Vice President Paul?

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.
rrnate
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3672
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 6:33 pm
Location: Madison's Corporate Underbelly
Contact:

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby rrnate » Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:44 pm

I think we can all agree that around these parts, I am well-established as a classic conservative. That being said, I am not sure I can vote for my beloved party's presumptive nominee (Mitt Romney). While I am sure he will cut my taxes and give the power back to the job creators, I am concerned about his lack of truly Christian values. Without that sort of moral compass, what road will he take us down?

johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:50 am

[quote="pjbogart"]It seems like John Henry is following a popular tactic amongst Republicans these days. They pretend to be disaffected Obama supporters

Wow, lots of good meat in that post, PJ.

First, I am not a disaffected Obama supporter. I am not even sure what that means. I did not vote for or support him in 2008. I very reluctantly supported McCain and that only because of Palin.

I may be an Obama supporter this year if Romney does what I expect he does. Obama, by any objective measure (see my list) has been a horrible president. He has been horrible for the US as a whole but he has been especially horrible for progressives.

He has basically killed the progressive movement. Many have tried over the years with varying degrees of success. Obama has succeeded where others failed. Look at your recent election for just one example. Or the 2010 election for another. Or the 2012 elections for another Never mind who is going to win, just look at all the progressives on both sides who have either called it quits or been primaried out.

I think all this is terrific. I think that, absent some radical surprise by Romney, it merits supporting Obama.

>and then create a laundry list of reasons not to support >Obama that are directed specifically at the liberal >mindset.

You seem to agree that all of my "laundry list" is true yet you still support Obama? You chant the mantra "Bush was worse, Bush was worse, neener, neener, neener"

So HOW was Bush worse? Everything Bush did Obama is doing in spades. Obama is going even further. He has committed an act of war against Iran without a congressional declaration of war. Bush at least had a congressional declaration of war before he went into Afghanistan and Iraq. (Or an AUMF which the courts meets the constitutional requirement of the declaration of war)

You are OK with that?

>Note that John says nothing about why he won't be >supporting Romney

I thought I had been pretty explicit about why I support Obama over Romney. We need a revolution in this country. Obama will bring it. Not on purpose but he will bring it anyway. "Worse is better". Haven't I said that several times?

Romney won't. He will kill all the gains we have made over the past four years.

>He's a moderate, so you can trust his opinion on why

Good Lord, Man! I am a moderate? I consider myself a fairly radical person politically. I want to destroy (via the voting booth) the federal government. I want it to provide military defense and little else. I think the only legitimate function of govt is military, police, courts and pretty much nothing else.

I think Ron Paul is far too moderate but he is the best we've got.

I am a minarchist. (Though I prefer "liberal") I am pretty close to an anarchist, though not quite. I do see some role for govt.

I might also point out that I am not a Republican nor am I a republican party supporter. I did vote for Paul in Primaries but that is the closest I've ever gotten to casting a Repo ballot. The one time I ever voted for Prez, I voted for McGovern.

>Obama is the most evil man on the planet.

When did I say he is evil? I don't think he is evil. A bumbling fool (but with a very high IQ!!!) but hardly evil. And I will not vote for him (neither will you, actually) as I live in PR and PR has no presidential electors.

>Ah, so you have a problem with the "Repo wing of the >DC Party."

My problem is with both Repo and Demmie wing of the DC Party.

I am not a member of the Tea Party but I fully support all that they do.

BTW: I will discuss why I have problems with SS, PP, support flat tax etc but will have to wait til tonight or tomorrow. My son is graduating today after what seems like an eon in medical school, internships board exams, and other rigamarole. So, priorities and all. Much as I would like to continue, I have to leave.

John Henry

Francis Di Domizio
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3453
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 8:11 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby Francis Di Domizio » Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:22 am

johnfajardohenry wrote: My son is graduating today after what seems like an eon in medical school, internships board exams, and other rigamarole. So, priorities and all. Much as I would like to continue, I have to leave.

John Henry



Wow, I hope you or he paid for all of his schooling out of your pocket and didn't get any of that icky government financial aid stuff.

Bludgeon
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1291
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 2:27 am

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby Bludgeon » Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:36 am

I will never stop being surprised and impressed by the tenacity of Ron Paul's supporters. I love him, think he's great, but he brings only risk to a ticket that is starting to look like a sure thing by itself. Romney's not McCain, he's rising in the swing states just by letting Obama punch himself out; this is a calculated campaign. Anyone but wallpaper would be a needless distraction.

pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6563
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby pjbogart » Fri Jun 15, 2012 6:32 pm

My apologies to you, Mr. John Henry. I sincerely believed you were pretending that you weren't a lunatic.

johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:11 pm

Francis,

I paid cash, full sticker price, for my son's and my daughter's (BSChE) educations. Not one nickle of tuition aid, student loan, grants or other money taken from taxpayers.

They also went to religious schools, Seventh Day Adventist and Catholic for K-12. I paid cash for that, too.

I owe an obscene amount of money, including an upside down mortgage but they get to start their lives clean.

Since you seem to think this is a proper question, somehow, let me ask you:

Who paid for your education?

John Henry

johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:17 pm

So PJ,

Can I take it you are happy with all the gains the progressives have made under Obama?

As I said, I am very happy what he has done for the movement. I'm an anti-progressive, though.

I am under the impression you consider yourself a progressive. (Correct me if I am wrong)

I don't know what you have to be happy about.

I don't know why you would support Obama.

I would think you would go for Romney to gain the movement a breathing spell to regroup and rethink. (Or perhaps just think)

John Henry

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21436
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby Henry Vilas » Sat Jun 16, 2012 7:07 pm

johnfajardohenry wrote:Who paid for your education?

John Henry

The G.I. Bill. Some call that socialism. Do you?

Francis Di Domizio
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3453
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 8:11 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby Francis Di Domizio » Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:21 pm

johnfajardohenry wrote:Francis,

I paid cash, full sticker price, for my son's and my daughter's (BSChE) educations. Not one nickle of tuition aid, student loan, grants or other money taken from taxpayers.

They also went to religious schools, Seventh Day Adventist and Catholic for K-12. I paid cash for that, too.

I owe an obscene amount of money, including an upside down mortgage but they get to start their lives clean.

Since you seem to think this is a proper question, somehow, let me ask you:

Who paid for your education?

John Henry



John,

My question was based on your claim that the government should only pay for the Military and little else. It's at least nice to see one over the top conservative who backs up his rants with actions. I've never made such a stupid claim, so I'm not at all embarrassed to admit I took out student loans (though having a parent who was a professor at an affiliated school did help with my over all costs). Since part of the purpose of government is to improve the nation, I see no issue with it supporting the further education of its youth.

johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Sun Jun 17, 2012 12:21 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:
johnfajardohenry wrote:Who paid for your education?

John Henry

The G.I. Bill. Some call that socialism. Do you?


Nope.

The Navy funded 3 of my degrees. Some as tuition assistance where they picked up 75% or so and I paid the rest. This was while on active duty. The balance they paid for under the GI Bill after I got out.

I consider both part of my pay packet/compensation. Same as leave, medical, uniforms and all the other things they paid me. An *earned* benefit in exchange for my time and labor.

A low interest student loan or financial grant is not normally earned. (Some schools do have work programs) That is what I disagree with.

No different than my daughter's private employer paying for her MSEM under their tuition assistance program.

In 2004 I got an MSBE and, because my VA benefits had expired, I paid cash for it.

I think that many govt jobs are unnecessary and could be eliminated, including many military positions. On the other hand, as long as they do exist, I do think that the employee is entitled to their pay. Pay includes both current and deferred cash and non-cash benefits.

John Henry

johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Sun Jun 17, 2012 12:28 pm

Perhaps I should point out that I realize that none of this education was completely unsubsidized.

While we took no direct subsidies, the mere fact that they went to schools that receive various govt funds means that to some extent the education was indirectly subsidized.

I think even the religious K-12 schools got govt cheese.

I wish it weren't but that is a fact of life today and one of my big issues with the way our govt works. I avoid subsidies but in the US today, if I breathe in, I am probably being subsidized. When I breathe out, I am probably subsidizing someone else.

John Henry

pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6563
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby pjbogart » Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:48 pm

Autonomy and self-reliance are largely illusions in modern society. Libertarians don't really resent government so much as they resent democracy. One of the unfortunate things about democracy is that you aren't the only one who gets to vote.

I get my bike trails, you get your F16's.

johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:25 am

pjbogart wrote:I get my bike trails, you get your F16's.


You really need to stop and think this through a bit, PJ. I see two gaping logical fallacies in this statement:

First, I think we would get near universal agreement that defense (the F-16's) is a legitimate function of any government. I think we would also agree that it is specifically provided for in the Constitution:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

I think we would also get near universal agreement that the military benefits the US as a whole.

(Let's not get into quibbles about how good a job it does.)

So taxing everyone to pay for the military seems pretty logical.

The bike paths, on the other hand, benefit the local people in a local community. Not even very many of those people. They may or may not be a good thing but they do not benefit anyone outside the local area.

We could also argue about whether bike paths are something that any govt should be paying for. I would be very interested to here any logical argument justifying the federal, or even a state, govt paying for it.

There is certainly nothing in the federal Constitution justifying bike paths. (No, "Promote the general welfare doesn't cover it")

So you want bike paths, you pay for them. My preference would be pay for them privately. I would not strongly object if your city wanted to provide them and charge users the full cost.

If your city wants to provide bike paths with monies taken at gunpoint from the money's creators, I think it is wrong.

John Henry

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21436
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby Henry Vilas » Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:36 am

A more relevant provision in our Constitution is this, from Article I, Section 8:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States..."

Notice the equal emphasis give to common Defence and general Welfare. Do libertarians support one and deny the other?

johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: Vice President Paul?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:02 am

pjbogart wrote:Autonomy and self-reliance are largely illusions in modern society.


Shouldn't you have put quote marks around that? I think it is a quote from Mussolini in the 1920s to justify his version of national socialism. (Fascism)

It is certainly of a piece with his best known quote, no?

"All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."

Or this?

"The keystone of the Fascist doctrine is its conception of the State, of its essence, its functions, and its aims. For Fascism the State is absolute, individuals and groups relative."

(12:04 edited to add quote marks)


John Henry


Return to “National Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests