Stormfront Supports Ron Paul

Oliver said:
Because it doesn't answer why a STORMFRONT-member would vote in favor of Ron Paul.
Click to expand...

That is not my question. I don't care why they vote for Paul. I'm asking if this group of people suddenly started to vote (I too am under the impression that they don't usually vote), if that would make any difference in the balance?

Now Oliver, I am not asking you, I am asking Americans here. Stop answering me.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
Thanks for reminding me why I am not a Libertarian. It is a philosophy of total selfishness, in which "Looking out for #1 " becomes the highest moral law.
Click to expand...

So you don't see the difference between "Looking out for #1" and "Not infringing on the rights of #2"?

Your post doesn't even make sense- you're equating stealing with generosity.
 
Admiral said:
So you don't see the difference between "Looking out for #1" and "Not infringing on the rights of #2"?

Your post doesn't even make sense- you're equating stealing with generosity.
Click to expand...
So you want to go back to the good old days of lassiez Faire Capitalism,with 12 hour work days, child labor,mines and factories that were death traps, unsafe food and drugs because the manafactures could put any damn thing i them they wanted.
No thank you.
I am no socialist if you mean that the Government should totally control the economy,but I am not a lassiez faire capitalilist either.
The ulitmate Libertarian dream is where a few rich people run off and let everybody else starve to death,as portrayed in Atlas Shrugged.
 
Admiral said:
you're equating stealing with generosity.
Click to expand...
I think that's the fundamental flaw with socialism. They justify stealing, violence, and coercion as long as they can counter act it by giving to the poor. If they don't have poor, they'll create them.
 
dudalb said:
So you want to go back to the good old days of lassiez Faire Capitalism,with 12 hour work days, child labor,mines and factories that were death traps, unsafe food and drugs because the manafactures could put any damn thing i them they wanted.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about a specific event? If so, could you elaborate?

No thank you.
The ulitmate Libertarian dream is where a few rich people run off and let everybody else starve to death,as portrayed in Atlas Shrugged.
Click to expand...
If you honestly think that, you either didn't actually read the book, or you didn't understand it.
 
Pardalis said:
Oliver, I don't even know what the hell your last post is supposed to prove.
Click to expand...


The last post were threads ON Stormfront about Paul. Are you too
lazy to understand that?

dudalb said:
God, another bunch of spam links from Oliver.
He never,never,never learns.
Click to expand...


Start a new thread about me and my political stance if you really
want to argue instead of "Waaaaambulance!" or "Waaah!" in general...
 
G19 said:
I agree. But I don't think it has to be that way.

Government should only exist to protect individuals from fraud, coercion, or force. Therefore, the only legitimate purpose of government is to maintain a military, police force, and law courts. Whenever one individual or collective attempts to initiate violence on another, government must act to protect the individual.
Click to expand...
Good luck getting around in a society with almost no roads. Or with road monopolies if they were build, because since the ground is 2 dimensional it is essentially impossible to have competing road nets.
 
Kerberos said:
Good luck getting around in a society with almost no roads. Or with road monopolies if they were build, because since the ground is 2 dimensional it is essentially impossible to have competing road nets.
Click to expand...
That's a red herring. Railroads criss-cross the country and are privately owned. Airlines are privately owned.

Here's a simple solution. Let private businesses adopt roads (just like they do now!). They can pay for advertising. Government is not omnipotent.
 
Start a new thread about me and my political stance if you really
want to argue instead of "Waaaaambulance!" or "Waaah!" in general..
Click to expand...

Oliver,don't you understand that the methods you are using to promote you poltical views (although I on the verge of telling you mind your own damn business and stop trying playing round with domestic US politics) are backfiring and turning people off?
Maybe you should try some different tactics?
 
G19 said:
That's a red herring. Railroads criss-cross the country and are privately owned. Airlines are privately owned.

Here's a simple solution. Let private businesses adopt roads (just like they do now!). They can pay for advertising. Government is not omnipotent.
Click to expand...

Boy, are you living in La La Land.
 
Tokorona said:
G19: Maintaince costs are monsterously more expensive
Click to expand...
Why? Why are things becoming more expensive and why are we not more prosperous? That's the central question I think and it's because our government is WAY too big, spends us into debt, and taxes the people too much.

-also, railroads are less and less owned privately.
Click to expand...
That's a good point. One reason rails declined is because of other modes of transportation are able to compete for price. Interstates (which damaged the economy BTW) competed with rails. Trucking companies capitalized on that and were able to ship things cheaper than rails. It was a huge market shift, partially created by big government.
 
Oliver said:
What's your problem concerning "posting on topic"? :confused:
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone with a brain would sift through the pages of rubbish that you just posted.

What you did is called spamming. Now unless you have become a neo nazi (which I doubt very much) I have no idea how this was supposed to help your campaign for Ron Paul.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom