Libertarians: Stop Using Logic

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's why you do when quoting someone, brainiac. You "quote" them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would any impartial English majors in the audience care to comment on what putting one word in an entire email in quotes is supposed to imply?

[/ QUOTE ]

Would any impartial non-hydrocephalic care to comment on what someone who is not Dr. Paul putting a word in quotes in an email is supposed to say about the opinions or character of Dr. Paul?

[/ QUOTE ]

Make up your mind. Is that quotation innocent, or isn't it?

Also, Ron Paul sure does have terrible taste in the types of people that he hires to do unimportant jobs such as "the editor of his political newsletter" and "the policy manager of his campaign." However, I'm sure you're right and the political views of his policy manager have nothing to do with his own - that's merely another regrettable oversight.

[ QUOTE ]
wow adanthar, I remember reading your posts in STT way back when and considered you on a very short list of the smartest 2p2 posters, you have undone so much of that in this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here, we start off with another case of "you're dumb because you disagree with me". I can definitely see why this forum is held in such high esteem. But okay, people have strong viewpoints on politics, let's move on:

[ QUOTE ]
Do you actually think that Paul's vote on the sudan HR has anything do to with there being a genocide there or race? It has nothing to do with that, he votes against every HR that would include the government taking those kinds of actions, it has everything to do with his principles about what the federal government should and should not be involved with. Your summary of his speech is a joke, that is not what he is saying at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait - did you just seriously say that Ron Paul's principles tell him that he should vote for taxpayer money to continue to flow to Sudan's government?

Are you aware of what that sounds like?

[GoodCallYouWin]

adanthar :

Are you arguing, with a straight face, that Ron Paul wants aid given to the genociders to Sudan? He doesn't want aid given anywhere...

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
How is forced divestment not a type of sanction? What is the intention of forced divestment, and what will its effects be?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
adanthar :

Are you arguing, with a straight face, that Ron Paul wants aid given to the genociders to Sudan? He doesn't want aid given anywhere...

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, sorry, didn't say that. Or that.

All I said - and the only thing that the bill says - is that the federal government should no longer do business with the Sudan. (It does also say that companies that continue to do business with the Sudanese Government should be put on a list. If that's your major hangup with this bill, refer to the 'how do people find out otherwise?' argument.) There are no other sanctions of any note in that bill.

[The Don]

I think we are being leveled my friend...

[owsley]

[ QUOTE ]
Here, we start off with another case of "you're dumb because you disagree with me". I can definitely see why this forum is held in such high esteem. But okay, people have strong viewpoints on politics, let's move on:


[/ QUOTE ]

All I was trying to say was that based on reading your previous posts I had formed the opinion of you being a really smart guy. That's it, I really didnt mean it as an insult or anything crazy.

[ QUOTE ]
Wait - did you just seriously say that Ron Paul's principles tell him that he should vote for taxpayer money to continue to flow to Sudan's government?

[/ QUOTE ]

Paul would prefer that taxpayer money flowed to as few places as possible, as is shown by his voting record. But he makes an exception for when it is going to support the genocide of black people?

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
I think we are being leveled my friend...

[/ QUOTE ]

I realize it's been a while since you guys have had any fresh air in here so you're used to everyone agreeing with you, but it sure seems to me that, last week, Ron Paul was the only vote against a bill that said very little other than "the federal government, as a public entity, should not be dealing with genociders."

He did, however, also abstain on the 'calling it a genocide in the first place' bill and his policy manager put "genocide" in quotes. So, feel free to pick any reasonable explanation for all of that out of the no doubt very long list.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
All I was trying to say was that based on reading your previous posts I had formed the opinion of you being a really smart guy. That's it, I really didnt mean it as an insult or anything crazy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. You might also notice that I'm nowhere near as sarcastic as I could be, in here. Don't underestimate someone just because he has a different political philosophy.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wait - did you just seriously say that Ron Paul's principles tell him that he should vote for taxpayer money to continue to flow to Sudan's government?

[/ QUOTE ]

Paul would prefer that taxpayer money flowed to as few places as possible, as is shown by his voting record. But he makes an exception for when it is going to support the genocide of black people?

[/ QUOTE ]

The bill has nothing to do with sending money to Darfur or making private corporations divest from the Sudan. The sum total of what is on the bill is:

-The government divests from the Sudan itself;
-It publishes a list of companies known to do business with the Sudan (subject to some exceptions and a waiver process);
-State and local governments can, at their discretion, use this list to refuse to do business with those companies;
-The federal government will not issue new contracts (but will honor existing ones) with those companies, subject to a Presidential waiver for national security reasons.

Again, these are the entire contents of the bill. Which parts of it are incompatible with the free market?

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I learned this from Fox News interviews of Ron Paul.

1) Ask someone if they hold a rediculous opinion that they don't actually hold, and then seem surprised when they say they don't. Question them a few times on this matter in different ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Newspaper link

Paul's "explanation" for this has been that he outsourced his newsletters for all of those years and never actually read them (for over four years). Interesting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bull [censored]. He had a staff writer who wrote some pieces that shouldn't have made it into his newsletter. She was let go, and he's regretted that they were published under his byline for going on two decades.

Is this the best you have? 15 year old bull [censored]? <u>Smearing</u> a guy who hires gays, blacks, minorities, women, you name it with the hate brush because you can't touch his ideas?

Pathetic.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is bizarre. Many of the linked ideas are rational; most will also be unpopular. I (maybe) understand why he's stepping back from them - he's running for president after all, however remote his chance of victory - but why are *you* disavowing them?

Also, when did quoting someone become a "smear"?

A. "You said such-and-such."
B. "Don't you smear me!!1"

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
Again, these are the entire contents of the bill. Which parts of it are incompatible with the free market?

[/ QUOTE ]

The part where by calling workers' pension funds "government assets" state and local governments can effectively force individual Americans to also divest their retirement investment from companies that bureaucrats decide they don't like, you know, like was said in the floor speech you quoted.

Also, the bill reiterates in Section 2 (you know, the part you told us to skip), that the Congress urges an interventionist foreign policy and economic sanctions, which Dr. Paul, not being a complete moron, understands will only make things worse.

[diddle]

[ QUOTE ]


Again, these are the entire contents of the bill. Which parts of it are incompatible with the free market?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, but your posts about the Sudan are pure spin. Do you seriously not understand what Paul thinks the role of federal government is? His voting record is very consistent regarding bills like this.

Are you trying to imply Ron Paul == Racist + 4 genocide because of this vote? You could make your case much better by talking about his views on immigration instead of harping about this stupid Sudan bill that is simply a smokescreen to get us to think that govt CARES about people dying and babies.