Republican Primaries

  • Thread starter Thread starter Scott_Lafrance
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
With me it´s Herman Cain. The smartest intelligence analyst I ever knew once told me. The best anti-tank weapon is another tank. God bless:thumbsup:👍👍
I like Hermain Cain too. I love his non politician answers… I love the ‘tell it like it is’ attitude he has.
 
I read his link and there are the usual libertarian fairyland ideas that you can eliminate the fed & reinstitute the gold standard, and it will not have any effect whatsoever on our current financial system or the world financial system. The problem is it starts from the premise that these currency systems are already in effect but does not take into account the cost of implementing them. And here’s the kicker-even if you were able to implement them without any economic cost. They would not eliminate the bust and boom cycles of the economies of the world. Nor would there eliminate the economic problems facing us today.

Simplistic solutions to complex problems-the hallmark of Ron Paul
We will NEVER solve the crisis until the oligarchs that control capital are brought to justice.
Paul takes steps toward that, who else will?
Do you wanna end up like Greece?
 
So I gather the fact that the century before the fed saw the US dollar modestly gain value, and the century after the fed’s creation saw the US dollar lose 95 percent of its value is completely lost on you somehow?

mises.org/mobile/daily.aspx?Id=5172

jomoco
Can you show us that the institution of the fed is the causeand not the integration of the worldwide economy. And again none of the studies take into account the the cost of implementing these draconian measures. Do you really think as integrated as the worldwide economy is that the United States can just call up& eliminate the fed and return to the gold standard and not have massive turmoil in the world financial markets?

Again simplistic solutions to complex problems. I had made my last post on Ron Paul in this thread as he is absolutely unelectable and dealing with his supporters is like trying to deal with the Jehovah witness who comes to your front door.
 
That’s easy. The strength and stability of our society does not hinge on women’s ordination as it does with marriage - hence the state’s interest in preserving the traditional institution of marriage. So your challenge falls short. On what grounds would a libertarian state which says “I own my body” keep the Dr. Kevorkians out of business? A fair question that deserves a calm, non - sarcastic answer it seems to me.

Ishii
But the state is the one that is attacking marriage. This is where your arguement falls flat. The state isn’t preserving it, it is altering it, either legislatively or by judicial fiat.
 
That’s easy. The strength and stability of our society does not hinge on women’s ordination as it does with marriage - hence the state’s interest in preserving the traditional institution of marriage. So your challenge falls short. On what grounds would a libertarian state which says “I own my body” keep the Dr. Kevorkians out of business? A fair question that deserves a calm, non - sarcastic answer it seems to me.

Ishii
If I’m not mistaken, Ron Paul is a constitutional conservative and a libertarian. They are not the same thing. The federal governments only interests should be to make sure they are excercising their enumerated powers as efficiently as possible. It is up to the individual states to determine for themselves whether or not they want to license marriage, or ban assisted suicide. If all libertarians wanted to flock to one state and do so then they should have that right as you would have the right to move there and politically fight them over it or stay away from it if you so choose.

Why do people argue for a federal ban on something like marijuana, but ignore the fact their is no federal laws on other immoral acts?
 
If I’m not mistaken, Ron Paul is a constitutional conservative and a libertarian. They are not the same thing. The federal governments only interests should be to make sure they are excercising their enumerated powers as efficiently as possible. It is up to the individual states to determine for themselves whether or not they want to license marriage, or ban assisted suicide. If all libertarians wanted to flock to one state and do so then they should have that right as you would have the right to move there and politically fight them over it or stay away from it if you so choose.

Why do people argue for a federal ban on something like marijuana, but ignore the fact their is no federal laws on other immoral acts?
Right!!! Where is the federal ban on buggery?
 
Can you show us that the institution of the fed is the causeand not the integration of the worldwide economy. And again none of the studies take into account the the cost of implementing these draconian measures. Do you really think as integrated as the worldwide economy is that the United States can just call up& eliminate the fed and return to the gold standard and not have massive turmoil in the world financial markets?

Again simplistic solutions to complex problems. I had made my last post on Ron Paul in this thread as he is absolutely unelectable and dealing with his supporters is like trying to deal with the Jehovah witness who comes to your front door.
You keep spewing your rhetoric like he wants to end it overnight and let the chaos insue.
You repeat over and over the same points and they are never all together intellectually honest.
 
You keep spewing your rhetoric like he wants to end it overnight and let the chaos insue.
You repeat over and over the same points and they are never all together intellectually honest.
Whether we end the Fed overnight or not, chaos is going to ensue on a global scale. The only thing that will prevent that is a violent crackdown of martial law. Apparently that’s just fine, as long as the international banking cartels get paid. 🤷
 
I like Hermain Cain too. I love his non politician answers… I love the ‘tell it like it is’ attitude he has.
I like Herman Cain to but the thing that is endears us to him, his blunt speaking, is going to cause him problems. I think that perhaps this time around Herman Cain is going to gain name recognition and perhaps making a serious candidate in the future.

In my mind the only people who have a realistic chance of getting the nomination (in no particular order )are:

Perry
Pawelnty
Bachmann
Romney
Huntsman
 
I read his link and there are the usual libertarian fairyland ideas that you can eliminate the fed & reinstitute the gold standard, and it will not have any effect whatsoever on our current financial system or the world financial system. The problem is it starts from the premise that these currency systems are already in effect but does not take into account the cost of implementing them. And here’s the kicker-even if you were able to implement them without any economic cost. They would not eliminate the bust and boom cycles of the economies of the world. Nor would there eliminate the economic problems facing us today.

Simplistic solutions to complex problems-the hallmark of Ron Paul
You know Bob, our current so called “conservative” congressmen and senators have alot in common with you, in that they don’t know, or choose to ignore, their own American history.

This mantra of cutting taxes during an active war was unprecedented in our entire history as a nation until a couple of neocons named bush and cheney set that precedent in 2003.

articles.latimes.com/2003/jan/13/nation/na-outlook13

Do you appreciate the true difference between a real conservative and a neocon Bob?

You see one believes in paying his debts like a good fiscal conservative does as a matter of principle. While the other, the neocon, believes in passing his debts on to his children, or anyone else but him, as a matter of greed.

jomoco
 
I like Herman Cain to but the thing that is endears us to him, his blunt speaking, is going to cause him problems. I think that perhaps this time around Herman Cain is going to gain name recognition and perhaps making a serious candidate in the future.

In my mind the only people who have a realistic chance of getting the nomination (in no particular order )are:

Perry
Pawelnty
Bachmann
Romney
Huntsman
Agree. I love Hermain Cain but I dont see him lasting long in the primary season.

I would take Huntsman out of having any chance.
Perry
Romney
Pawlenty
Bachman

Thats the order I would say the primaries will go.
 
Agree. I love Hermain Cain but I dont see him lasting long in the primary season.

I would take Huntsman out of having any chance.
Perry
Romney
Pawlenty
Bachman

Thats the order I would say the primaries will go.
I think that Huntsman’s past stances on Cap n trade and homosexual marriage will cause him problems but he is in the top tier rather than the lower tier.

I will also make a bold prediction now and that is that Sarah Palin is not going to get into the race and that Rick Perry will.
 
Nope, they are conservatives. Well all but Huntsman anyway. Even McCain is a conservative. Take a look (all from this site: ontheissues.org )
Fortunately, I don’t rely on charts from organizations that clearly cannot call a spade a spade. When push comes to shove, Romney and McCain and their ilk fold. That is progressive light.
 
I think that Huntsman’s past stances on Cap n trade and homosexual marriage will cause him problems but he is in the top tier rather than the lower tier.

I will also make a bold prediction now and that is that Sarah Palin is not going to get into the race and that Rick Perry will.
Agree.

I dont think Palin is running either.
If Perry gets in, which I think he will, she will endorse him. From what I understand, they like each other.
 
And… If Perry gets in… he wins the primary and the Presidency.
 
But the state is the one that is attacking marriage. This is where your arguement falls flat. The state isn’t preserving it, it is altering it, either legislatively or by judicial fiat.
Is that what you call the Defense of Marriage Act? Is that attacking marriage?
 
Fortunately, I don’t rely on charts from organizations that clearly cannot call a spade a spade. When push comes to shove, Romney and McCain and their ilk fold. That is progressive light.
There is no Progressive lite. There is Progressive slow and Progressive fast. Our choices in 2008 were between those, we got Progressive fast.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top