead of concentrating so much on Ron Paul quinnox Jan 2012 #16

Hmmm? ProSense Jan 2012 #19

Yes, exactly: The question his candidacy poses for the DEMOCRATS. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #29

Hmmm? ProSense Jan 2012 #39

Hmmmmmmmmmmm? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #40

Again ProSense Jan 2012 #41

It is you who doesn't have a good comeback. Kaleko Jan 2012 #49

Well, ProSense Jan 2012 #69

There is no hyping of Ron Paul on this thread. Kaleko Jan 2012 #87

You're ProSense Jan 2012 #91

No - it is pointing out the vacuum left by the failure bread_and_roses Jan 2012 #100

That is correct. Kaleko Jan 2012 #102

+ 100 nt Mojorabbit Jan 2012 #153

You've got this one in a corner DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2012 #188

Note that Paul and the President share an opposition to marriage equalty. Why is that? Bluenorthwest Jan 2012 #45

Really? ProSense Jan 2012 #75

He's a Rape-Publican. Those views WON'T "manifest." But that's not the topic under discussion. ClassWarrior Jan 2012 #179

Other than smoking Pot, I don't see Paul as that strong on civil liberties. BiggJawn Jan 2012 #21

Smoking pot is an issue that directly impacts tens of millions of people SixthSense Jan 2012 #90

But are you willing to destroy the rest of the social fabric for it? BiggJawn Jan 2012 #92

What social fabric? SixthSense Jan 2012 #94

I got you now. BiggJawn Jan 2012 #104

That is the real story, Jack. Rather than demand the party kick the legs out from under TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #9

Post removed Post removed Jan 2012 #32

Yes. Exactly. Thank you. To repeat your final line: JackRiddler Jan 2012 #38

I'll reply to you, since woo me with science's post got hidden paulk Jan 2012 #158

Yes I thought that post was excellent dreamnightwind Jan 2012 #165

I read the post, and I consider it DANGEROUS that the post was hidden DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2012 #190

But the Democrats are offering us all something... truedelphi Jan 2012 #168

Ron Paul Stands Against Civil Rights and Equality for All. MineralMan Jan 2012 #48

Bingo. rucky Jan 2012 #34

Absurd. You sound like Ron's mother Robb Jan 2012 #42

Paul is a huge anti gay crusader. More so than the President, although they share the Bluenorthwest Jan 2012 #52

You want to make it personal? Robb Jan 2012 #61

Congratulations for criticizing Paul. You're a real trooper in the fight. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #53

I find your definition of "leading" fascinating. Robb Jan 2012 #57

So you think opposition to war and drug war is like an insane man on the subway? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #67

Weak sauce. No, you see, Paul is the insane yelling man. Robb Jan 2012 #78

You did a much better job of making a point I tried to make as well. Perfect. PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #81

It's all right, many people argue with the batting cage machine after so many swings and misses. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #89

And I have asked "leading who?" with no answer. PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #68

+1000 ellisonz Jan 2012 #160

Make no mistake, he also inspires rage among us who are critical of Obama. PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #43

Agreed on all points: "Fuck him." But why aren't the Democrats leading on peace and drug reform? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #44

Wait ProSense Jan 2012 #47

lol nt BootinUp Jan 2012 #64

Leading who? The Republicans? I think we are. PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #50

No. Not the Republicans, and not the point. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #51

Great questions.. Upton Jan 2012 #55

Actually ProSense Jan 2012 #59

It *is* the point, though. He 'gets' to talk about the stuff he talks about because he is a lunatic PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #60

No. He gets traction with liberals where Dems have dropped the ball. DirkGently Jan 2012 #88

And yes, I will post 'more stuff about how Paul sucks' in every conversation on DU that involves him PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #66

+100. When it comes to civil rights and equality, MineralMan Jan 2012 #46

Civil rights are for white, male, Christian property owners. The rest of us are fucked in Paultopia. PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #54

Precisely. That is why any praise for Ron Paul on other MineralMan Jan 2012 #56

The War on Drugs... Upton Jan 2012 #58

What? ProSense Jan 2012 #62

I never said they were worse that Ron Paul.. Upton Jan 2012 #73

You find attacks of a Republican on DU to be... "ODD" and/or hypocritical?!?! PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #76

And I find defense.. Upton Jan 2012 #82

Quick.. move the goalposts!! PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #83

Well, ProSense Jan 2012 #103

Wait ProSense Jan 2012 #77

The War on Drugs as a national issue MineralMan Jan 2012 #65

Many polls now show a majority supporting marijuana legalization. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #70

Look, I've been working to end laws against voluntary MineralMan Jan 2012 #86

Nailed it. DirkGently Jan 2012 #63

Thank you. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #71

I think you are incorrect - or at best, broad-brush stereotyping MH1 Jan 2012 #72

Ron's not outflanking anyone. He's a lunatic who never had a chance at the Presidency. MjolnirTime Jan 2012 #74

very well said. nashville_brook Jan 2012 #79

The hand-wringing over this.. 99Forever Jan 2012 #80

So ProSense Jan 2012 #84

"...why keep mentioning him?" 99Forever Jan 2012 #105

wtf? girl gone mad Jan 2012 #121

I noticed exactly the same thing. 99Forever Jan 2012 #123

Mentioning him on an internet discussion board is not giving him any traction Mojorabbit Jan 2012 #155

99 +1 in this case. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #85

Exactly. He's not an election threat. They doth protest too much. DirkGently Jan 2012 #93

You ProSense Jan 2012 #95

I don't know what makes you think that Democrats are the party of peace or killing the drug wars cali Jan 2012 #96

Democrats are the party that wants votes from those that support those things. DirkGently Jan 2012 #107

Paul is not constrained by the need to be politically viable. gulliver Jan 2012 #97

Very well put. PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #98

Exactly ProSense Jan 2012 #99

You're not constrained by it either. So how do you stand on war for empire and drug war? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #109

Obviously something Paul's saying is "politically viable" or it wouldn't so anger Obama partisans. DirkGently Jan 2012 #113

Excellent points. Thank you. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #115

Totally untrue. He should inspire rage among all Democrats. PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #116

The precise strawman silliness Greenwald predicted in his piece. Again, the partisan worldview DirkGently Jan 2012 #118

Um as I have pointed out in this thread, he isn't right about anything. PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #120

1) Not the point 2) You literally just copy pasta'd your own prior post? As a "response?" DirkGently Jan 2012 #125

It was clear you didn't read or comprehend it in context of this subthread. PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #127

And this has what to do with him having any functional space at all is because Democrats TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #131

Dead-on. The threat is that progressive ideas Dems have abandoned resonate. Defeats the narrative. DirkGently Jan 2012 #149

He's ProSense Jan 2012 #117

You empower Paul by so carefully ignoring the point of the OP DirkGently Jan 2012 #122

Hmmm? ProSense Jan 2012 #138

I think it is also because few people know his racist, homophobic beliefs. beyurslf Jan 2012 #101

With eight simple words Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #108

You could at least quote the eight words so I know what you mean, dude. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #110

I'll leave you to figure that out. Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #111

O zen master! Seven syllables for you. And in next line, five. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #112

Nailed it. n/t girl gone mad Jan 2012 #119

But, his stances on war and drug policy are not different. That's what pisses *me* off. joshcryer Jan 2012 #132

Again, missing the point. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #133

Most intellectuals know better. All you're doing is giving him a platform to lie. joshcryer Jan 2012 #134

Right ProSense Jan 2012 #135

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Ron Paul is an asshole, Sarah Ibarruri Jan 2012 #140

Hell I think at one time or another everyone one of those GOP candidates have supported an issue... LynneSin Jan 2012 #148

Very true! nt Sarah Ibarruri Jan 2012 #150

Yep. mmonk Jan 2012 #143

Anyone who cares more about their drugs then the rights of minorities, GLBTQ and women..... LynneSin Jan 2012 #147

Apparently the rights of two million people in the prison system... JackRiddler Jan 2012 #151

Why does it have to be a choice and how much of one is considering the real world TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #156

They're locking up potheads...for gay rights? Logic problem here. nt Romulox Jan 2012 #174

Very cruel of you DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2012 #192

Yes and no...good idea, worth looking at, but mostly no. limpyhobbler Jan 2012 #161

We all know that Ron Paul is a racist and unlikely to ever win the Presidency randr Jan 2012 #164

Ron Paul has NEVER been a threat. We should be LAUGHING at Paul. Countdown_3_2_1 Jan 2012 #166

So? Why all the particular rage at Paul? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #167

He's a threat to liberal-self-image because his ideology is incompatible with liberals. joshcryer Jan 2012 #169

If you got Paul this would be no brainer nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #171

Here's an example of the tragedy. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #172

That's ProSense Jan 2012 #175

Thanks for showing the culmination of this sorry trend. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #180

You ProSense Jan 2012 #181

I most certainly do, JackRiddler Jan 2012 #183

You know what ProSense Jan 2012 #184

It's more insidious than that--they're trying to link opposition to war, Drug War to rightwing Romulox Jan 2012 #173

Ron Paul isn't anti-war because of any morally sound reason. The same goes for the war on drugs. phleshdef Jan 2012 #177

There will be no Ron Paul government. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #182

And ProSense Jan 2012 #186

"Romney would support a war on Iran. Don�t vote for a neocon warmonger!" ProSense Jan 2012 #189

Wait, so now you're "hyping" Romney? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #191

Frankly ProSense Jan 2012 #194

Thank you for continuing object lesson JackRiddler Jan 2012 #195

Just because that crazy man has one or two good thoughts in his head Rex Jan 2012 #193

But why is that? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #196

I don't think they are angry as much as I think Rex Jan 2012 #197

Yes. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #198