Ron Paul retires from Congress

[IndyDave1776]

You wrote your daughter's assignment?

Does this remind you of the Cosby Show (which I rarely watched, but did catch this episode) in which the teacher makes Cosby come in for a conference about this daughter's report done as homework and ends up making him write on the board 100 times "I will not do my daughter's homework for her."

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Originally Posted by lucky4034
My 11 year old daughter came home during the election with an assignment to chose either Romney or Obama and then write a 1 page paper why you would vote for them.

I had a long talk with my daughter... then personally wrote a 3 page paper on who Ron Paul was and why he would be getting my vote and sent my daughter back to school.

I would have bet a thousand dollars that her teacher never heard of Ron Paul, Gary Johnson or even the Libertarian Party....

You wrote your daughter's assignment?

So what grade did [STRIKE]you[/STRIKE]...um...I mean she get on that paper?

 

[Liberty1911]

Have we true conservatives had any real success with the Republican party over the last several decades? Even if we can claim that the Republican party has slowed our descent, it has been too complacent, even an accomplice at times, when it should have been resolutely against it. The lesser of two evils is still too evil to be left in charge.

I think the Tea Party movement has done a lot to move the Republican party to the right. There have been some failures, but there are several Tea Party senators and quite a few in the House that influence the direction of the Republican party.

That's a great idea, actually. What are some ways we can make our message include a strong thread of personal responsibility in order to set us up for a later push for personal freedom?

My take on it is, zero additional "rights" until we establish personal responsibility. The last thing I want are pot heads living off the government dole, and homosexual couples suing landlords because they refuse to rent to them.

This is where I think modern Libertarians have left the reservation. For some reason, they just can't grasp that letting people have a free-for-all, while maintaining the current system of regulation and welfare, will only result in less freedom for responsible citizens than we had before, and a further erosion of actual Constitutional rights, as opposed to the made up "rights" that they are championing.

This doesn't make sense to me. My experience at Libertarian party events has always been that I am one of the youngest ones there. Everybody else was at least "family man" age and of respectable, upstanding appearance and demeanor. And most of the other young people I know aren't aware of the Libertarian Party and its goals.

Maybe I just don't hang out with enough young people who like to do drugs.

My comments were somewhat hyperbole. However, the main focus of the Libertarian party has always been drug legalization. We have far, far, greater problems in this country than some guy not being able to smoke a joint, but yet, this seems to be priority one of the Libertarian party.

Just look at the comments of the INGO Libertarians, every argument centers around the "failure of the drug war", or "some guy going to jail for smoking a joint". Yeah, whatever. On the list of things that need fixed in this country, that would be somewhere around number 1,786.

Also, check out their position on immigration. They have an insane open borders policy. Again, they want an immediate free-for-all. "Open the borders!!", "Do it now!!!" Clearly, the dope smoking has affected their ability to reason. How about we first cut off all welfare aid to immigrants, then we can talk about throwing open the borders.

The modern Libertarian party has nothing to offer conservatives. What they want is freedom without responsibility, something true conservatives will never support.

 

[hornadylnl]

I think the Tea Party movement has done a lot to move the Republican party to the right. There have been some failures, but there are several Tea Party senators and quite a few in the House that influence the direction of the Republican party.




My take on it is, zero additional "rights" until we establish personal responsibility. The last thing I want are pot heads living off the government dole, and homosexual couples suing landlords because they refuse to rent to them.

This is where I think modern Libertarians have left the reservation. For some reason, they just can't grasp that letting people have a free-for-all, while maintaining the current system of regulation and welfare, will only result in less freedom for responsible citizens than we had before, and a further erosion of actual Constitutional rights, as opposed to the made up "rights" that they are championing.

Just which libertarian is asking to maintain the current system of regulation and welfare?



My comments were somewhat hyperbole. However, the main focus of the Libertarian party has always been drug legalization. We have far, far, greater problems in this country than some guy not being able to smoke a joint, but yet, this seems to be priority one of the Libertarian party.

Just look at the comments of the INGO Libertarians, every argument centers around the "failure of the drug war", or "some guy going to jail for smoking a joint". Yeah, whatever. On the list of things that need fixed in this country, that would be somewhere around number 1,786.

Also, check out their position on immigration. They have an insane open borders policy. Again, they want an immediate free-for-all. "Open the borders!!", "Do it now!!!" Clearly, the dope smoking has affected their ability to reason. How about we first cut off all welfare aid to immigrants, then we can talk about throwing open the borders.

Sorry, never touched any "illegal" drugs in my life.

The modern Libertarian party has nothing to offer conservatives. What they want is freedom without responsibility, something true conservatives will never support.

Again, please provide some examples of libertarians wanting freedom without personal responsibility.

 

[Liberty1911]

Again, please provide some examples of libertarians wanting freedom without personal responsibility.

That would be you and anyone else demanding support of new "rights", without first demanding personal responsibility be legally established.

So, if I'm wrong, here's your chance to prove it.

Would you support legalization of pot tomorrow before we require 100% personal accountability and responsibility. And by personal accountability and responsibility, I mean zero tax dollars would be used to support anyone who smokes pot. If you have money for pot, then you have money to feed yourself, etc.

So, would you?

 

[hornadylnl]

That would be you and anyone else demanding support of new "rights", without first demanding personal responsibility be legally established.

So, if I'm wrong, here's your chance to prove it.

Would you support legalization of pot tomorrow before we require 100% personal accountability and responsibility. And by personal accountability and responsibility, I mean zero tax dollars would be used to support anyone who smokes pot. If you have money for pot, then you have money to feed yourself, etc.

So, would you?

Again, which libertarians here are for spending tax dollars to support anyone who smokes pot? You keep claiming that libertarians are against personal accountability and responsibility. Please quote some examples.

 

[hornadylnl]

No, I don't want tax dollars going in the form of welfare to anyone. That includes earned income tax credits used to buy guns, etc. That includes Jim Irsay and all the rest of the corporate whores. That includes farmers. Do I need to go on?

 

[Liberty1911]

Again, which libertarians here are for spending tax dollars to support anyone who smokes pot? You keep claiming that libertarians are against personal accountability and responsibility. Please quote some examples.

I guess you're pleading the 5th then.

You can easily refute my assertion by answering the question.

 

[hornadylnl]

I guess you're pleading the 5th then.

You can easily refute my assertion by answering the question.

Read my next post. I knew you'd come back with this. You're making the assertion. You prove it. AGAIN, POST SOME QUOTES FROM LIBERTARIANS WHO WANT TO MAINTAIN WELFARE FOR DRUGGIES.

 

[Liberty1911]

No, I don't want tax dollars going in the form of welfare to anyone. That includes earned income tax credits used to buy guns, etc. That includes Jim Irsay and all the rest of the corporate whores. That includes farmers. Do I need to go on?

No, you need to convince the Libertarian party to focus on these issues instead of trying to create more government dependents and regulation by championing "rights" that aren't in the Constitution.

 

[hornadylnl]

No, you need to convince the Libertarian party to focus on these issues instead of trying to create more government dependents and regulation by championing "rights" that aren't in the Constitution.

Again, I'm not creating more government dependents. How many government dependents did the house repubs just prop up with the fiscal cliff fiasco?

FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME. PLEASE POST QUOTES FROM LIBERTARIANS WHO ADVOCATE WELFARE FOR DRUGGIES. I GUESS SINCE YOU SAY IT'S SO, IT'S SO.

 

[Liberty1911]

Read my next post. I knew you'd come back with this. You're making the assertion. You prove it. AGAIN, POST SOME QUOTES FROM LIBERTARIANS WHO WANT TO MAINTAIN WELFARE FOR DRUGGIES.

I never said libertarians want welfare for druggies. You said that.

I said Libertarians want to give people freedom, via newly minted "rights", without first requiring 100% legal accountability and responsibility, i.e freedom without responsibility.

Again, you can easily prove me wrong by answering the question I asked.

 

[hornadylnl]

That would be you and anyone else demanding support of new "rights", without first demanding personal responsibility be legally established.

So, if I'm wrong, here's your chance to prove it.

Would you support legalization of pot tomorrow before we require 100% personal accountability and responsibility. And by personal accountability and responsibility, I mean zero tax dollars would be used to support anyone who smokes pot. If you have money for pot, then you have money to feed yourself, etc.

So, would you?

No, I don't want tax dollars going in the form of welfare to anyone. That includes earned income tax credits used to buy guns, etc. That includes Jim Irsay and all the rest of the corporate whores. That includes farmers. Do I need to go on?

The term "anyone" usually includes every swinging richard.

I never said libertarians want welfare for druggies. You said that.

Again, you keep claiming that libertarians don't demand personal accountability and responsibility. Please post some proof of that.

I said Libertarians want to give people freedom, via newly minted "rights", without first requiring 100% legal accountability and responsibility, i.e freedom without responsibility.

Again, you can easily prove me wrong by answering the question I asked.

I answered your question. I'll use crayon this time. No, I don't want druggies getting a dime in tax dollar. You know, the whole " I don't want tax dollars going in the form of welfare to anyone."

 

[Liberty1911]

The term "anyone" usually includes every swinging richard.

I answered your question. I'll use crayon this time. No, I don't want druggies getting a dime in tax dollar. You know, the whole " I don't want tax dollars going in the form of welfare to anyone."

LOL, you're still trying to answer a question I didn't ask. That would be an example of the numerous straw men you like to create.

To clarify, I'll ask it again

Would you support legalization of pot tomorrow before we require 100% personal accountability and responsibility? And by personal accountability and responsibility, I mean zero tax dollars would be used to support anyone who smokes pot. If you have money for pot, then you have money to feed yourself, etc.

Would you? That's a simple yes or no question. I would think someone who wanted to convert others to the Libertarian point of view wouldn't have any trouble answering that.

 

[rightwinger]

I still have my Ron Paul 2012 bumper sticker on my truck and its there to stay haha

 

[hornadylnl]

LOL, you're still trying to answer a question I didn't ask. That would be an example of the numerous straw men you like to create.

To clarify, I'll ask it again

Would you support legalization of pot tomorrow before we require 100% personal accountability and responsibility? And by personal accountability and responsibility, I mean zero tax dollars would be used to support anyone who smokes pot. If you have money for pot, then you have money to feed yourself, etc.

Would you? That's a simple yes or no question. I would think someone who wanted to convert others to the Libertarian point of view wouldn't have any trouble answering that.

No I would not support the legalization of pot without personal responsibility. But your question is a trap. Neither major political party is going to end welfare for the irresponsible.

Now please show me the legislation that the repub party has introduced to end welfare for the irresponsible. Conservatives love to talk about ending welfare but they sure haven't done a damn thing about it.

 

[hornadylnl]

I still have my Ron Paul 2012 bumper sticker on my truck and its there to stay haha

Get your Bloomberg/Boehner 2016 sticker now!

And to think that douche Boehner just retained Speaker of the House.

 

[lucky4034]

You wrote your daughter's assignment?

Yes I did... and put my name at the top.

 

[lucky4034]

So what grade did [STRIKE]you[/STRIKE]...um...I mean she get on that paper?

That was the last of a string of about 3-4 election based assignments.... I have no idea what happened after she turned it in.

 

[lucky4034]

LOL, you're still trying to answer a question I didn't ask. That would be an example of the numerous straw men you like to create.

To clarify, I'll ask it again

Would you support legalization of pot tomorrow before we require 100% personal accountability and responsibility? And by personal accountability and responsibility, I mean zero tax dollars would be used to support anyone who smokes pot. If you have money for pot, then you have money to feed yourself, etc.

Would you? That's a simple yes or no question. I would think someone who wanted to convert others to the Libertarian point of view wouldn't have any trouble answering that.

I would... if you do the same for anyone who needs any type of medicine for any reason...

NO MORE BAMACARE!!!

Also, if you do the same for anyone who purchases alcohol, coffee, cigarettes or any other item contains a stimulant of any kind.


Sound fair?