Open Thread
By Nicole Belle Saturday Jul 07, 2007 10:38pm
Download | play 
Download | play
When was the last time you saw a TV anchor be this blunt with a politician?
John Amato’s virtual online magazine…OK, It’s a blog!
©2009 Crooks And Liars
Login or Register to post comments.
Well, he's right. Ron Paul will not win, whether for good or bad. If we had a ranked voting system, perhaps a third-party type of candidate might win.
George Stephanopopoupoupolouloulous can be so arrogant with a "small" candidate...but he hasn't got the rocks to speak as bluntly to Hilary or Giuliani. He's a pussy. I happen to think he's probably right, but be fair to all your guests, don't just big-time a supposed "small" candidate. What an ass.
I agree, TC. What a jerk.
George Stephanopopoupoupolouloulous can be so arrogant with a “small” candidate.
Exactly. He won't lose any invites being tough with Ron Paul.
Ron Paul, given current financial and political conditions, cannot win the election. Sometimes, the truth hurts.
Ruling elites do not like when an outsider challenges them. Nothing bothers them more. George can be sure his dinner party invitation will come but not if Rudy is asked like that.
What a punk! A school yard bully picking on the shortest guy! GS doesn't deserve to interview candidates after a performance like that.
Stephie is an arrogant loser. America however does like arrogant losers as their winners.
Rather rude and unnecessary. I know where GS was trying to go with the line of questioning but his approach sucked.
George Snuffleupagus has got a helluva nerve. Where are his balls when he talks to "winners" like Mitt "Dog crapping on a hot tin roof" Romney and Rudy "Three times an adulterer" Guiliani? George Snuffleupagus needs to be cut down to size. Oh, I forgot. He's already a midget douchebag.
Cindy Sheehan is considering going after Pelosi's seat in '08 if Pelosi doesn't come forward with articles of impeachment against Bush within the next two weeks. Hallelujah! This will light a fire under Mrs. "Impeachment is off the table"'s tail!
11: and you know in San Fran, she can whup Pelosi's pompous behind. I say that as a former resident of that lovely, fantastic city.
Ron Paul is not going to win, and thank God.
Don't be fooled by his good ol boy mannerisms and those animated facial features. Yes, he wants out of Iraq. But that's the extent of his progressiveness.
He wants to end Medicare.
He wants to end Social Security.
He would not support socialized healthcare.
He is a republican, through and through. Everything that most people here at C&L stand for, Ron Paul is against.
You do not want to have a beer with this one, no matter what your gut instinct tells you.
Dr. Paul is only one on the Repub ticket with any guts, shared by Gravel and quite often Kucinich on the left.
He scares the hell out of people because he's not bought and paid for, so folks like georgie s. have no way of knowing which side Dr. Paul's bread is buttered on --- since it's actually buttered on the American peoples' side, not that of big corporations and scheister organizations, like the "news" organ that stephanopolos works for.
what an ass!
And I actually do think Ron Paul has a better shot at this than Gulliani or Romney. I am even registering as a Repub this year just to vote for him in the primary.
Look at the results of the straw poll in Georgia, that had Thompson on top with Ron Paul second.
Second!
Um, 14 I would suggest you look at 13, as he has summed up pretty well what Ron Paul is about (Ron is a Libertarian, so the list is not a surprise).
Joep: the guy has rocks, and his position on the war is welcome, but this guy is a small-government....like Grover Norquist-drown-gov't-in-the-bathtub-small. And I've read plenty at Daily Kos about his racial views and some of his friends in the closed borders; unless he makes a principled statement renouncing those (unlikely-see his appearance on the Colbert Report for his take on the role of gubmint) I would not vote for dude.
Scarecrow @ 13:
_______________________
How much do you think one person can do in 8 years? He will not end social security or medicare. HE say in the shape the countries in he can't but what he would do is get out of Iraq not to mention 130 other countries you're military is in (see if the dems will do that), he will end the federal reserve and interest on debt, he will bring value back to the dollar, he will end trade deals that only hurt the poor and middle class. There are important things that could help everyone.
He did the same thing to Gravel. The Stepford guy is a prick, I've had enough of him and the other two pricks - tweety and timmeh.
Well well well,
How much can one person do in 8 years? Are you kidding?
If a Republican were to win the next Presidential election, I would hope it would be Ron Paul. Ron seems to be the most down to Earth out of the entire lot.
Danny @ 19:
That's right. Do this to Biden, Giuliani, Hilary, Actor Boy, and then you might have something. Until then, he's just an insecure pretty boy.
Okay Clint Stephanopoulos---I dare you to make the same statement to the other more credible candidates.
Go ahead punk---make my day.
Otay @ 20:
I spy someone awake to the possibilities of irony, lol. Try 6.5
Ron Paul is a nut.
But he drives the GOP nuts.
So I wish him the best.
And yes, George, like most of the beltway pundits, only shows spine when he is attacking the low ones on the totem pole. As for the higher ones on the totem pole, he's just another groveling sycophant.
I can't believe people honestly think the Neocons, after this many years of ruling, are just going to suddenly hand over the reigns of the party to someone who wants to take it away from them.
Newsflash - Neocons will get to pick the Republican nominee. They aren't going to pick Ron Paul. It's clearly against their interests to give away their party, and they'd rather lose to a Democrat than lose control of their party.
This is the guy people should be voting for!
1. Personal freedom...CHECK!
2. End IRS ad FEDERAL RESERVE...check! (Imagine no income taxes! You could afford healthcare)
3. War on drugs that the US is losing ENDED....CHECK! (Should you go to jail for smoking weed? COME ON!)
4. Getting the Military the Hell out of other countries (130 of them)...CHECK!
(ALL this would save the US over a trillion dollars a year, creating a HUGE surplus..see if the Dems will do this)
People need to prioritize, do you want a government that knows all about you? Do you want money that always loses its value? Do you want more people dieing to protect oil? Why do you still have solders in Germany? Wake up and stop dreaming.
Before anyone gets too worked up about Ron Paul's failings, Stephanopoulas represents what's fundamentally wrong with the MSM treatment of electoral issues. Discount the small guys, ignore the policies. Mr. S. will do the same thing with Kucinich and ignore the issues Mr. Kucinich brings to the forum. He'll favor Hillary & Guilliani, treating them as candidates of substance, rather than pawns of the elite factions of the country.
Secondary candidates are the only ones who bring populist ideas up front. Support Paul or not, it's necessary to advocate his place in the forum.
And, oh, yes, Stephanopoulas was rude.
I spy someone awake to the possibilities of irony, lol. Try 6.5
Bush accomplished what he did because he was stupid and controlled by companies and the Neo-Cons. Ron Paul isn't and everyone should check out what he says on each issue that concerns you. Just do not write him off because of some pre-conceived notion you have of him. I am a liberal and I do not agree completely BUT he is right where it is most important.
Gosh, I really miss Sam Donaldson.
Sam was a hard hitter without being a complete moron.
But George is just such a loser - that was a completely rude think to do - and Paul is right about Republicans. I don't know what ABC ever say in that guy -they just wanted to get rid of Sam because Sam always ask hard questions - without the gracelessness.
Thanks 16/Otay, you're a genius, it's obvious. If he were running as a Libertarian, he would not be running.
I hate to be blunt. But those who favor Stupidopolis's evil arrogance above Ron Paul's well intentioned, if misunderstood politics are fucking stupid.
Well well well,
Ending income taxes is a liberal issue? Since when?
Otay @ 26:
and pussy.
What a "courageous" pussy!
Show no mercy to the media, Dems, Reps, noone who is against the people. It's time to fix what's got broken by the suck ups.
Seele^ @ 345:
Seele, Your lack of basic political knowledge is frightening. Libertarians support the war in Iraq? Are you KIDDING??? The foundation of Libertarian philosophy is non-aggression! Libertarians and neo-cons are ideological opposites.
This is directly from their party platform: "The principle of non-intervention should guide relationships between governments. The United States government should return to the historic libertarian tradition of avoiding entangling alliances, abstaining totally from foreign quarrels and imperialist adventures, and recognizing the right to unrestricted trade, travel, and immigration."
Perhaps you have such a strong opinion against Libertarian beliefs because you have them backwards.
No complaints about socialized healthcare from me.
There's a crucial thing here about Ron Paul. I don't care that he doesn't have a hope in hell of winning; but the point is, aside from his having the stones to be radically different from his authoritarian party, and speaking in honest terms about what used to be the basic conservative view of American foreign policy -- no foreign entanglements -- until they got wrapped up in the wacky world of the neocons -- he's a John Bircher and an extreme libertarian, who would leave the UN, close up the federal government, and basically take us back to an idealized vision of America in the 1880s. Flatly speaking, he's a loon, though a likeable one.
AC Green @ 350:
__________________
THANK YOU!!:)
Seele^ @ 348:
Again, this is nonsense. Libertarians do not want to "close all public schools". They want schools to be controlled locally by states and communities, not by the Federal government. You really need to do some reading. If you're going to "make fun" of someone's beliefs, it helps to actually know what they are, otherwise you just look foolish.
honesty @ 359:
Good explanation, you said it much better than I could:)
I keep hearing you all speak about RP supporters not qualifying any of his stances...Jesus Christ do other people have to do everything for you, go look at his web site, do your own research. Having a debate about progressivism vs libertarianism is useless because if you really believe the federal government has a role in giving people social welfare programs, I probably wont change your mind, nor do I care to. Its your right to believe that just as it is my right to think what I do....you know, that whole liberty thing we libertarians like to talk about.
Kyle @ 356:
Ever hear of "Objectivist Libertarians" they believe the state should more aggressively protect the rights of US individuals and corporations abroad. It is reasonable to believe the Iraq war coincides with this Libertarian belief system.
AC Green @ 350:
in fact i have. to several (albeit not libertarians). and they all thank god they don't have the practically inhumane garbage we have here in the states!
everything i've heard about UK's and Canada's healthcare is pretty positive, and the few meager complaints still did not amount to the overwhelming gasp at US's crap.
try again.
Libertarians are not Constitutionists. This is based on one of the foundation of Libertarianism of 'Free Trade' The constitution orders the executive to impose tarrifs if foreign countries dump cheap goods onto our shores. This is counter to what Libertarians believe. And free trade is a cornerstone of libertarian ideology.
Andy K @ 355:
Are you kidding me? Using one example of how someone sought out a specialist 10 years ago proves the quality of the overall system? How about the enormous waiting lists to have simple procedures done? Or stacking patients in hallways because they don't have enough staff to clean rooms and turn them over quickly? Lack of competition breeds waste and inefficiency (see Halliburton). I'm not saying there isn't a problem right now, just that throwing more government (especially federal government) at it won't necessarily be better, and might be worse.
Seele^ @ 364:
Ron Paul has spoken for years against corporatism. He supports the free market, but is strictly against corporations benefiting from government largess, like those in Iraq. You should watch his appearance on the Daily Show from a couple months ago, he calls corporatism "evil" and singles out Halliburton specifically.
Seele^ @ 364:
not all libertarians believe the same thing, just as not all progressives do, you cannot lump people into one category and say this is the way it is. Life, Liberty, and property (which was a phrase later transcribed to be life, liberty, and happiness) is not just something we enjoy, or rather should enjoy here in America, as a Libertarian I respect the rights of those 3 things for every single person in this planet. There is no greater act of forced coercion than a war, especially an unjustified one such as the Iraq war. This is why I as a Libertarian do not support it. Others may have different opinions which relate more to economics.
and yes Kyle is correct about RP's view of corporatism
honesty @ 359:
as well as Well Well Well @ 362
Well, it took over 1/2 a day, but here we have it: Democrat=Communist. It usually takes the typical troll about 2 seconds to bust out a crack like that.
Thanks fer all the creative propaganda earlier in the thread. Maybe you should try yer recruitment at Balloon Juice, trolls.
Seele^ @ 366:
some are and some are not, the Constitution was actually a step up in terms of progressivism from what many of the founders wanted or had envisioned, and many libertarians or classical liberals still hold to that, although in todays standards it would be a dramatic step back towards liberty if we were to actually follow it.
Kyle @ 361:
and the laughter stems from that very fact- "state rights." ha. ha. ha. have you ever lived in a state that poorly manages itself? louisiana has suffered corruption on a massive scale for at least the last half-century. because of it, our schools are terrible failures (for one example), and new orleans has suffered the most. had it been better controlled and less corrupt, then perhaps more of the schools here would have re-opened after Katrina.
back in the 60s and 70s, there was a phenomenon called "white flight." whites left the city for the suburbs on the northshore, leaving the newly "desegregated" schools in a sort of de facto segregated form, facing a lack of support and funds. things quickly went downhill and have continued to decline to the point of complete dysfunction.
the school board in NOLA has probably been one of the most corrupt, and let's not forget the corrupt "levee board," our community's board which is supposed to oversee the levee construction- "HA" said katrina! (more laughter) granted, it was the army corp of engineers who are mostly to blame, nonetheless, LA is prime example of why states and communities can not run themselves. and as i mentioned about abortion, my rights would be eroded with our conservative democrats in power, and our healthcare system is in shambles down here- our state's legislature is a joke- and please spare me the "well move then" and the "people power" bits- while i believe in giving power to the people, i also believe that the people can not always be counted on to defend civil liberties- slavery would probably still exist down here if LA had its way way back when (though i say it still does, again de facto).. it's a little thing our founders attempted to prevent when they instituted congress and whatnot- tyranny of the majority.
Democrat=Communist, Stalinist, The Devil.
The Libertarians don't have much other then colorful language to claim they are right and everyone else is wrong. As for Libertarian ideas put into practice on a national scale - see Darfur and Iraq.
AC Green @ 367:
Blah, blah, competition in the free market, fuckin' blah.
This laissez faire libertarian economic bullshit always looks good in theory, but never- NEVER- plays out the way it's presented. Theoretically, yeah, wealth trickles down to the hard workin' common man, but in practice- when ya throw the greedy tendencies of human beins- the wealth stays concentrated in the hands of the wealthy, who occasionally open up the wallets to buy off politicians so's to consolidate power.
Don't like all of the corruption now? Under libertarians we would regress past the Gilded Age, back to a state of feudalism. Every man a serf- except those chosen by God. For the chosen it's heaven right here on earth. The rest of us get to wait fer our pie in the sky.
Well, I'm not sure a moment of bluntness with a third tier candidate amounts to well... anything.. I would have liked to see the rest of that interview... As to the idea 'that ain't gonna happen'...
Well there's a whole laundry list of names that applies to..JD
Andy K @ 375:
and under progressivism I have am forced to give up my hard earned money to pay for someone else's problems. Good job you don't like my ideology and I don't like yours. why even argue about it.
Libertarians current selling points are: "Taxes are bad, we want to end taxes" and "Iraq war is bad, we want to get out of Iraq"
It will be hard to find people who say "lets stay in Iraq" and "I like paying taxes" so the progressives will have to examine other Libertarian ideology to find fault with them. There are plenty of Libertarian platforms to find fault with, watch them squirm when they are held up to the microscope.
Huh!??? Not sure what's going on with this thread.. I post something, come back a bit later and it appears to have vanished.. Not edited by any site monitor... Just gone.. So I repost.. Then like magic, the original post has returned.. I give up, what gives site folks... Seems like this site has been just a little bit squrrelly off and on ever since the last upgrade... Somehow, I gotta start wondering, even if just a little, about the recent FCC decision and how it might already be effecting discourse.... If you site folks with IT experience has an idea whats happening here, I'd appreciate it if you could enlighten me....... thanks JD
Seele^
I've gotta go to the store, but here's some things one might include in a post:
Strict Constitutional Libertarianism
Differences between 18th and 21st century modes of transportation
Pandemic viral outbreak
The National Institute of Health/Center for Disease Control
Have fun while I'm gone. ;)
Seele^ @ 378:
Taxes aren't necessarily bad, and in fact are necessary in order to run the government, Direct Taxes like the income tax, is what we find to be "bad" you must be thinking more of anarcho-capitalism
If we want the Constitution and Bill of Rights reinstated, vote for Ron Paul.He seems to be the only man running who is actually for American . I you want a Globalist
in office(if so, there will be no America), vote for the candidates revealed on UTUBE video:
CFR-NAU & 2008 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES.
I am scared to death of anyone but Ron Paul.Watch and you will understand.For the sake of our country WATCH IT! Ignorance may be bliss, but this time it can be extremely dangerous.The man even rejects his congressional "retirement".
Libertarian Says:
"....and under progressivism I have am forced to give up my hard earned money to pay for someone else’s problems."
Us Progressives are not as selfish as you.
Seele^ @ 383:
I'm hardly selfish and in fact regularly give money to charity or to people whom I KNOW...who are in need of financial help. The difference is in my view, I have a choice to give, and in yours I do not.
I guess you could say i'm pro-choice
jorlin @ 382:
Better take a vacation for all the stress you have, because Ron Paul doesn't have a chance. Dude, how many Libertarians are in an elected office? And since when is Ron Paul NOT a globalist? He is for free trade! Man these Libertarians don't even know what they are complaining about.
Seele^ @ 386:
there is quite a difference between political globalism, which he was referring to, and free-trade. Ron Paul would have no impact on free-trade and is a staunch fighter for US sovereignty
Libertarian - and I am in the majority. Very few Libertarians have been elected in the political party's long existence.
There is so little support for Libertarian candidates in this country, where do these Libertarians get this attitude like they know so much more then we do?
Seele^ @ 388:
There is also a significant difference between the LP and libertarianism as an ideology, I myself am not a member of the Libertarian Party. And while elected officials from the two main parties continue to somehow obtain lower and lower approval ratings, they some how manage to keep getting elected. I don't put much faith into which party gets elected more, because frankly it doesn't matter...they are both horrid and the people obviously know it.
Seele^ @ 390:
I wouldn't say I know more, in general than you or any other person does, but I will have the audacity to say I know more about libertarianism than you do.
Doesn't John Stewart do this same sort of crap, albeit in a much more witty type of way, with guys like Chris Dodd?
"I am a Constitutionalist" is a very overused out phrase. You think you are above scrutiny because you claim to hide behind the United States Constitution?
These so called Constitutionalists sound like bible thumpers saying their actions are excused because they invoke God's name.
Hey all you constitutionalist libertarians, just where does it say in the constitution that corporations are bad?
Well Well Well @ 30:
Bush accomplished what he did because he was stupid and controlled by companies and the Neo-Cons. Ron Paul isn't and everyone should check out what he says on each issue that concerns you. Just do not write him off because of some pre-conceived notion you have of him. I am a liberal and I do not agree completely BUT he is right where it is most important.
If you're a liberal, you should check out all the things he has said about ethnic minorities over at http://dneiwert.blogspot.com. If you really are a liberal, you will not want to vote for this guy. I'm not sure why you are responding to my comment. I was simply responding to Otay who made a very dry crack about wondering whether someone could do so much damage in 8 years. I said, yeah, about 6.5. Paul has guts, but he's also for the abolition of the IRS, the Education dept., NEA, you name it. So to be quite honest, I really don't see any way an honest liberal can truly get behind this guy, with all due respect.
Otay @ 34:
Liberals can hate income taxes, do you like paying Federal Reserve interest? Not one penny of you're money goes to services...JUST THE FED. A PRIVATE BANK!
Stranger in a Strange Land
Paul's got more money for the primaries than does McCain. But I guess that's not saying much. ;-)
Joep,
No need to be a genius to use the internets. Just look up Ron Paul's background. His background and his philosophies are as a Libertarian.
http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/ron-paul.html
Scarecrow @ 13:
Well said! When I saw this guy on "The Colbert Report" it just reinforced what I already suspected: Ron Paul's just another idiot Libertarian. Yeah, he says all the right things as far as the Iraq War is concerned, but this guy would be an absolute disaster as far as domestic social programs are concerned. Don't believe the hype - Ron Paul is not our friend.
oops - ABC ever saw in that guy
frank black @ 35:
Do you think George would treat Ann Coulter with the same level of THICK disdain? And does that make Coulter high man on the totum poll compared to a U.S. Congressman, just because he happens to be a populist?
He gets paid for it. Unlike us.
[Deleted. 9/11conspiracy stuff here, and you know it-Sitemonitor]
bmw 528 @ 23:
Jesus H. Christ! Do ya go to a casino and plunk down 1/2 yer kids' college fund on 00 on the roulette wheel, then make the same bet with the remainder of yer stake after ya just lost?
Stephanopoulos wasn't sayin' Paul wasn't deservin' to win, he just that Paul isn't capable to win- not in '08 anyway. That's a rock-solid bet.
The hard, fast reality of the matter is that to win the Presidency these days, a candidate must win the less than 10% of voters who make up the truly independent, middle of the road American voter. The candidate from whichever party who plays closest to the center will win the election. That's why Ron Paul won't win in '08. That's why Dennis Kucinich won't win in '08.
TC @ 24:
Well well well, indeed. Y'all beat me to a response.
Yup. 6.5 years is all it took to take away that quaint Habeas Corpus thing, kill how many hundreds of thousands of people?, wiretap us, torture civilians, zoom to near the top of the list as most aggressive/hated country in the world, fear that the 2008 elections will be canceled.
Oh. My. God.
You must be kidding, well well well.
Damn straight: Ron Paul could do whatever he sets out to do, including all of the things I mentioned above, in fewer than 8 years.
TC @ 2:
How can he possibly be as confidently dismissive of Hillary or Giuliani's presidency ambitions. They are major candidates with widespread support. Their chances of being president are at least 10x greater
I don't see how any "Democrat" can sit here with and honestly try and bash Ron Paul, or anyone else for that matter. The November elections showed what the people of this country wanted. The democrats have absolutely 100% failed us, and have continued to let Bushco. carry on his illegal war with no accountability.
You know what, so what if Ron Paul's only "good" talking points are on the war and taxes, at least he has the balls to say it. This is why people are listening to him, and I don't give 2 shits about his other faults. To me, ending this illegal war in Iraq and holding those accountable who started it, is the most important thing for the future of our democracy.
Why is impeachment "off the table" Ms. Pelosi?
Libertarian @ 392:
You may be even audacious to call yourself Libertarian, but your audacity shrinks when you don't mention Libertarian 2008 presidential candidate George Phillies 2008.
Average Libertarian: "Phillies who?"
Seele^ @ 395:
I don't think I have mentioned God, but I do believe my rights and your rights are derived from Nature, and God, whether or not you believe in God, you still have natural rights. I'm not a Christian so please don't lump me with the bible thumpers.
Where does it say that corporations are bad? Aren't you supposed to be arguing against the corporations? Well it doesn't...it does however empower the people to speak out against corporatism as well as government corruption, which often times go hand in hand.
but if you want to play that game, we could just say "where in the Constitution does it say..." often times, the answer will be no where.
honesty @ 397:
As to why a Libertarian who hates corporations would call someone else a communist... well, there is a very good reason why Libertarians lose elections.
Haha,
Seele^ @ 399:
did you not just read that I said I don't belong to the LP? Although yes I do look at what they have to offer in terms of candidates, as well as the Constitution Party, I have found none better, who support the things I do than Ron Paul.
I will say it again though for sake of understanding.....libertarianism is not the same as LP
we could just say “where in the Constitution does it say…” often times, the answer will be no where.
- Then you aren't a constitutionalist! If you are a constitutionalist, start quoting it, otherwise quit invoking it's name and telling us we should be doing something that is not expressly explained in the constitution!
Seele^ @ 404:
are you serious, there is nothing more pro-Constitution than saying "the Constitution does not give the federal government the authority to...(fill in the blank)" yep some things it explicitly does, and they are all spelled out for you if you ever care to read the document. yet there is the matter of the simple phrase "Congress shall make no laws..."
your statement doesn't make any sense, im not telling any one to do anything, im telling the federal government they CANNOT do things.
The Libertarians posting here should start applying some logic to their statements, since all of Libertarian platforms and ideology is based on Theory - because you are not winning any arguments here. For example:
When you say you are some "Constitutionalist" maybe, quote the constitution for a change? And if you call yourself "Libertarian" maybe you should be vocal in support of the Libertarian Party? Just a thought that may help you when you go head to head with a Progressive.
honesty @ 394:
A reference to fiction, but, none the less, mafiosi are direct descendents of the feudal system, a system which is based on allegiences owed counts, lords and kings. In that system power isn't derived from the people- might= right.
Are you a member of a well regulated militia? If ya were, then, hey, build that nuke! If not, the Constitution, other than forbiddin' the government to quarter troops in yer home, gives ya no right to defend either yer person or yer private property. Those rights may be derived from the common law, but since those rights aren't strictly codified Constitutionally, if yer not a member of a well regulated militia, the 2nd Amendment guarantees no rights and offers no relief.
that should tell you that we have a controlled media. a fmr spinster for the Clintons parading as a "journalist." no rational, or intellectually critical thinker would ever speculate on such nonsense. "You're not gonna win." Who the frak are you the Oracle of Delphi?? Bet you never guessed Ol' Bill was getting a wax job under the oval office desk.
puhhhleeze! Goerge, why don't you ask Cheney something tough, like where the frakk were he on 911, does he in fact deny the fact as asserted by Norman Minnetta that he told his aide that the shoot down order still stands? Or who were with his heart attack prone ass in the secret energy meeting. what a douche. oooh you're so tough stephano, what an apologist shill. watch him to be the first to kiss the boots of a fascist neo-con nazi thug, freakin kiss ass to the ruling elite. get a life!!
Ron Paul Jan 21, 2009-Jan 20 2017!!!
Seele^ @ 409:
I don't even know where to begin with you. Quote the Constitution? with regards to what? you havnt asked my any Constitutional questions besides the one about corporations, which I answered. I don't think you realize that when something is not in the Constitution explicitly, it does not give the federal government authority on that particular issue, and will either fall to the state or to that people. And i dont know how many times I need to explain to you that libertarianism is different than the LP, get out of your party mindset.
honesty - you can call me a communist, a stalinist, even Marx's love child. I don't care. I am for issues. You can call these issues inspired by satan himself but it won't change the fact i am for them. This is the situation you will find with most progressives. If you have a different solution to ours, feel free to explain it. But be warned: you will face scrutiny from us where we find fault with it.
Yeah, Steph. It's all about the horse race. Ideas aren't important...just money.
Bulldog, yes Jon does... but his show is not a news show... it is a satire of a news show.
Stephie and Katie rule our media. How do you like it?
More, more, more
How do you like it, how do you like it?
Anyway....im through correcting your misconceptions about the Constitution and about libertarianism, you are taking nothing but pot shots, and havnt made a single argument yourself. gone for lunch...
Seele^ @ 413:
ill respond to this one though, it was the other guy who called you a communist, not me. what you offered me was not scrutiny, it was pot shot misconceptualizations about what libertarianism is, and how the constitution works
Krimea @ 411:
Talked about the media waaaaay up-thread, but here it goes again.
Strictly defined, the 1st Amendment allows the right of free speech.
As defined, the 14th Amendment gives equal protection under the law to corporations. That includes the protection of the 1st Amendment.
So, usin' the libertarian argument, not only are corporations within their rights to say anything they want- short of fomentin' a riot- but also, the FCC is un-Constitutional.
Seems to me that Paul is hoisted on his own petard.
Libertarian @ 412:
Here is where I get the Constitutionalist Libertarian. When you claim the constitution "does not give the federal government authority on that particular issue"
See the Constitution of the United States - Article 1 - Section 8
honesty @ 421:
Well that's just swell!
Why didn't they phrase the 2nd Amendment that way?
Winning is not a measure of success?
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha,....
Stephanopoulos needs an industrial strenght enema.
LOL ANDY K, the 'Strict Constitutionalist Libertarian' doesn't seem to interested in quoting the Constitution anymore!
It's fun to toy with the Libertarian, and point out their logical errors, but we should not waste too much time on them, because they are just a fringe party who never are a threat at the polls.
honesty @ 424:
So, do you support the rights of school-kids to bring a Saturday Night Special and/or a .50 cal machine gun into the classroom in 2007?
Gun Control is awesome. Hitler told me so.
Calm down honesty. You need to articulate your policies in a better way then calling everyone fascists and idiotic lunes. Remember: Libertarians are not represented well in washington... or at all... ok, Libertarians have zero politicians in office at washington. You need to articulate your positions with less rage and more thought if you are to win people over to your marginalized side.
Whats with all this 'they are gonna take our guns away!' talk? Republicans and Democrats have been in power for over 100 years, however people can still purchase guns at convenient WallMart stores today.
I would like the Libertarians to explain where their guns have been taken away?
honesty - you lost me with the 'I should vote libertarian because Ron Paul is a family man' post.
honesty - also Ron Paul is a Republican too. He has the (R) by his name. Remember that when you make fun of me for voting for either Republican or Democrat.
GS was rude. Although he makes WAY more sense the other repuke candidates combined, Paul is too sold on the "invisible hand" of the market.
honesty @ 430:
:roll: and out come the nonsequiturs, platitudes, and rethuglicon talking points. good job.
look, dude, you're whoring a conservative on a progressive blog. you're not going to convince people who don't believe in conservative ideals to support a conservative candidate. so he's not your average republican fascist twerp- that doesn't mean he's the candidate for us. give it a rest already.
honesty @ 394:
Good man!! You finally realize what I just did this year:) I hope today others here will start looking and listening to what REAL non corporate candidates have to say. HILL used to work for Wal-mart...need I say more?
honesty - Working Hard or Hardly Working? Remember: these communist democrats and fascist republicans have been in power for over 100 years, why do you think it has taken so long for them to ban guns?
Well Well Well @ 438:
Why don't these two noobs realize that Ron Paul is a republican congressman from Texas? And on that note: Since when does the 'free-trade' policies of Ron Paul = anti-corporation?
Dude free-trade means pro-corporation! Why is this so hard for Libertarians to understand?
And OH.
To all those who are being misled, being TERRORIZED by myopic partisans that Ron Paul is, oh my GOD....dare I say it....L-L-Libert...arian, just be aware that Ron Paul wants to abolish corporate personhood. He's a POPULIST. His interest?
YOU!
don't let the fearmongers stop you from getting past their silly display of partisan fearmongering. Research Paul for yourself. Give him an honest look. You'll find he's different than you've been told.
No matter what Ron Paul believes about socialized medicine (which is going to happen in this country regardless), he is a better candidate, overall, than any of the other Free Mason puppets running for president.
Ron Paul has more cash on hand than McCain.
Don't count him out.
...
BREAKING NEWS:
For those of you who predicted a false flag incident to deflect attention from the Libby commutation ... you were right.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/07/08/people.aiken.ap/index.html
Bic @ 43:
That's right. There's a clip of Adam Corolla hanging up on Coulter after she was scheduled to be on his radio show and then showing up late and lamenting she couldn't hang around long....and Corolla deals with her as one should-he hangs up on her. Then he rants to his staff on-air-it's very funny. "Come in here an hour and a half late and tell me you're short on time. Of course you're short on time. You're an hour-and-a-half late. Go and sell your crappy books to your lame cable outlets." Then one of his staff says something like "I say this Ann Coulter: why the long face?" Anyway, yeah, that's how Ann Coulter should be dealt with, or how Letterman dealt with Bill O'Reilly-not allowing him to monopolize a talk show segment. Coulter was snippy with Corolla though even when she was late....and did you guys see how petulant she was in her segments with Tweety? When she doesn't have enough time to plug her books, you see how snippy she gets? Ah yes, Repubs, the party of ideas. Yeah, you treat a-holes with disdain, but guys like Paul, at least let them get their words out.
GS what a dickhead. No balls schoolyard bully. Crap interviewer, this kind of "discourse" doesn´t help anyone. I bet his momma taught him better.
Hey Guys,
I used to be a liberal and a democrat and was for all taxes and thought that we should have em to fund alot of gov't programs. However, the more I read about Ron Paul and about what taxes truly are the more you see it hurts the middle class and people trying to break into higher classes in life. For example, alot of what people do not understand is, large corporations make the majority of income in america but get away from paying true taxes by circumventing the current tax code. Small business does not get the same treatment and are not on the same level playing field and have to suffer by paying alot. If there was no IRS but a flat tax...then no large corpoaration would have an excuse of not paying tax...everyone is on the same level. In this way you can generate more govt income to run liberal type programs. The current system only hurts people who try to earn a living while giving enormous tax breaks to rich people who can hide there assets in large corps and get away with not paying taxes
If you're a liberal, you should check out all the things he has said about ethnic minorities over at http://dneiwert.blogspot.com. If you really are a liberal, you will not want to vote for this guy. I'm not sure why you are responding to my comment. I was simply responding to Otay who made a very dry crack about wondering whether someone could do so much damage in 8 years. I said, yeah, about 6.5. Paul has guts, but he's also for the abolition of the IRS, the Education dept., NEA, you name it. So to be quite honest, I really don't see any way an honest liberal can truly get behind this guy, with all due respect.
I hate waste, I would love to see the end of the dept of education/NEA (Create competition for public money) you can allow private companies to get public money if they deliver a better service. Its you're kids education and things are not getting better no matter how much money you throw at the public system we are still behind. Now what I mean by this is that nobody should pay..just public money. Telephone companies compete for you're money and schools should compete for you're kids.
Next on the list would be the DEA...that has to be focused on something other than pot. 54% of the budget goes to fighting pot. (30 to 40 billion). He wouldn't make all drugs decriminalized (Political suicide) but pot probably.
Next the surveillance NSA, do you like this? He would end that. CIA would still be there but it would get the hell out of the business of toppling governments and killing people for special interests (Oil).
FEDERAL RESERVE this is the head of the snake of corruption. Since 1913 America ceased to be a Republic and has been controlled by the banks since then in a pseudo communist central banking system. Look a Thomas Jeffersons quotes about central banks.
Maybe a lot of people should look at the details (not pointing at you) if you have a Jeffersonian candidate in office you will not lose. He said himself he cannot get rid of all the social programs because of the damage that has been done with inflation and bad trade deals.
I could go on forever but I do not have time:)
When all the tv talking heads tell people that you aren't going to win, dumbasses will listen. Now, Ron Paul has a lot of problems (even if he does have a couple decent positions), so I don't want him to win; still, though, it's very wrong of him to say that on national tv.
"just because he happens to be a populist?" Well, the Dems were populists before the election, now they are populists and "donothingers", going down slope, ain't we? To think that it has to take Cindy Sheehan to directly challenge the House speaker in the upcoming California election to make her notice the basic requests and concerns of the electorate. Geez. A Greek would take a look at this disarray called US democracy and say, it just ain't f******g it. George is a disgrace to all the Greeks, ancient and present.
Speaking only for myself, Bic, I have researched Ron Paul. And although I agree with several of the things he supports, I strongly disagree with others. Overall, I won't vote for him. He does not represent my interests. It's not that I'm "TERRORIZED", even by Libertarians. ;)
I just don't agree with them (and him) on balance.
awww. that's pretty rude.
yeah right, ron will never win. He just won the New Hampshire straw poll with 65% of the vote. Rudy was in 2nd with only 8%. Ron just came in 2nd in the Georgia straw poll, behind only Freddy who isn't even officially running. Maybe....just maybe......it won't take $100 mil to win the nomination.
Ron Paul is turning the traditional political process on it's head
Let's see...
...bring the troops home
...end the war on drugs
...enhance/reestablish civil liberties
...end foreign military adventurism (ie, undeclared wars)
Yeah, what liberal could be for that? ...snark...
...
Well Well Well @ 28:
No, Paul would just end the Federal government's role in these matters. He thinks that if a power or right isn't specifically spelled out in the Constitution, then these matters should be left to the individual states. So California might choose to legalize weed in Paul's panacea, while Georgia would be within its rights to draw and quarter anyone in possession of one freakin' seed.
george steph. did the same thing to gravel although gravel took it much better...
Under the existential candidate (the whole ron paul clip is there too)
Anyone know where we can e-mail Step-punk-opolis? I'd like to forward these comments to him. Like his War Room buddy James Carville, lil Punkolis showed what a condescending ass he is.
George should look at his ratings. There's a reason why his is the lowest-rated Sunday morning political talk show.
If George had half the balls of Ron Paul, people might take his shtick seriously.
[Deleted. 9/11conspiracy stuff here, and you know it-Sitemonitor]
Narendra @ 54:
___________________
RIGHT ON! I had the same "transformation" so to speak as you did. I became an independent. I have liberal social view and conservative fiscal views. Keep reading about him and things could work in the way he says it could.
Narenda - I'm betting most people on here know that big business gets away with almost anything they want - including war apparently. Progressives are not for big business, and that's probably the main reason Hillary will not win. Progressives are not "for" taxes and big government, they're for equality in chance. Everyone should have a legitimate chance. Sometimes you need a big program to allow for the millions of people in this country to have a fair chance. Medicare, Social Security etc are only there to give everyone a fair chance. Republicans certainly aren't for small business, as you can see by the no bid contracts and corporate greed currently at unprecedented levels.
I like having Ron Paul in the government, I just wouldn't want him to be pres.
at least Paul had the courage of his convictions, even if he's worse than the shrub.
stephie is a clintonite and thinly-veiled corporatist shill. I watched what I could (more than 7 minutes) and all I can say is it really looked like the belittling was part of a plan.
Flat tax sounds fair, but look it up. It puts a much heavier burden on the poor and middle class than on the big businesses and the rich -
Get informed!!
But wait one minute here,
George Stephonopolis could have said that very same thing about any of the GOP primary candidates, couldn't he?
For sure he could do the same to any GOP candidate that wins the Primary, and then runs against a heavily favored Dem..........
pinhead @ 436:
Yes, Please self-proclaimed libertarians, give it a rest with your conservative talking points. All your smoke and mirrors don't cover up the fact Ron Paul is just another republican from texas.
But really, Mr. Paul should have countered by asking the dweeb,,, How do you know that George? Do you have some inside info that the American people should know about George? Like election fraud and vote rigging?,, or have you had a sudden bout of precognition,, because I did not realize you were clairvoyant, or have you been gazing into your little crystal balls?
Seele^ @ 442:
honesty is just a shrill for the GOP. Will he be voting Libertarian in 2008 when Ron dosn't make the nomination? Nahhh.
Well Well Well @ 445:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....mp;search=
Check this video out with an open mind.
Well Well Well is just a shrill for the GOP. Will he be voting Libertarian in 2008 when Ron dosn’t make the nomination? Nahhh.
But really, I would like to know why George was so antagonistic towards Dr. Paul to say such a thing. You're not going to win.... He definitely seemed biased by saying such a thing. It was like in a story when the evil character (his mask falling away momentarily) tells the good guy,,,Ssssss, You're NOT going to win.
Login or Register to post comments.