Bob Barr Enters Presidential Race as Libertarian
- Thread starter FireMax
- Start date
I've always found it important to read opposing views and to decide for myself whether they are bunk or worth merit. If you feel you are like that, then take a look at a book called "The Road to Serfdom" written in 1944 by Friedrich Hayek, an Austrian economist. Hayek was a classical Liberal which is nearly exactly opposite of the liberals we all know today. Classical Liberals believe in liberty and freedom very strongly and are against government intervention in our lives. Hayek won a Nobel Prize in economics in 1974 (before Socialists began to infest the organization). To sum up his great works, Hayek believes that Socialism will lead a people to tyranny regardless of what country adopts the Socialist philosophy. His book is an eye opener... worth the read.
Many people believe that Hayek had a strong influence on Ronald Reagan and British PM Margaret Thatcher.
His publisher also put out this pamphlet around 1950 which is a picture summary of the ideas of his book.
http://www.mises.org/books/TRTS/
Many people believe that Hayek had a strong influence on Ronald Reagan and British PM Margaret Thatcher.
His publisher also put out this pamphlet around 1950 which is a picture summary of the ideas of his book.
http://www.mises.org/books/TRTS/
Wildalaska
Moderator
There are a bunch of us here who are classical liberals...I prefer to call them now Progressive republicans
Closest we have is John McCain.....
WildbobbarrisntAlaska ™
Wildalaska
Moderator
Come back and see us when you understand what a "socialist" is
WildseemysigAlaska ™
Wildalaska
Moderator
Yadda yadda.....toss the word around like the rest of the labels you seem to have little understanding of...
If you honestly think McCain is a socialist then clearly the American educational system has failed.
Now over on Daily Kos, the equally unknowing call him a Nazi LOL
WilddangwhatabunchwehaveraisedAlaska TM
Airtime is being on the air. Having your name mentioned is not airtime. Given the audience leno has and the number of shows tha Paul was on I think that there is an argument at Paul got more airtime than many of the other candidates.
Either way, the point is that Paul had his mug all over the place. Blaming the media is just a really poor scape goat because it doesn't add up.
The concepts aren't vilified as fascism, the idea that if you don't vote for this particular candidate makes you an evil hater of the constitution is.
#1) You called yourself a socialist. Remember?
#2) You still refer to yourself as a "progressive", which is the same thing.
#3) Your 2 favorite Republican candidates this year were a) Rudy Giuliani and b) John McCain.
#4) You insist on avoiding rational discussion in lieu of drive-bys and villifying anyone who disagrees with you as either antisemitic, racist, or ignorant.
If you're not a socialist, you do one heckuva convincing job imitating one.
Stage2,
I think it adds up just fine. You're conflating "late night talk shows" with "the media" and pretending they're one and the same in order to make a point that you claim you're not trying to make.
Already addressed upstream. And 'fascism' is a political belief structure, not a tactic. Try picking a word that fits, because Paul and his supporters are the polar opposite of fascists.
Last edited:
You have a high opinion of your intellect and that's fine. Just don't expect to sway people by pounding your chest and putting people down. Some people will see right through it.
Brilliant dialog there HawgHaggen. I find it ironic to hear a McCain supporter calling others "losers".
The amount of media coverage was immaterial to Ron Paul's campaign and the Paulites can complain all they want to but what kill his chances is that for 90% of the people in the US he came off as a wacko.
I think to call them losers is a little extreme but he never had a chance and neither does Bob Barr.
I think to call them losers is a little extreme but he never had a chance and neither does Bob Barr.
And if he didn't come off that way, they certainly went to great lengths to portray him as such.
No argument there, but it does highlight a critical problem: The things that he was advocating are what conservatism is all about! If those tenets are viewed by the average American as "wacko", we've got much bigger problems.
Also agreed. Of course, I don't believe that McCain has a chance either, and I'm not going to let that stop me from voting as I wish.
If you want to vote for someone who can win, vote for Obama. Otherwise, you may as well "waste" your vote on someone you agree with and join the rest of us 'losers'.
I think that 90% is an extremely high number. I myself have met some of the most dedicated, passionate and intelligent people who support Ron Paul. They love their country and they are troubled because of the direction it has taken. Are there some extreme examples among his supporters... sure... you bet-- just like McCain has extreme supporters and every other candidate has extreme supporters. Does Ron Paul deserve this "wacko" label? I don't know. You tell me. But, before you do, at least... at the very least... Spend $20.00, purchase and read his book called "The Revolution - A Manisfesto". All of Ron Paul's major ideas and beliefs are in that book.
My guess is that 90% of the anti-Ron Paul people don't know where he stands issue to issue. But, because Sean Hannity smears him, they act in kind. Actually learn about what Ron Paul stands for instead of listening to those willing to smear him. You may be surprised at what you learn.
Lastly, the GOP tried to smear Ronald Reagan back in the 70's. Nixon didn't like him. Ford didn't like him. The GOP power machine called him "dangerous" and they thought he was a nut case. George Bush's own father and later Reagan's vice president even termed Reagan's economic theory "Voodoo Economics". But Ronald Reagan scoffed at their smear tactics and kept working to get his message out to the American people. In the 1980 election, the timing was right and Reagan won in a landslide. So, be careful who you listen to. Get your facts straight before you judge.
^Also this. Reagan and Goldwater were also portrayed as fringe whackos for sayin' the same stuff Paul says.
I wonder tho' if it's still possible for such 'nuts' to get elected these days. On the one hand you have media with a definite political agenda, but on the other hand we have the internet.
Neither here nor there I suppose. Guess we'd best get back on topic.
I wonder tho' if it's still possible for such 'nuts' to get elected these days. On the one hand you have media with a definite political agenda, but on the other hand we have the internet.
Neither here nor there I suppose. Guess we'd best get back on topic.