Ron Paul Puns!

[Crezth]

I like paultard. It allows you to call someone a "tard" for their political beliefs, without getting banned.

Gotta love skipping under mod radar!

You make posts praising the death of American diplomats abroad. You can shove it.

 

[Neomega]

You make posts praising the death of American diplomats abroad. You can shove it.

Oh no! I was told to shove it on the internet!

 

[Neomega]

You make posts praising the death of American diplomats abroad. You can shove it.

and you ruin threads in the chamber with stupid sarcastic remarks about how nuclear war would be great, and you don't stop because you are so delighted with your own seeming wit, blind to how tiresome and stupid it really is.

 

[Crezth]

Hard to ruin what was never any good to start with. I must admit I had my work cut out for me there. :/

 

[civver_764]

Neither am I. Believing the state should exist (And as a necessary evil no less) is not the same thing as relying on it to do anything for you.

Well then opposition to Ron Paul(who supports the state) can't be considered "state-worship."

The people that are insulting the people who supported the one guy who actually wanted to limit the state can do so for no other reason than that they worship at the feet of the state whom they think is entitled to do anything and everything. If they were not state-worshippers, they would at least respect one of the few "Limited government" voices out there.

Really, that's your level of empathy?

Maybe they resent the fact that corporations would gain more power.
Maybe they resent the fact that he's anti-abortion.
Maybe they resent the fact that he's anti-gay.
Maybe they resent the fact that he offers no help to the impoverished.
Maybe they resent his constitution-worship.
Maybe they resent him for some other reason.

In any case, I don't think it has anything to with the size of the state(I'm not even sure you could quantify that).

 

[Joecoolyo]

(I'm not even sure you could quantify that).

The size of the state is directly equal to the number of Democrats holding congressional seats.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Maybe they resent the fact that corporations would gain more power.

This is false, and is exactly the reason the GOP establishment prefers Romney. Romney is actually "Pro-corporation" rather than "Pro-market."

Maybe they resent the fact that he's anti-abortion.

"Disagree" isn't the same thing as "Resent." Of course, as an MD, Ron Paul has far more right to talk authoritatively on the topic than we do.

Maybe they resent the fact that he's anti-gay.

Maybe personally opposed to it, but legally he doesn't advocate doing a thing to stop gay marriage. He is actually opposed to the state recognizing marriage at all (Much like how you are, in fact.)

Maybe they resent the fact that he offers no help to the impoverished.

Maybe because he has no right to do so?

Maybe they resent his constitution-worship.

I don't care if you like it or not, the constitution is the law of the land, so don't trample on it. Amend it, abolish it, whatever, but while it is still the law of the land it should be followed. The worst thing you can do is speak highly of the constitution and then ignore it, like the rest of the GOP is.

All of that being said, I don't seriously think everyone opposed to Paul is a state worshipper. I'm being 90% hyperbolic, and for the other ten percent, it has little to do with who you do and don't like.

That being said, in a thread basically designed to take cheap shots at Ron Paul supporters, if you are that blatantly disrespectful to one of the very few honest members of congress (And I feel similar about the few honest guys on the left) I'm going to take cheap shots back.
Maybe they resent him for some other reason.


In any case, I don't think it has anything to with the size of the state(I'm not even sure you could quantify that).

 

[History_Buff]

This is false, and is exactly the reason the GOP establishment prefers Romney. Romney is actually "Pro-corporation" rather than "Pro-market."

I don't think you understand how free markets work.

"Disagree" isn't the same thing as "Resent." Of course, as an MD, Ron Paul has far more right to talk authoritatively on the topic than we do.

Resent is the right word at least some of the time. And he really doesn't get any more right to authority on the abortion topic. It's not like the science is hard to understand.

Maybe personally opposed to it, but legally he doesn't advocate doing a thing to stop gay marriage. He is actually opposed to the state recognizing marriage at all (Much like how you are, in fact.)

I resent people for being anti-gay, just as I would resent them for being anti-semetic, or anti-black, or anti-woman. That you don't actually take steps to harm these groups does not change the fact that you are a terrible person for holding such views.

Maybe because he has no right to do so?

Awfully convenient excuse, seeing as every other government in the last 40 years or so has managed to do it without issue.

I don't care if you like it or not, the constitution is the law of the land, so don't trample on it. Amend it, abolish it, whatever, but while it is still the law of the land it should be followed. The worst thing you can do is speak highly of the constitution and then ignore it, like the rest of the GOP is.

The fact that you espouse some nutbar interpretation of the Constitution does not mean that it actually means that. Interpreting it is the Supreme Court's job, you know, like it says in the Constitution.

That being said, in a thread basically designed to take cheap shots at Ron Paul supporters...

Thing is, they aren't cheap shots. If Ron Paul was in charge of the country, assuming Congress didn't completely block him, it would be an utter catastrophe.

 

[JollyRoger]

Ronspiracy theorists

 

[Cutlass]

You claim to know my eternal destiny?

Double points considering you (Unless you changed your mind recently) don't even believe in God...

You're flat out lying through your teeth if you think I've ever not believed in god, or ever claimed that I didn't.

Another example of you rejecting god.

 

[GhostWriter16]

You're flat out lying through your teeth if you think I've ever not believed in god, or ever claimed that I didn't.

Another example of you rejecting god.

Wow. Making a mistake is now lying? Jeepers. I thought you said you were a strong agnostic. That doesn't mean I remember correctly, however.

I don't reject God. I reject the government as being that God. I'm not saying you don't reject the government as being God (I did say that when I was being hyperbolic) but I find it kind of absurd that you consider a wrong political belief to be rejecting God (Yes, social conservatives do it all the time. I honestly thought liberals were ahead of them in that one regard. Guess not)