• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

"Ron Paul racist rant caught on tape!" (note, in quotes)

Oliver,
Didn't we go through this dance with you four years ago? IIRC Ron stands for almost nothing you believe in, but you are so fervently anti-USA intervention as regards foreign policy, that you'll accept anything on the negative side just so long as he wants to close down US bases and withdraw US military support in almost all corners of the world.

Anti-Vaccination?
Anti-Abortion?
Paranoid Anti-Government?
911 Truth?

And now, add to that the fact that he's either a blatant racist (which I personally believe) or that, at minimum, he can be seen to have been pandering to racists in order to build up his war chest. I'm not sure which is worse, frankly. Neither person gets my support, my dollars, nor my vote.

Those things are not you, Oliver! Yet, you hand wave them away and accept any silly-assed excuses he offers. The guy's a panderer and a professional egg-sucker. He has the same goal as every politician - to fleece the sheep sufficiently to get re-elected. He's merely more blatant about it and he's been caught at it. He simply selected a particularly disgusting stinky filthy bunch of sheep to fleece. Now that he's taken "seriously", he's backing away from those earlier stands. Cynics might say that that's because he's found a bigger flock of not so disgusting stinky filthy sheep who can fleece for even more donations.

"I like Ron Paul because he's a real straight shooter", say the blinded followers. Yeah, he lets everyone know how bad earmarks and pork are, then he earmarks blatant porkbarrel legislation to get money for his district. "Hey, I'm agin' it, but man, I'd be dumb not to line up at the trough with the others, wouldn't I?" Yeah, a real honest guy. A guy who can tell you what he had for breakfast at his first meal in the House restaurant, but can't remember who wrote his money-making columns for him!

Nonsense. You people believing in this sack of lies should really be ashamed of yourselves. If you believe in non-interventionism or libertarian policies go out and find someone who has those beliefs, ... for real. Or, sign up now in this thread that you support and believe in his Pro-Life Anti-Vax nonsense. Those are far bigger issues than whether he thinks government is too big or whether he's anti-war.
 
What if a dangerous disease was spreading like wildfire? Would Paul cave and require immunization in such a dire situation?

"No, I wouldn't do it, because the person who doesn't take the shot is the one at risk..."
Click to expand...

You'd think that a doctor would know about "herd immunity", wouldn't you?
 
It's interesting to note how quickly Paul has sold out to the Republican voters now that he stands a strong chance of taking Iowa. Take a look at his recent adverts: Faith, abortion, marriage in abundance.
 
OMG! Direct from the Ron Paul Official Website:

“I have accepted Jesus Christ as my personal Savior, and I endeavor every day to follow Him in all I do and in every position I advocate.”

-Ron Paul
Click to expand...



And this implied lie sucks big time:
After being forced to witness an abortion being performed during his time in medical school, he knew from that moment on that his practice would focus on protecting life. And during his years in medicine, never once did he find an abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman.
Click to expand...
Pregnancy poses a serious health risk. To imply ending a pregnancy is never needed to save the mother is disingenuous. I'm sure he knows better. He didn't say, "never needed". He's as much of a vote whore as any of them. So much for following principles of no government interference, no interference unless he needs their votes.
 
Last edited:
SezMe said:
I haven't read every post here but it seems our OP has completely disappeared. Bill, come back! Defend your guy.
Click to expand...

In fairness, Bill Thompson softened his defense of Ron Paul pretty much during the discussion. His position for a while now has been that he has no opinion, I believe. [ETA: Also there was a pretty major holiday in there a couple of days ago. . . ]
 
Last edited:
Foolmewunz said:
Redtail said:
Wait... he's an antivaxer too?
Click to expand...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-freedman/ron-paul-no-to-mandatory-_b_82765.html

That's from 2008, though. He may have proof that someone else wrote those words and he just said them, so I can't be sure he's really anti-vax.
Click to expand...

In all fairness, his stance is not anti-vaccine, as in "vaccination is bad for you!" but "vaccination is good for you, but the government should not force you". This is of course a slightly stupid stance, as the vaccination that others take is also good for you, and the vaccination that others don't take is bad for you, but it's not "anti".
 
Oystein said:
In all fairness, his stance is not anti-vaccine, as in "vaccination is bad for you!" but "vaccination is good for you, but the government should not force you". This is of course a slightly stupid stance, as the vaccination that others take is also good for you, and the vaccination that others don't take is bad for you, but it's not "anti".
Click to expand...
And thus you have the Libertarian fallacy in a nutshell. Things we do impact other people in the community and on the planet for that matter. The Libertarian tunnel vision ignores that little reality problem by just not mentioning it or thinking about it.
 
Oystein said:
In all fairness, his stance is not anti-vaccine, as in "vaccination is bad for you!" but "vaccination is good for you, but the government should not force you". This is of course a slightly stupid stance, as the vaccination that others take is also good for you, and the vaccination that others don't take is bad for you, but it's not "anti".
Click to expand...

I think the pertinent perspective, and the one most relevant to the Libertarian perspective, is this one: Vaccination that you do not take is bad for others.
 
Chaos said:
I think the pertinent perspective, and the one most relevant to the Libertarian perspective, is this one: Vaccination that you do not take is bad for others.
Click to expand...
That's ignorant but regardless, take that and reverse it. I impose my will on you by mandating you get vaccinated. After all, the vaccine I mandate you take is good for me. You impose your will on me by not getting vaccinated thus exposing me to a disease.

The difference is merely semantics and from whose eyes one is looking through.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
That's ignorant but regardless... You impose your will on me by not getting vaccinated thus exposing me to a disease.
Click to expand...

If you've been vaccinated, and vaccination is so effective, how is my being unvaccinated going to put you at any risk? No ignorance here....
 
oddball said:
If you've been vaccinated, and vaccination is so effective, how is my being unvaccinated going to put you at any risk? No ignorance here....
Click to expand...

Because your being unvacinated can allow new strains of disease to develop. furthermore, it is naive to think that I will not be burdened if you come down with a preventable disease.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom