RNC Shuns Ron Paul, Supporters Root For Romney Defeat

[foszoe]

Why is it there are so many Ron Paul Supporters who support everything he does EXCEPT the biggest one, he remains a Republican. If he is so right on everything else, then do what he does and work within the party for change. That is the beauty of the Tea Party which overall is following Pauls philosophy by working to get more Tea party friendly candidates elected from the Republican party. Change comes from the bottom up not the top down. Take the townships which get you the counties which get you the Indiana House and US House, then take the state and US Senates. Then the Executive branch will be easy AND you don't have a bunch of yayhoos rubber stamping all the exec branch stuff you don't agree with or putting Judges in that are not in line with your viewpoints.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Why is it there are so many Ron Paul Supporters who support everything he does EXCEPT the biggest one, he remains a Republican. If he is so right on everything else, then do what he does and work within the party for change. That is the beauty of the Tea Party which overall is following Pauls philosophy by working to get more Tea party friendly candidates elected from the Republican party. Change comes from the bottom up not the top down. Take the townships which get you the counties which get you the Indiana House and US House, then take the state and US Senates. Then the Executive branch will be easy AND you don't have a bunch of yayhoos rubber stamping all the exec branch stuff you don't agree with or putting Judges in that are not in line with your viewpoints.

He tried to bring change the way he felt he could do it and unfortunately it has been proven that working within the party doesn't work. I wish I could share your assessment of the Tea Party. Initially it promised much good. The problem is that every neocon and his dog jumped on the wagon which has served to dilute the original message of less taxation and less government. At this point, if you are going to rely on the long march through the institutions as the vehicle of change, you are going to be sorely disappointed. First, that only works in an environment of freedom which no longer exists in this country. Second, if you take that much time, the fight will be over long before you have covered much distance at all. If you hold to this, I suggest studying up on the history of such vacation spots as Sarajevo because the place will have already self-destructed by then.

 

[foszoe]

He tried to bring change the way he felt he could do it and unfortunately it has been proven that working within the party doesn't work. I wish I could share your assessment of the Tea Party. Initially it promised much good. The problem is that every neocon and his dog jumped on the wagon which has served to dilute the original message of less taxation and less government. At this point, if you are going to rely on the long march through the institutions as the vehicle of change, you are going to be sorely disappointed. First, that only works in an environment of freedom which no longer exists in this country. Second, if you take that much time, the fight will be over long before you have covered much distance at all. If you hold to this, I suggest studying up on the history of such vacation spots as Sarajevo because the place will have already self-destructed by then.

Well I won't deny your assessment, but I don't believe the contention that voting for Johnson accomplishes anymore than voting for Romney or Obama. If someone can prove that point I would be more willing to listen to a reasoned argument for voting straight Libertarian tickets.

 

[hacksawfg]

The Tea Party is just as full of crap as the rest of Republicans, that's why. If healthcare funded by the government is bad (which it is), and everything should be privatized, then why does abortion have to be illegal? NOT THE GOVERMENT'S JOB. Similarly, are we going to federalize religion? If not, then who cares if a church wants to marry two dudes? Most TP'ers who profess limited government seem to have no problem with trying to tell people how to live their own lives. THAT'S why I support Johnson instead of the Tea Party and other Republicans. The easiest way to really shrink government is to get them the hell out of our personal lives, and I'm including the Patriot Act as the biggest part of that.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

He tried to bring change the way he felt he could do it and unfortunately it has been proven that working within the party doesn't work. I wish I could share your assessment of the Tea Party. Initially it promised much good. The problem is that every neocon and his dog jumped on the wagon which has served to dilute the original message of less taxation and less government. At this point, if you are going to rely on the long march through the institutions as the vehicle of change, you are going to be sorely disappointed. First, that only works in an environment of freedom which no longer exists in this country. Second, if you take that much time, the fight will be over long before you have covered much distance at all. If you hold to this, I suggest studying up on the history of such vacation spots as Sarajevo because the place will have already self-destructed by then.

So what are you saying? Because your plan is going so well, you denigrate everyone elses' efforts to go (approximately) in the same direction you want, but slow enough to build popular support - which you are at present demonstrably unable to do - in favor of supporting a rapid decline and collapse? Is that what your reference to Sarajevo is all about?

Once again Ron Paul supporters (and God Bless You All) your message hasn't found popular traction. If your principles are sound, is it that your message is wrong, your voices are weak, or your attitudes - most of you - are off-putting to the majority of Americans? The formula for political / philosophical success is out there and a proven meme to work from, why aren't you using it?

 

[IndyDave1776]

Well I won't deny your assessment, but I don't believe the contention that voting for Johnson accomplishes anymore than voting for Romney or Obama. If someone can prove that point I would be more willing to listen to a reasoned argument for voting straight Libertarian tickets.

I don't believe that it will generate what I would consider desired results this time, but one of four things will happen:

1. Johnson miraculously wins.

2. Obama wins, GOP either gets the message that it cannot continuing to ignore everyone but its 'establishment' crowd if it intends to win an election again, ever, or doesn't get it and becomes a footnote in history.

3. Romney wins, GOP hubris sets in and sets the stage for the next Obama, fact that Romney and Obama are remarkably similar notwithstanding.

4. Either Obama or Romney wins, but Johnson pulls a significant portion of the vote reminiscent of Ross Perot, or perhaps even more. Two things then happen. First the L party gets enough funding to make a viable appearance next time. Second, the establishment is sent a clear message that it may ignore as it did after getting kicked to the curb in 2006 and then blown out of the water in 2008, or it may take a hint and act accordingly, but this will happen only if those who are philosophically on board vote as such rather than getting sucked into the Anyone but Obama rhetoric.

 

[IndyDave1776]

The Tea Party is just as full of crap as the rest of Republicans, that's why. If healthcare funded by the government is bad (which it is), and everything should be privatized, then why does abortion have to be illegal? NOT THE GOVERMENT'S JOB. Similarly, are we going to federalize religion? If not, then who cares if a church wants to marry two dudes? Most TP'ers who profess limited government seem to have no problem with trying to tell people how to live their own lives. THAT'S why I support Johnson instead of the Tea Party and other Republicans. The easiest way to really shrink government is to get them the hell out of our personal lives, and I'm including the Patriot Act as the biggest part of that.

Indeed the invasion of the neocons derailed the Tea Party. Interesting that you mention abortion since this is one of the few social issues in which I support .gov 'interference'. I have not problem with people doing as they will to themselves. I believe this crosses the line into murdering someone else. Nevertheless, it is still an issue for the states under the Tenth Amendment.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

The Tea Party is just as full of crap as the rest of Republicans, that's why. If healthcare funded by the government is bad (which it is), and everything should be privatized, then why does abortion have to be illegal? NOT THE GOVERMENT'S JOB. Similarly, are we going to federalize religion? If not, then who cares if a church wants to marry two dudes? Most TP'ers who profess limited government seem to have no problem with trying to tell people how to live their own lives. THAT'S why I support Johnson instead of the Tea Party and other Republicans. The easiest way to really shrink government is to get them the hell out of our personal lives, and I'm including the Patriot Act as the biggest part of that.

Hell, I'm all in favor of legal abortion if we eliminate laws against all other sorts of manslaughter as well. I mean, if we're going to kill innocents for no other reason than that they're inconvenient, why not be able to kill the M-F who flipped you off at the stoplight or kicked your puppy?

 

[IndyDave1776]

So what are you saying? Because your plan is going so well, you denigrate everyone elses' efforts to go (approximately) in the same direction you want, but slow enough to build popular support - which you are at present demonstrably unable to do - in favor of supporting a rapid decline and collapse? Is that what your reference to Sarajevo is all about?

Once again Ron Paul supporters (and God Bless You All) your message hasn't found popular traction. If your principles are sound, is it that your message is wrong, your voices are weak, or your attitudes - most of you - are off-putting to the majority of Americans? The formula for political / philosophical success is out there and a proven meme to work from, why aren't you using it?

OK, I will be forthright with what I am thinking. I believe the country is finished. We do not have the time to spend a century sneaking through cracks as the leftists did starting with the Wilson administration. We do not have people in sufficient numbers who feel anything for the nation. Sure, they wave flags but they don't stop to think about what it means. They wave it but don't live it. Something on the order of half the population votes for a living. We have an all time record number of people on various forms of public assistance and more yet on .gov-contrived jobs. Most people simply don't give a damn. Punting is a long-shot, but I really don't think we have time to spend three or four generations trying to recondition the sheep to use their heads for anything other than hat racks and trying to break them of addiction to .gov candy.

 

[hacksawfg]

So what are you saying? Because your plan is going so well, you denigrate everyone elses' efforts to go (approximately) in the same direction you want, but slow enough to build popular support - which you are at present demonstrably unable to do - in favor of supporting a rapid decline and collapse? Is that what your reference to Sarajevo is all about?

Once again Ron Paul supporters (and God Bless You All) your message hasn't found popular traction. If your principles are sound, is it that your message is wrong, your voices are weak, or your attitudes - most of you - are off-putting to the majority of Americans? The formula for political / philosophical success is out there and a proven meme to work from, why aren't you using it?

Wait, you mean somebody running for office who says legitimate rape doesn't lead to pregnancy is less off-putting than legalizing marijuana and ending a fruitless expensive drug war?

Guess I'd better get off the glue

 

[rambone]

Why is it there are so many Ron Paul Supporters who support everything he does EXCEPT the biggest one, he remains a Republican. If he is so right on everything else, then do what he does and work within the party for change.

He is not one who feels beholden to support the Establishment or its agenda.

Ron Paul on Romney: "I don't fully endorse him for president."

 

[hornadylnl]

Don't forget that 38 house tea partiers voted to punt advise and consent from the senate.

 

[Prometheus]

I don't believe that it will generate what I would consider desired results this time, but one of four things will happen:

1. Johnson miraculously wins.

2. Obama wins, GOP either gets the message that it cannot continuing to ignore everyone but its 'establishment' crowd if it intends to win an election again, ever, or doesn't get it and becomes a footnote in history.

3. Romney wins, GOP hubris sets in and sets the stage for the next Obama, fact that Romney and Obama are remarkably similar notwithstanding.

4. Either Obama or Romney wins, but Johnson pulls a significant portion of the vote reminiscent of Ross Perot, or perhaps even more. Two things then happen. First the L party gets enough funding to make a viable appearance next time. Second, the establishment is sent a clear message that it may ignore as it did after getting kicked to the curb in 2006 and then blown out of the water in 2008, or it may take a hint and act accordingly, but this will happen only if those who are philosophically on board vote as such rather than getting sucked into the Anyone but Obama rhetoric.

Exactly. You want to get better? You have to take your medicine.

Sometimes you have to rebreak someones nose before repairing it.

People want the easy way out. That's what got us into this mess.

A nation of cowards gets the nation it deserves and right now, the American electorate is filled with cowards... and fools.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Wait, you mean somebody running for office who says legitimate rape doesn't lead to pregnancy is less off-putting than legalizing marijuana and ending a fruitless expensive drug war?

Guess I'd better get off the glue

That would probably be the best thing for you to do.

 

[hacksawfg]

Hell, I'm all in favor of legal abortion if we eliminate laws against all other sorts of manslaughter as well. I mean, if we're going to kill innocents for no other reason than that they're inconvenient, why not be able to kill the M-F who flipped you off at the stoplight or kicked your puppy?

The question still needs to be asked, is it better to not be born, or better to be born to someone who doesn't want you, won't love you, etc.? I would say if you support the possibility of being born into a loveless home where you are an afterthought, you don't really have a gripe about hoodlum kids who may have been born into that circumstance.

"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." Ben Franklin

In fact, call me a cold-hearted SOB (again), but I'll submit this:

"A 2001 study conducted by the Guttmacher Institute found that the average overall cost of an abortion in the United States was $468, a figure that has probably risen since then due to inflation, but that the average amount paid for an abortion (due to subsidies) is $372."

I'm guessing that whatever it costs today for a first or second term abortion is significantly less than the costs government pays out in welfare, possibly incarcerating kids who grow up in bad households or with irresponsible parenting. I would almost even go so far as to say if you want to make real welfare reform, take away any extra welfare benefits for having extra kids, let the government subsidize free birth control to those on welfare, and subsidize abortions for those who actually use the birth control (because nothing is fail-safe).

Of course, the alternative to abortion is the possibility for more people like this roaming around:

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/break_room/231797-unbelievably_stupid_people.html

Actually, I think in their case, I would even support manslaughter. Nothing good can come of that union.

 

[downzero]

Liberals support a large government, "socialist" ideology. I don't think that has anything to do with Libertarianism, which I believe is a more extreme version of conservatism, focusing on even less government and more individual liberties than the Republicans support. That is EXACTLY why my signature says "Liberals are not liberal". D

Actually, the "liberal" parties throughout the world generally oppose the "socialist" and social democratic parties, which favor large government.

I don't know where you got the idea that "liberals" support large government or socialism, or why you, and others, think that the extreme Democrats in the United States, who generally refer to themselves as 'progressives' or 'social democrats' are 'liberals.' They are not. Liberals do exist in the Democratic party, but they are generally the more moderate, pro-market, pro-individual liberties members.

Conservatism is a political ideology without any philosophical basis. The only distinction between a moderate conservative and an extreme one is the degree to which they seek to conserve the status quo. Historical examples of extreme conservative governments have been extremely oppressive; few would doubt that basically no libertarian values would survive such a regime.

I don't know where you got the idea that the "liberals" are the enemy. It's not an accident that the word "liberal" and "liberty" have the same roots. They are overlapping philosophical ideas.

Without a firmly rooted history of "liberalism," there would be no "libertarian" ideas. Maybe you should fly over to the UK and tell their "liberal" party members that they really should hate the market and side with the labour party because they're actually the same thing and see how they respond.

 

[Wreaver]

 

[downzero]

Why is it there are so many Ron Paul Supporters who support everything he does EXCEPT the biggest one, he remains a Republican. If he is so right on everything else, then do what he does and work within the party for change. That is the beauty of the Tea Party which overall is following Pauls philosophy by working to get more Tea party friendly candidates elected from the Republican party. Change comes from the bottom up not the top down. Take the townships which get you the counties which get you the Indiana House and US House, then take the state and US Senates. Then the Executive branch will be easy AND you don't have a bunch of yayhoos rubber stamping all the exec branch stuff you don't agree with or putting Judges in that are not in line with your viewpoints.

Are you kidding? He tried to do that and they moved the goal post in the middle of the election! Your head is buried in the sand if you don't think Ron Paul has sacrificed a lot to be a member of a major party and to try to change things.

Ron Paul also took the money from his 2008 campaign and founded a nonprofit organization called the Young Americans for Liberty, which will out live him and continue to spread the cause.

Ron Paul has done more to publicize the libertarian cause than anyone else in modern times. Does anyone remember Michael Badnarik? Yeah I bet you don't. But a ton of you know who Ron Paul is, and that has been because he has been relentless in infiltrating the establishment to get the voice out about libertarian ideas.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Like steering the Titanic, we must tilt slowly in the right direction.

I think the point that you're missing is that if indeed our situation can be surmised and represented by the Titanic - it won't make a single bit of difference in what direction we're headed: the ship is rapidly, immediately sinking deep into the ocean.

No one is served by electing those to power who do not have the interests of the Republic at heart - call him Obama, Romney, or Mussolini - anyone who would rather enrich their friends, line their own pockets, and disregard the will of their political opponents and the nation whom they represent, is no friend to this nation, no matter his political persuasion or platform.

 

[foszoe]

Are you kidding? He tried to do that and they moved the goal post in the middle of the election! Your head is buried in the sand if you don't think Ron Paul has sacrificed a lot to be a member of a major party and to try to change things.

Ron Paul also took the money from his 2008 campaign and founded a nonprofit organization called the Young Americans for Liberty, which will out live him and continue to spread the cause.

Ron Paul has done more to publicize the libertarian cause than anyone else in modern times. Does anyone remember Michael Badnarik? Yeah I bet you don't. But a ton of you know who Ron Paul is, and that has been because he has been relentless in infiltrating the establishment to get the voice out about libertarian ideas.

I will keep this very simple. Is Ron Paul a member of the Republican party?