|
Post by Distind on Dec 29, 2011 18:18:22 GMT -5
Rand Paul has openly stated that he disagrees with the Civil Rights Act in regards to "forcing" businesses to deal with equality and would like to see it repealed. Why should his father be any better? The sins of the son shall be visited upon the father? When you defend them at length, yes.
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Dec 29, 2011 18:18:59 GMT -5
Holding racist sentiments is inexcusable, but if Ron Paul denounces these views, then I'm willing to move on. I disagree with a lot of his policies, but I am strongly aligned with his views on the military. He is the only candidate who will finally bring an end to the military–industrial complex. If elected, he will also radically change the nature of conservatism in the United States and hopefully move it away from evangelical nonsense.
Perhaps you think his views are whacky, but at least he's not a God-Warrior. He could bring real libertarianism back to American conservatism. I'm not at all libertarian, but I can at least respect their position, which is far from what I can say about neo-conservatism.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Dec 29, 2011 18:26:01 GMT -5
Holding racist sentiments is inexcusable, but if Ron Paul denounces these views, then I'm willing to move on. He hasn't denounced them, he's denied them. Huge fucking difference.
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Dec 29, 2011 18:27:51 GMT -5
Ron Paul has a libertarian heart, wants to audit the Fed, but has said other things that are batshit. He's pushing 80, probably losing his mind. But? And therefore. Paul's crank libertarianism is the source of his crank antebellumism.
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Dec 29, 2011 19:09:06 GMT -5
If elected, he will also radically change the nature of conservatism in the United States and hopefully move it away from evangelical nonsense. Paul is a strongly evangelical Christian. Bad. Conservatism doesn't need to be gold-buggy and tenther. They're bad enough already.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Dec 29, 2011 19:48:30 GMT -5
Uh... I seem to remember once that the KKK threw support behind Obama because "he supported segregation"
Or at least one chapter of the KKK
On the other hand, I don't quite know how valid that is.
|
|
|
Post by Wykked Wytch on Dec 29, 2011 19:52:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lexikon on Dec 29, 2011 19:59:59 GMT -5
www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/He also thinks Abortion should be illegal (and life starts at conception) but thinks states should be able to decide whether to make it legal or not. I think he has the same view on gay sex.
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Dec 29, 2011 20:03:20 GMT -5
Uh... I seem to remember once that the KKK threw support behind Obama because "he supported segregation" Or at least one chapter of the KKK On the other hand, I don't quite know how valid that is. I heard that they supported him in the primary. Because they REALLY, REALLY hate the Clintons. That was the Onion, though.
|
|
|
Post by discoberry on Dec 29, 2011 20:06:27 GMT -5
He is the only candidate who will finally bring an end to the military–industrial complex. If elected, he will also radically change the nature of conservatism in the United States and hopefully move it away from evangelical nonsense. Never, NEVER gonna happen
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Dec 29, 2011 20:08:39 GMT -5
Holding racist sentiments is inexcusable, but if Ron Paul denounces these views, then I'm willing to move on. I disagree with a lot of his policies, but I am strongly aligned with his views on the military. He is the only candidate who will finally bring an end to the military–industrial complex. If elected, he will also radically change the nature of conservatism in the United States and hopefully move it away from evangelical nonsense. Perhaps you think his views are whacky, but at least he's not a God-Warrior. He could bring real libertarianism back to American conservatism. I'm not at all libertarian, but I can at least respect their position, which is far from what I can say about neo-conservatism. You're cute if you think he's going to change shit.
|
|
|
Post by Wykked Wytch on Dec 29, 2011 20:11:59 GMT -5
www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/He also thinks Abortion should be illegal (and life starts at conception) but thinks states should be able to decide whether to make it legal or not. I think he has the same view on gay sex. Basically, he doesn't think the federal government should intervene in states, even to protect the civil liberties of individuals. IIRC he also supported DOMA, as well as a bill that would make it illegal to question DOMA's constitutionality in the Supreme Court.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Dec 29, 2011 21:26:52 GMT -5
That was the Onion, though. Ah, see, I didn't know that was the source. Now that I do, I feel more educated.
|
|
|
Post by lexikon on Dec 29, 2011 21:44:53 GMT -5
Holding racist sentiments is inexcusable, but if Ron Paul denounces these views, then I'm willing to move on. I disagree with a lot of his policies, but I am strongly aligned with his views on the military. He is the only candidate who will finally bring an end to the military–industrial complex. If elected, he will also radically change the nature of conservatism in the United States and hopefully move it away from evangelical nonsense. Perhaps you think his views are whacky, but at least he's not a God-Warrior. He could bring real libertarianism back to American conservatism. I'm not at all libertarian, but I can at least respect their position, which is far from what I can say about neo-conservatism. You're cute if you think he's going to change shit. Kind of like Obama.
|
|
|
Post by Wykked Wytch on Dec 29, 2011 22:09:02 GMT -5
You're cute if you think he's going to change shit. Kind of like Obama. It's a typical Paul fanboy tactic to avoid discussion of Ron Paul's faults by shifting the focus to Obama, which assumes that the other person even voted for Obama in the first place. There are criticisms of Ron Paul from both the left and the right. One's opinion that Ron Paul is an assbutt has nothing to do with that person's opinion on Obama.
|
|