God doesn't owe anyone anything. Not a job. Not an income. Not anything. God helps those who help themselves, which basically means God does nothing for anyone. I was a believer up until my 30s, now I am an absolute non-believer, and much saner, much freer, much happier because of it. Religion is man-made, and as such is a form of control and bondage. I have worked full-time from age 18 untl now (40+ years) and when I can't due to illness, disability or age I know there isn't anyone to help me.
Who REALLY runs our world? search "israel Did 911 All Proof in the World" and search "ZionCrimeFactory" for proof.
Reporting on the death of supremacist Zionist leader David Wolffsohn, the September 17, 1914, edition of THE NEW YORK TIMES tells us that during his closing address at the Zionist Congress at the Hague in 1907 Wolffsohn “pleaded for greater unity among the Jews and said that eventually they must conquer the world.”
w(dot)zioncrimefactory com/jew-world-order SPREAD THE TRUTH!
@jasongleaner Unfortunately (for her) NOBODY ever takes Peggy Noonan seriously. She's always been for the status quo & she makes no secret that she wants more police state thru-out the world. The only intelligent thing Noonan has ever said in her life was when she called Kanye West an "angry black cockroach" on MSNBC's Morning Joe. She also called Kanye a "pottymouth" too. Other than that this woman is totally clueless & she's in for a very rude awakening in Nov when Dr. Paul wins.
Dont listen to their bull zhit. They want you to remain complacent. The truth is, the establishment is going to steal this election, like they've been doing every election for the last half century. ORGANIZE a transparent vote count. We want 1 person in every precinct in Iowa and New Hampshire to take a picture and or video of the election results then upload the results to a public web site for the world to see. Otherwise, the media will lie to you. They wont count all the precincts. TRUST ME!
I think it's because of his low coverage why he is not the front runner. Anyone with a brain who has been watching this election closely see's that there is a concentrated effort to keep that mans message from reaching the masses.
And ironically enough, right after this debate Yahoo! stated Gingrich had solidified his position as the front-runner. Typical MSM FLIP-FLOP PANDERING.
Lol at the people that think a god has to spoon feed you your morals. Here's a wake up call for you.. universal morality doesn't even exist in your mentality, it is all derived from god's will and plan. Besides that Ron Paul is the best! Civil liberties, sound currency, non-interventionism and prosperity!! Ron Paul 2012!
First time he had EQUAL time (well almost) & look how well he did. Co-sponsor was YAHOO. After debate Yahoo had layers of articles & POLLS. RON PAULS name never appeared ONCE on Yahoo follow up material nor his quotes. Like he was not even in the debate. In 3 1/2 weeks the FIRST "REAL" POLL gets taken in the IOWA GOP Primary vote. The media keeps saying Paul is far back in 3rd or 4th place. Anyone got any money you feel like LOSING? At worst he will be 4% behind Newt. MAYBE in FIRST
Hooray for our side ... Please Dear God... give us Dr Ron Paul for our leader. No one else comes even close to his level of honor & comprehension of leadership. Everyone else is creepy or worse. So many idiots think the morals of a man don't matter... what fools... probably atheists.
The people take RP seriously its the media that doesn't and since the media is there to shape opinions the morons who don't analyze or think for themselves repeat what they heard in the media as if it were their own opinion.
Peggy Noonan was right when she called Kanye an angry black cockroach & a pottymouth on Morning Joe a few yrs back but she is dead wrong when she says no one takes Ron Paul seriously & the other shit she's been saying about him being a pretender. This is the same woman who called Sarah Palin a true contender for the presidency in 2012. Noonan is a blowhard bitch who should be married to Bernie Goldberg, another assclown who thinks Ron Paul is a joke.
ron paul isn't going anywhere.He's useful in making people re-think some accepted global geo-political realities--but so unrealistic as to be a National security disaster.
@mrbriscoe2001 You are slowly but most definitely repeating the now minority view... Keep at it... We will wave to you on the way in to the white house.
oh my god! wait let me stop. is this possible? iowa is the key, we cant place 2nd or 3rd, we need 2 win it all 2 shake up the world ya'll !!!! im being dead serious yo. we got this, i just know it. unless the pull a bush vs gore 2000.umm idk lol
If he pulls it off he's gonna need food tasters and bulletproof vests because the same shysters and murderous swindlers who whacked JFK and Abe Lincoln will do him in. Take that to the bank. He's s threat to the JEWS and their hold over their US Colony.
If the elections weren't so rigged Ron Pauls victory would be almost certain, despite what the mainstream media mantra though even with all the dirty tricks they are going to try to pull Ron Paul can still win we are just going to have to work that much harder at it. Ron Paul 2012.
ARE these people stupid???? The woman says 'No one has taken RP seriously' she is DEAD WRONG....THE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TAKING HIM SERIOUSLY ALL ALONG ...ONLY THE STUPID PRESS HAS BLOCKED HIM OUT. THEY HAVE LOST MOST OF US AS VIEWERS BECAUSE OF IT. DON'T THEY LIKE THEIR JOB, THEN FUCKING DO IT!!!!!!
Look at the lemmings in the media parroting each other! Notice we are hearing the term "Ron Paul's passionate supporters" now? Good stuff LOL! MAYBE now people will start to loook into why we are so passionate!
I have to wonder now if anyone has ever taken you seriously? Because when you say things that make you sound like your head has been in the sand for the past 6 months I want to say, "what the heck!"
So now, on the eve of a good showing or even a win, main stream media is pretending that the person they've black listed for so long is coming out of nowhere? The media functions just like every other federal agency in that it's main focus is to serve and protect the parasitical elite.
What no one takes Ron Paul serious??? who is that woman presstitute? In Australia all the talk of US politics is all about Ron Paul and that he is the US's and the worlds last hope
@SouthernCross33 No one in America does. I love Ron Paul, but no one really does take him serious here. Mostly because the media writes him off in fear that he does get elected.
Because he is. All these idiots in the mass media just disregard Dr. Paul because he is the only person with the guts to stand up and tell it like it is. Lobbyists and Corporate lap-dogs don't like him, it means "bye-bye War!" and that is frightening to most of Corporate America.
Actually the people that have looked into Ron Paul take him very seriously and so does the msm or they would not marginalize him so much. They are very afraid he could pull this off and I think he must win for the good of the country.
Maybe I'm paranoid, but I remember Bobby and how much he scared the establishment. The previous administration and this current one had and would have no problem creating another false flag operation to disrupt the political process. The support for Ron Paul, whether you like it or not, is a steam train that may very well run over the big 5 networks and neo-cons that would rather pretend he and his supporter don't exist.
@myhipsi Ah, the mentality of the average Ron Paul supporter. Immediately turns the conversation to anuses like the frustrated and closeted fellow that he is...
@masercot funny to find your stupid ass on another comment section devoted to Ron Paul. I have not seen one person ever agree with you. I would refer to you as a tool, but tools have some use.
@masercot professing for supporters of ron paul to kill themselves isn't a child like comment.. its an adult comment from an ignorant fool. i would never wish death upon anyone for their views, beliefs, or thoughts.. no matter how skewed.. freedom of speech.. but what you do with your words is merely spread hate and ignorance.. you're lucky the constitution allows you to be an idiot.. unfortunately because of people like you.. we may no longer have a constitution to value.
@LastbutNotFirst Didn't say that I WANTED them to kill themselves. I stated that I was EXPECTING them to kill themselves...making reference to their status as a cult...
@masercot Ah, the mentality of the average Ron Paul basher. Always writing comments on youtube complaining Ron Paul supporters write too many comments on youtube.
@viavo Don't really care how many comments you girls write. A few remarks back and forth and you see that Ron Paul supporters have no idea what they support...
@masercot "First, tell me what you support as a Ron Paul supporter...as in policy."
Part 1: I support Ron Paul's belief that waterboarding is torture. I empathize with Paul's skepticism of the centralized power advanced National ID cards could potentially grant. After Kaddafi was sodomized without a trial, Al Qaeda flags subsequently appeared on courthouses in Libya, and the emerging government was claimed to be basing policy from Shariah Law, I recalled Paul warning about blowback.
@masercot "First, tell me what you support as a Ron Paul supporter...as in policy."
After seeing a TSA agent put her fingers down the waist band of a 6 year old girl and a myriad of intrusive TSA searches caught on camera, I recalled Ron Paul being laughed at years before that for wanting to end the Department of Homeland Security. Also, watching the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security ask us to spy on our neighbors in Walmart parking lots (Video ID mQZhvuxf0-c), I remembered Ron.
@streetmagicstyle So, what policy does your comment refer to? Getting rid of TSA? To what extent? Entirely? Let the market dictate what chance of terrorist attack a consumer will put up with?
@masercot "So, what policy does your comment refer to? Getting rid of TSA? To what extent? Entirely?"
It refers to privatizing the TSA.
"Let the market dictate what chance of terrorist attack a consumer will put up with?"
Nobody can guarantee perfect safety, including the TSA. As Ron Paul argued, a gun in the cockpit has a better track record with respect to preventing terrorist attacks. How many terrorist attacks has the TSA prevented with porno scanners and groping?
@masercot "Privatizing TSA is giving law enforcement powers to a private entity...something we do far too much already...
...and, in Ron Paul's America, the corporation will be the law..."
Before the governmental TSA was imposed, the massive episode of groping people and using porno scanners did not exist. Call it corporate law if you will, but whatever it was, it was much better than its current alternative.
@masercot youtube search "why we should fear bathtubs more than terrorists" - good video to check out to see tsa doesn't do much. as far as market solutions go, canada privatized some stuff so if they can we can. And I don't have any data to back this up (mainly I don't know where to look) but why anyone would think the gov. has more incentive than the airlines themselves to keep us safe is beyond me. If a plane goes down due to a airline neglecting security they would face huge probs.
@masercot "Why not? First, tell me what you support as a Ron Paul supporter...as in policy."
With the U.S. debt apparently in excess of $15 trillion, and the US military expenditures being at least over 6x that of any other country in the world, it would seem that Ron Paul's proposal to cut from military expenditures could be sensible.
I read the Constitution and I realize that declarations of war without congressional authorization are unconstitutional (i.e. illegal).
@streetmagicstyle So again, what is the policy? I know that the debt is bad and we spend a lot on military. Where is Paul going to cut? And, by how much?
@masercot "So again, what is the policy? I know that the debt is bad and we spend a lot on military. Where is Paul going to cut? And, by how much?"
With respect to military, 15% gets cut from the Department of Defense, and while I can not be as meticulous as a balance sheet in YouTube comments, I think it goes without saying that Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and several other countries would see a withdraw of troops.
@streetmagicstyle just to add what you put on the military part --- my wife is a finance officer in the Air Force and you should see some of the insane stuff we are spending money on just in afghanistan. It would blow your mind the money we are wasting overseas. So to those who want a strong defense, you are making our country more hated involving ourselves in other peoples business.
@undeadarsenal I'm all for cutting waste; however, if you simply tell the military "cut fifteen percent", I guarantee you, having worked for the military for fifteen years in total, they will not go for the waste first...
There is a reason wasteful spending happens in the first place...
@streetmagicstyle It doesn't go without saying. They could instead cut military benefits, salaries, etc. We could be enjoying a time where existing personnel is stretched to capacity...something we got to witness during Bush's regime...
@streetmagicstyle I don't doubt it. But, home to unemployment? It is a very real issue. To be an effective leader one needs to plan several moves ahead. Ron Paul looks no further than one move before announcing policy...
@masercot "I don't doubt it. But, home to unemployment? It is a very real issue. To be an effective leader one needs to plan several moves ahead. Ron Paul looks no further than one move before announcing policy..."
I think that is entirely unfounded. Ron Paul is like a grandmaster of chess at thinking moves ahead. I am not claiming to embrace the Austrian school of economics, but Ron Paul clearly has a solid grasp on it and I read a book that addresses that. (See next comment for more.)
@masercot "I don't doubt it. But, home to unemployment? It is a very real issue. To be an effective leader one needs to plan several moves ahead. Ron Paul looks no further than one move before announcing policy..."
That is entirely unfounded. Ron Paul is like a grandmaster at chess when it comes to thinking moves ahead. You may not agree with with the logic but it is utterly false to think he has not anticipated unemployment. To back this up, read the next comment.
For the record, you see two comments that paraphrase one another because the comment did not show up after I posted it. Then I tried posting again (hence the second comment) and it did not show up right away. Ron Paul uses Austrian school ideas. Austrians (Austrian school economists, really) believe purchase power spent on American products used in wars means the buying power ultimately come from labor here. (read next for more)
@masercot Jesus motherfucking Christ. I can't see my last comment yet and it is frustrating me. Anyways, think of this as Comment 2 because I can't reply to my last one. To Austrians (Austrian school economists), the buying power taken from taxation or inflation for those weapons and military labor go to waste, cut into domestic savings that would have been invested into capital goods here, and make it less attractive to run a business or work here (decreasing employment). MORE TO COME
@masercot Think of this as Comment 3. To Austrian school advocates, the Keynesian arguments are incorrect and paying money to repair destruction does not increase production; it is a broken windows fallacy to believe that and merely diverts production. Also, according to them, Ron Paul's efforts to get rid of minimum wage would increase employment. (I actually have a video on my channel with an audio chapter by an Austrian school economist, Henry Hazlitt, about minimum wage and unemployment.)
@masercot Think of this as Comment #4. I personally do not claim that Keynes was wrong and that Austrian economists are right. Plenty of people object to their arguments with a multitude of books. In this context, I am only contesting your claim that Ron Paul "looks no further than one move before announcing policy." That is an untrue statement about Ron Paul.
@streetmagicstyle My comment was not a throw-away insult of Ron Paul. He claims our rights as citizens are in danger; but, his solution simply washes the hands of the federal government of any responsibility, but doesn't look at the abysmal records of the states. He wants to get rid of public medical care, stating that prices will drop, somehow, if the poor are left to die...
His contempt of the underprivileged carries with it a short term monetary gain, but a long term destabilization...
@masercot "My comment was not a throw-away insult of Ron Paul. He claims our rights as citizens are in danger; but, his solution simply washes the hands of the federal government of any responsibility, but doesn't look at the abysmal records of the states."
I understand your point here, but your original comment mentioned employment for troops who are brought home and Ron Paul looking no further than one move before announcing policy. It seems worth highlighting he thought many moves ahead.
@streetmagicstyle I don't really think that Paul is going to want to support a wartime-sized force with no war. In this case, I think we have to disagree...
A good solution would be to put military personnel to work on American infrastructure...but, Paul wouldn't go for that in a million years...
@masercot "I don't really think that Paul is going to want to support a wartime-sized force with no war. In this case, I think we have to disagree..."
@masercot "He wants to get rid of public medical care, stating that prices will drop, somehow, if the poor are left to die..."
This sentence is pretty multithreaded, so I will try to address a few points separately. You say he wants to get rid of public medical care. It is widely accepted that the entitlement programs are unsustainable if recent trends continue. Ron Paul has announced his intentions to use part of the money cut from the Department of Defense and put it into entitlements.
@masercot "He wants to get rid of public medical care, stating that prices will drop, somehow, if the poor are left to die..."
You mention Ron states that prices will drop. From what I have seen, it is pretty widely accepted by economists on both sides of the argument that Medicaid and Medicaid insurance drives prices up. I saw the extent and horrid consequences of removing programs debated, but I am not sure if you actually doubt the fact that gov programs drive med prices up. Do you?
@streetmagicstyle I doubt, very much, that medical institutions are going to drop their rates by very much at all if Medicaid is defunded. There is no historical precedent for it...
@masercot "He wants to get rid of public medical care, stating that prices will drop, somehow, if the poor are left to die..."
Then there is the part about poor people being left to die. Again, the entitlement programs are unsustainable if recent trends continue. Ron Paul has announced his intentions to use part of the money cut from the Department of Defense and put it into entitlements. (more to come)
@masercot "He wants to get rid of public medical care, stating that prices will drop, somehow, if the poor are left to die..."
When it comes to health care, Ron is in a unique position because he is a physician. He stated that while in residency, he worked at a hospital before heavy government involvement in health care and never saw anyone be left on a street to die. People also can die from lack of advanced medical technology brought into existence by private competition.
@streetmagicstyle People die now from lack of money or devious insurance companies. It happens a lot. Studies show that you are forty percent more likely to die if you have no insurance...equating to 45,000 people a year.
Also, the fact that the United States ranks below most socialized medicine nations in health is a good indicator...
@masercot "People die now from lack of money or devious insurance companies."
The key word is "now." A lack of money is a bigger problem when medical prices are higher. Devious insurance companies may be a bigger problem when big bureaucracy creates a recipe for cronyism. Google "iron triangle us politics wikipedia" and consider the diagram.
@masercot "People die now from lack of money or devious insurance companies. It happens a lot."
It is easy to overlook parts of Ron Paul's wholistic philosophy when discussing health. Think about the health of people in overseas wars that he wants to end. Consider the health of Iraqi children, deaths of troops in Afghanistan, injuries of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, money spent on war instead of investing into health care, etc..
@masercot "His contempt of the underprivileged carries with it a short term monetary gain, but a long term destabilization..."
You claim that Ron Paul has contempt of the underprivileged? That seems outlandish. Contempt? Is this supposed to be a poetic way to oppose private market philosophy, or are you sincerely suggesting that Ron Paul literally has contempt for the underprivileged?
@streetmagicstyle I firmly believe that "contempt" is the most appropriate word, yes. I don't condemn you for supporting the man...you seem to believe in him and you seem more thoughtful than most; however, I believe that Ron Paul values money over people...
@masercot "however, I believe that Ron Paul values money over people..."
This reminds me of George Carlin saying something to the effect that the left cares more about people and the right cares more about property. The Austrian economists, whether correct or incorrect, argue that a system with strong private property rights is in the best interest of people; they argue that property rights is the best way to maximize utility of people. Even if incorrect, is that actually "contempt?"
@masercot "Very dangerous attitude for a leader to have..."
The most dangerous attitude of leaders I can think of were the polar opposite of libertarianism and individual rights. They were people who pushed collectivism, war, unitarian structures, or centrally planned economics. Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, etc.
@streetmagicstyle Hitler was a friend to big business and had a death sentence for communists. The governments of Mao, Stalin and Lenin were just as vicious as the capitalists that preceded them...
@masercot "Hitler was a friend to big business and had a death sentence for communists."
Hitler and Communists were both pushing collectivism. Ron Paul's philosophy is individualism. Also, Hitler was all about central planning. Check out Hayek's book "The Road to Serfdom."
"The governments of Mao, Stalin and Lenin were just as vicious as the capitalists that preceded them."
Which capitalist was as vicious as Mao, Stalin, and Lenin?
@streetmagicstyle Capitalism doesn't either. When money is involved in a capitalist society, the poor individual has the right to do as he's told. This puts capitalists in the same camp with Stalin, Mao and Lenin.
Equating American liberals with Stalin, Mao and Lenin is tired and full of fallacies. I'm sure you know this...
"Capitalism doesn't either. When money is involved in a capitalist society, the poor individual has the right to do as he's told. This puts capitalists in the same camp with Stalin, Mao and Lenin."
Well, I to quote myself: "Hitler did not idealize a system of individual rights."
I think you are playing fast and loose with the word "right." What system of individual rights do American liberals advocate?
Consider the phrase "right to health care." And suppose we agree that privatized health care is inhumane, wrong, and immoral. I think it is still a word game to call it an individual right. Virtually nobody disagree that I have a "right to play Sony Playstation" in America if I want (unless, maybe, I was in prison or some strange exception). Further, virtually nobody would ever think that meant the right to threaten my neighbors with weapons to take their Playstation. Word games.
@streetmagicstyle Your rights extend proportional to the thickness of your wallet. Do you have a right to a fair trial? If you consider substandard public defenders against seasoned lawyers fair. A right to free speech? Folks like Ron Paul equate dollars with speech.
You have the right to contact your representative. If you have money he will even listen to you.
You cannot have "rights" and capitalism, without wealth. And, Adam Smith states we can't all be wealthy...
@masercot "A right to free speech? Folks like Ron Paul equate dollars with speech."
Whether 10 people listen to you or 300 people listen, you have just as much free speech if you are not being arrested for what you say. The "right to free speech" does not mean the right of gang-robbing your neighbor to afford studio technology and broadcast to a wider audience. Libel, slander, and yelling fire in a movie theater may raise questions about the definition, but the number of listeners does not.
@streetmagicstyle How 'bout the wealthy buying up the airwaves to force feed us their opinions and deciding what is appropriate to give us from the internet? It isn't the number of listeners...it is the number of sources...
"How 'bout the wealthy buying up the airwaves to force feed us their opinions"
1. Jon Stewart does not kick in your door and take you to a secret dungeon where you are bound to watch his show.
2. We do not have privatized media. As Ron Paul says all the time, there is presently corporatism in this country, not capitalism. I do not believe 9/11 was an inside job or any of that, but I think there is evidence to support the existence a military-media-industrial complex.
I saved a ton of links that serve as good evidence for a military-industrial-media complex after a lot of tedious research. I would be happy to present it if you want.
@masercot "Do you have a right to a fair trial? If you consider substandard public defenders against seasoned lawyers fair."
I am glad you brought this up because part of me wonders whether or not you are right. First, exactly what would the alternative look like? Would there be a voucher system for all defendants to match a multi-million-dollar prosecutor? Would everybody be forced to have socialized, substandard public defenders? Aren't substandard public defenders heterogeneous (skill-wise)?
@streetmagicstyle I think that, in our current legal system, the judge takes too passive an approach. If a lawyer misses the obvious, the judge lets it happen. It isn't the fault of the judges...they are overloaded with cases...but, there are consequences for actual human beings regardless...
I don't offer a solution. There isn't an easy one...our judicial system is very sick and multi-tiered...
The Objectivists (Ayn Rand loving capitalists) had a very good argument. They argued a huge key the problem is laws that are not written objectively enough, and that subjective interpretation creates a huge disparity in outcomes arises from different attorneys and spins.
@streetmagicstyle The problem is the vague nature of the human language. Any two words (excepting proper nouns) can be link through synonyms...even opposites. It usually only takes a few steps.
Of course, that is also the beauty of the English language...
@masercot I can see that being a problem to some extent, but I still subscribe to the correspondence theory of truth. When describing wavelengths of light, a writer can be highly, highly specific and construct reasonably unequivocal statements. With enough effort, the same effort can be used to screen out some gray areas in law. There are, of course, postmodernists who will get really semantic and deny language can describe any objective truth, but those arguments are impractical for courts.
@streetmagicstyle I'm not a Wittgenstein man...more of a semiotics/Umberto Eco kind of a guy. In my opinion, though, no matter how careful one writes a law, there will always be weasels to twist them...
@masercot "Why not? First, tell me what you support as a Ron Paul supporter...as in policy."
I agree with Ron Paul that Federal prohibition is bad news. As a doctor, he called it a health problem. I had several friends with addiction problems and this resonated as true. I met frail, weak people who engaged in selling marijuana and were locked up with murderers and rapists. And marijuana was easier to obtain than alcohol, so trying to attack supply backfired there.
@streetmagicstyle Ron Paul doesn't support making drugs legal. He supports states making their own laws concerning drugs. States could make laws even more draconian.
@masercot "Ron Paul doesn't support making drugs legal. He supports states making their own laws concerning drugs."
As a president, he would be a federal official and his role to reject prohibition is therefore (legally) limited to federal actions. He explicitly stated he wants to get rid of the DEA. That is a prodigiously radical position to oppose prohibition (within his legal power) and it appeals to me.
@streetmagicstyle Much about that appeals to me...but, even though he sees drug laws as being out of the realm of the Feds, he still sees the states as being fully entitled to tell us what to do in our homes...
You do understand why the federal government got into the business of enforcing civil rights, don't you?
@masercot "Much about that appeals to me...but, even though he sees drug laws as being out of the realm of the Feds, he still sees the states as being fully entitled to tell us what to do in our homes..."
He also sees Jesus as the son of God, which I find preposterous, I am focused on his actual political actions as a president. And again, as a present, he can only legally operate at the federal level. At the federal level, he would work to vanish the DEA . That's good enough for me.
@masercot "Why not? First, tell me what you support as a Ron Paul supporter...as in policy."
I do not support internet censorship. Ron Paul opposes internet censorship. I do not support a federal ban on prostitution. When a woman has not posed a safety hazard, I oppose the government using firearms, handcuffs, and jail cells to forcefully dictate what she does with her private, personal sex life.
@streetmagicstyle So, Ron Paul wants to pass a law telling Internet Providers that they cannot censor their content? As for prostitution, again he wants states to decide. Are there any federal laws against prostitution?
@masercot "So, Ron Paul wants to pass a law telling Internet Providers that they cannot censor their content?"
Ron Paul opposed the Protect IP Act, a vague law that opens the door for governmental censorship. It authorizes bureacracy to selectively block websites (with the pretense of preventing piracy while remaining very ambiguous, of course).
@streetmagicstyle Yes, he opposed a bill that contains censorship, but not because he is against corporate entities censoring content. He is opposed to government regulating those businesses. Don't be insincere...
@masercot "Yes, he opposed a bill that contains censorship, but not because he is against corporate entities censoring content. He is opposed to government regulating those businesses. Don't be insincere..."
Insincere? That is ridiculous. I should have been more specific with language and said "governmental censorship" but the "insincere" charge is bogus. At any rate, I am not a utopianist. Governmental censorship scares me a lot more than private firms monitoring their own property.
@streetmagicstyle Corporate power is way more horrible than anything our government can come up with. But, if Paul has his way on restrictions are removed from business, your corporations WILL be our government. We're practically there anyway...
@masercot "Corporate power is way more horrible than anything our government can come up with."
I gave you the example of corporate searches being more benign and the searches being more intrusive when the government got involved. Video ID X_Ww-d71J-A is footage of a 9-year-old having fingers stuck down her waist band. You have not provided any evidence or argument that the private airport security was worse. Have any evidence that government is doing better than private airport security did?
@streetmagicstyle Well, like it or not, your party blamed the private contractors who worked security at the airports for the 9/11 attacks.
The corporate power I refer to are the killings in Ron Paul type nations (like Guatamala) where labor organizers were murdered with impunity...or in this country, during its Ron Paul phase (the industrial revolution) where they were shot dead by private detectives working for the corporations...
@masercot "The corporate power I refer to are the killings in Ron Paul type nations (like Guatamala) where labor organizers were murdered with impunity..."
Guatemala is a "Ron Paul nation?" lol whaaat? Is that supposed to be strident to grab attention or are you serious? Guatemala is a unitary state. Ron Paul does not advocate a unitary state.
@masercot "He advocates the laissez faire type of government that brought about the Coca Cola killings in Guatemala..."
I am only guessing and I realize this would not negate anything, but this sounds like an attempt to build on the documentary called "The Cost of a Coke." Exactly what are you blaming for the killings? Are you suggesting an unregulated Guatemalan economy caused it?
@masercot "Well, like it or not, your party blamed the private contractors who worked security at the airports for the 9/11 attacks."
I am an individual, not a collective. Unless you are challenging me personally for something I did or said, there is no reason why I am intellectually obliged to defend a position.
@masercot "As for prostitution, again he wants states to decide. Are there any federal laws against prostitution?"
No, but there is intense lobbying to ban prostitution at the federal level. (I can cite sources if you wish.) Dennis Hof (owner of the most popular brothel in America) endorsed and actively raised money for Ron Paul during his 2008 campaign. Federal policy can work both ways. Prostitution is nationally banned in most countries. Citizens can at least move to Nevada in the US.
@streetmagicstyle You might've guessed, by now, that I am against the prosecution of "crimes of morality". You are probably becoming aware, at this point, that I think giving the decision to the states is a rotten idea...
@masercot "You are probably becoming aware, at this point, that I think giving the decision to the states is a rotten idea..."
We have too many fanatical, fundamentalist, socially conservative jackasses in this country to leave decisions up to the federal government. It is better to have a minority of states be socially free than none at all.
@streetmagicstyle Yeah, then you get Jim Crow-type laws and anti birth control and anti Muslim laws...all of which are being attempted at a state level...
@masercot "Yeah, then you get Jim Crow-type laws and anti birth control and anti Muslim laws...all of which are being attempted at a state level..."
I have seen no indication that you have even considered the possibility that the federal government could apply the insane laws to all 50 states. Do you assume these problematic laws would all disappear if they started being handled at the federal level?
@streetmagicstyle You are right...I definitely don't see the federal government outlawing birth control, like they almost did in Mississippi. I also definitely don't see Jim Crow laws being put back into place on a federal level. If they didn't pass anti-Muslim legislation after 9/11, they probably are never going to.
The states, on the other hand, are quite capable. You obviously are aware of that fact...
@masercot The Defense of Marriage Act is a federal law that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. You conveniently left out any example that demonstrates federal policy is not immune from social bigotry. But the use of track record is very questionable anyways: The bat shit crazy Republicans historically left decisions to the state. Now they are trying to impose that stuff at a federal level, so historical policy at the federal level is less apposite for future prediction.
I believe.
Strateg68 1 day ago
Ron Paul for eight years (two terms)!!! The USA will be back on top again!!!
tigeroll 1 week ago
God doesn't owe anyone anything. Not a job. Not an income. Not anything. God helps those who help themselves, which basically means God does nothing for anyone. I was a believer up until my 30s, now I am an absolute non-believer, and much saner, much freer, much happier because of it. Religion is man-made, and as such is a form of control and bondage. I have worked full-time from age 18 untl now (40+ years) and when I can't due to illness, disability or age I know there isn't anyone to help me.
rosemaya48 2 weeks ago
I said this before and im going to say it again.... " fuck Ron paul just for 2012 i want Ron Paul for the rest of his sacrid and Honest Life.
JO3DIGGA 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Who REALLY runs our world? search "israel Did 911 All Proof in the World" and search "ZionCrimeFactory" for proof.
Reporting on the death of supremacist Zionist leader David Wolffsohn, the September 17, 1914, edition of THE NEW YORK TIMES tells us that during his closing address at the Zionist Congress at the Hague in 1907 Wolffsohn “pleaded for greater unity among the Jews and said that eventually they must conquer the world.”
w(dot)zioncrimefactory com/jew-world-order SPREAD THE TRUTH!
LordLindsey12 3 weeks ago
Never taken ron paul serously my ass. What makes this jackass an expert?
jasongleaner 1 month ago
@jasongleaner Unfortunately (for her) NOBODY ever takes Peggy Noonan seriously. She's always been for the status quo & she makes no secret that she wants more police state thru-out the world. The only intelligent thing Noonan has ever said in her life was when she called Kanye West an "angry black cockroach" on MSNBC's Morning Joe. She also called Kanye a "pottymouth" too. Other than that this woman is totally clueless & she's in for a very rude awakening in Nov when Dr. Paul wins.
bucky468 3 weeks ago
RON PUAL 2012
itzgangstabob 1 month ago
Bet they won't talk like this again. He has a VERY good chance of winning Iowa.
VeeDubz420 2 months ago
That Lady at the end sounds way to much like the "Fruit Cup" Nurse on High Anxiety
& I just cant take her seriously !!!! ;-)
ncwdane 2 months ago
"Distruptive.." ??? ..........
Interesting choice or word.
ABC commentators still talking as if Ron Paul is a second class citizen.
To these arrogant and dishonest commentators, Ron Paul is like an uninvited guest "distrupting" a members only country club party.
Go Ron Paul Go!!!!! Win the whole thing!!!!
frantomam 2 months ago
Liberal Agnostic and huge Dr. Paul supporter here...He's the only candidate with a conscience.
tooldruid 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
very good video!
Americans--this is your chance to have some future in this country!
is the next money bomb 12/16?
aguafinatv 2 months ago
i think Dr Paul is going to take the nomination this time
desipimp299 2 months ago
Dont listen to their bull zhit. They want you to remain complacent. The truth is, the establishment is going to steal this election, like they've been doing every election for the last half century. ORGANIZE a transparent vote count. We want 1 person in every precinct in Iowa and New Hampshire to take a picture and or video of the election results then upload the results to a public web site for the world to see. Otherwise, the media will lie to you. They wont count all the precincts. TRUST ME!
SupraSovereign 2 months ago 2
I think it's because of his low coverage why he is not the front runner. Anyone with a brain who has been watching this election closely see's that there is a concentrated effort to keep that mans message from reaching the masses.
MrMalcolm900 3 months ago 2
And ironically enough, right after this debate Yahoo! stated Gingrich had solidified his position as the front-runner. Typical MSM FLIP-FLOP PANDERING.
TheReapersSon 3 months ago
Ive taken ron paul seriously for 10 years when I first found out about him when I was 16.
Bigturns33 3 months ago
Ron Paul has my vote!
bluemonday2020 3 months ago
Lol at the people that think a god has to spoon feed you your morals. Here's a wake up call for you.. universal morality doesn't even exist in your mentality, it is all derived from god's will and plan. Besides that Ron Paul is the best! Civil liberties, sound currency, non-interventionism and prosperity!! Ron Paul 2012!
designcliche 3 months ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
First time he had EQUAL time (well almost) & look how well he did. Co-sponsor was YAHOO. After debate Yahoo had layers of articles & POLLS. RON PAULS name never appeared ONCE on Yahoo follow up material nor his quotes. Like he was not even in the debate. In 3 1/2 weeks the FIRST "REAL" POLL gets taken in the IOWA GOP Primary vote. The media keeps saying Paul is far back in 3rd or 4th place. Anyone got any money you feel like LOSING? At worst he will be 4% behind Newt. MAYBE in FIRST
charles43110 3 months ago
Hooray for our side ... Please Dear God... give us Dr Ron Paul for our leader. No one else comes even close to his level of honor & comprehension of leadership. Everyone else is creepy or worse. So many idiots think the morals of a man don't matter... what fools... probably atheists.
9tee 3 months ago
@9tee You started so strong then ended in ignorance... I'm an Atheist, go ron!
Sixvicious 3 months ago
@9tee I'm also an atheist and voting for Dr. Paul. Loving freedom is universal!
Bouchon211 3 months ago 14
@9tee I am an Atheist and Socio-capitalist Libertarian and I am voting for Ron Paul!!! Go Paul Go!!! Ron 2012!!!
MarcLira66 2 months ago
Finally. Good news
christopher4everon 3 months ago
Won't that just piss them all off when he does win?
rubbersole79 3 months ago
The people take RP seriously its the media that doesn't and since the media is there to shape opinions the morons who don't analyze or think for themselves repeat what they heard in the media as if it were their own opinion.
DiNatalli 3 months ago 2
Peggy Noonan was right when she called Kanye an angry black cockroach & a pottymouth on Morning Joe a few yrs back but she is dead wrong when she says no one takes Ron Paul seriously & the other shit she's been saying about him being a pretender. This is the same woman who called Sarah Palin a true contender for the presidency in 2012. Noonan is a blowhard bitch who should be married to Bernie Goldberg, another assclown who thinks Ron Paul is a joke.
bucky468 3 months ago
"Disruptive"? HAHAHA. The media's a joke.
Itugen88 3 months ago
ron paul isn't going anywhere.He's useful in making people re-think some accepted global geo-political realities--but so unrealistic as to be a National security disaster.
mrbriscoe2001 3 months ago
@mrbriscoe2001 You are slowly but most definitely repeating the now minority view... Keep at it... We will wave to you on the way in to the white house.
NeurozapPaul 3 months ago
We have one crack left and that is Ron Paul, let's no blow it. If we blow it we will end up in rags.
wildman1945 3 months ago
oh my god! wait let me stop. is this possible? iowa is the key, we cant place 2nd or 3rd, we need 2 win it all 2 shake up the world ya'll !!!! im being dead serious yo. we got this, i just know it. unless the pull a bush vs gore 2000.umm idk lol
JUANO510 3 months ago
Who else is there? RON PAUL 2012
MrGottabefree 3 months ago 2
Only the people who want to keep this farce rolling do not take Dr. Paul seriously.
strawman007 3 months ago
i was just gonna ask you about that? yeah right lady
AlienNationRadio 3 months ago
If he pulls it off he's gonna need food tasters and bulletproof vests because the same shysters and murderous swindlers who whacked JFK and Abe Lincoln will do him in. Take that to the bank. He's s threat to the JEWS and their hold over their US Colony.
Bernie95 3 months ago
@Bernie95 I would be proud to be one of those food-tasters.
It is worth the price of liberty, when all of us have been in a "Plato's Cave" our whole lives.
Anyone else with me ?
SenatorTonyKreutzer 3 months ago
Too bad he doesn't want to shut down the southern border and send the illegals back. ..
14nomonkeys 3 months ago
Absolutely right! Ron Paul will take 2012!!!
fatsmile77 3 months ago 4
R O N P A U L = O U R P L A N
downwindspiral 3 months ago
OUR PLAN = RON PAUL
downwindspiral 3 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
RON PAUL YOU GOT MY VOTE!
endbrainwashing 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
That was encouraging! Ron Paul 2012!
edeneating 3 months ago
If the elections weren't so rigged Ron Pauls victory would be almost certain, despite what the mainstream media mantra though even with all the dirty tricks they are going to try to pull Ron Paul can still win we are just going to have to work that much harder at it. Ron Paul 2012.
BladeEdge86 3 months ago
ARE these people stupid???? The woman says 'No one has taken RP seriously' she is DEAD WRONG....THE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TAKING HIM SERIOUSLY ALL ALONG ...ONLY THE STUPID PRESS HAS BLOCKED HIM OUT. THEY HAVE LOST MOST OF US AS VIEWERS BECAUSE OF IT. DON'T THEY LIKE THEIR JOB, THEN FUCKING DO IT!!!!!!
RSCustomWebDesigns 3 months ago
Fail @ 0:02, that's not George Will.
dudemanbearpig 3 months ago
Nice !! Finally someone gives Ron Paul some respect. Thanks Peggy Noonan*
Nieuws1 3 months ago
Ron Paul Hollywood 2012.
girlonlaptop 3 months ago
And it will be about time everyone takes him seriously!
Really, just what is it that freaks people out? The fiscal responsibility, having sound money, civil liberties, smaller government?
capturenowmedia 3 months ago 5
Look at the lemmings in the media parroting each other! Notice we are hearing the term "Ron Paul's passionate supporters" now? Good stuff LOL! MAYBE now people will start to loook into why we are so passionate!
ONLYRonPaul1 3 months ago 9
No one has ever taken him seriously... Well, hehehe; the world is about to muthafuggas!
rockhardagain 3 months ago
everyone email the man, and thank him for stating the TRUTH !!!!!!
naym2011 3 months ago
Wow. This video got me stoked!
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
Let's win Iowa! Help the grassroots send 200,000 caucus voters Ron Paul information packages. SUPERVOTERBOMB [dot] COM
Eric21ND 3 months ago 3
Um...could win IOWA...not exactly what the title of this video says, but what is ACTUALLY SAID in the video.
hanslute 3 months ago
I have to wonder now if anyone has ever taken you seriously? Because when you say things that make you sound like your head has been in the sand for the past 6 months I want to say, "what the heck!"
capturenowmedia 3 months ago
So now, on the eve of a good showing or even a win, main stream media is pretending that the person they've black listed for so long is coming out of nowhere? The media functions just like every other federal agency in that it's main focus is to serve and protect the parasitical elite.
Thank God for the internet! Ron Paul 2012!
4thstuning 3 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
OH WE'RE TAKING THIS BABY!!! RON PAUL 2012!!!
sga86 3 months ago
What no one takes Ron Paul serious??? who is that woman presstitute? In Australia all the talk of US politics is all about Ron Paul and that he is the US's and the worlds last hope
SouthernCross33 3 months ago 27
@SouthernCross33 No one in America does. I love Ron Paul, but no one really does take him serious here. Mostly because the media writes him off in fear that he does get elected.
Chaaazz2008 3 months ago
@SouthernCross33
Because he is. All these idiots in the mass media just disregard Dr. Paul because he is the only person with the guts to stand up and tell it like it is. Lobbyists and Corporate lap-dogs don't like him, it means "bye-bye War!" and that is frightening to most of Corporate America.
skorgelock 3 months ago
DR. RON PAUL IS SPEAKING WORDS OF WISDOM...LET IT BE...LET IT BE...RON PAUL 2012!!!
DesaStables 3 months ago
Actually the people that have looked into Ron Paul take him very seriously and so does the msm or they would not marginalize him so much. They are very afraid he could pull this off and I think he must win for the good of the country.
jayrod59 3 months ago 16
Maybe I'm paranoid, but I remember Bobby and how much he scared the establishment. The previous administration and this current one had and would have no problem creating another false flag operation to disrupt the political process. The support for Ron Paul, whether you like it or not, is a steam train that may very well run over the big 5 networks and neo-cons that would rather pretend he and his supporter don't exist.
DinjenPolevaulter 3 months ago
The American people may be stupid, but they'll never be so stupid as to elect Ron Paul...
I'm waiting for his cult to kill themselves during the next comet...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot
Opinions are like assholes, everybody's got one, but yours stinks.
myhipsi 3 months ago
@myhipsi Ah, the mentality of the average Ron Paul supporter. Immediately turns the conversation to anuses like the frustrated and closeted fellow that he is...
Good luck with that, son...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot funny to find your stupid ass on another comment section devoted to Ron Paul. I have not seen one person ever agree with you. I would refer to you as a tool, but tools have some use.
LastbutNotFirst 3 months ago
@LastbutNotFirst Thanks for your incisive comment, child...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot professing for supporters of ron paul to kill themselves isn't a child like comment.. its an adult comment from an ignorant fool. i would never wish death upon anyone for their views, beliefs, or thoughts.. no matter how skewed.. freedom of speech.. but what you do with your words is merely spread hate and ignorance.. you're lucky the constitution allows you to be an idiot.. unfortunately because of people like you.. we may no longer have a constitution to value.
LastbutNotFirst 3 months ago
@LastbutNotFirst Didn't say that I WANTED them to kill themselves. I stated that I was EXPECTING them to kill themselves...making reference to their status as a cult...
Glad I could help...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot Ah, the mentality of the average Ron Paul basher. Always writing comments on youtube complaining Ron Paul supporters write too many comments on youtube.
viavo 3 months ago 3
@viavo Don't really care how many comments you girls write. A few remarks back and forth and you see that Ron Paul supporters have no idea what they support...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot Go back to sleep!
decieveusnot9 3 months ago
@masercot "A few remarks back and forth and you see that Ron Paul supporters have no idea what they support..."
Care to test that one out? I consider myself a Ron Paul supporter.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Why not? First, tell me what you support as a Ron Paul supporter...as in policy.
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "First, tell me what you support as a Ron Paul supporter...as in policy."
Part 1: I support Ron Paul's belief that waterboarding is torture. I empathize with Paul's skepticism of the centralized power advanced National ID cards could potentially grant. After Kaddafi was sodomized without a trial, Al Qaeda flags subsequently appeared on courthouses in Libya, and the emerging government was claimed to be basing policy from Shariah Law, I recalled Paul warning about blowback.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Two of those are policy and one is opinion, since it already occurred.
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "First, tell me what you support as a Ron Paul supporter...as in policy."
After seeing a TSA agent put her fingers down the waist band of a 6 year old girl and a myriad of intrusive TSA searches caught on camera, I recalled Ron Paul being laughed at years before that for wanting to end the Department of Homeland Security. Also, watching the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security ask us to spy on our neighbors in Walmart parking lots (Video ID mQZhvuxf0-c), I remembered Ron.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle So, what policy does your comment refer to? Getting rid of TSA? To what extent? Entirely? Let the market dictate what chance of terrorist attack a consumer will put up with?
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "So, what policy does your comment refer to? Getting rid of TSA? To what extent? Entirely?"
It refers to privatizing the TSA.
"Let the market dictate what chance of terrorist attack a consumer will put up with?"
Nobody can guarantee perfect safety, including the TSA. As Ron Paul argued, a gun in the cockpit has a better track record with respect to preventing terrorist attacks. How many terrorist attacks has the TSA prevented with porno scanners and groping?
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Privatizing TSA is giving law enforcement powers to a private entity...something we do far too much already...
...and, in Ron Paul's America, the corporation will be the law...
masercot 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@masercot "Privatizing TSA is giving law enforcement powers to a private entity...something we do far too much already...
...and, in Ron Paul's America, the corporation will be the law..."
Before the governmental TSA was imposed, the massive episode of groping people and using porno scanners did not exist. Call it corporate law if you will, but whatever it was, it was much better than its current alternative.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot youtube search "why we should fear bathtubs more than terrorists" - good video to check out to see tsa doesn't do much. as far as market solutions go, canada privatized some stuff so if they can we can. And I don't have any data to back this up (mainly I don't know where to look) but why anyone would think the gov. has more incentive than the airlines themselves to keep us safe is beyond me. If a plane goes down due to a airline neglecting security they would face huge probs.
undeadarsenal 3 months ago
@masercot "Why not? First, tell me what you support as a Ron Paul supporter...as in policy."
With the U.S. debt apparently in excess of $15 trillion, and the US military expenditures being at least over 6x that of any other country in the world, it would seem that Ron Paul's proposal to cut from military expenditures could be sensible.
I read the Constitution and I realize that declarations of war without congressional authorization are unconstitutional (i.e. illegal).
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle So again, what is the policy? I know that the debt is bad and we spend a lot on military. Where is Paul going to cut? And, by how much?
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "So again, what is the policy? I know that the debt is bad and we spend a lot on military. Where is Paul going to cut? And, by how much?"
With respect to military, 15% gets cut from the Department of Defense, and while I can not be as meticulous as a balance sheet in YouTube comments, I think it goes without saying that Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and several other countries would see a withdraw of troops.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle just to add what you put on the military part --- my wife is a finance officer in the Air Force and you should see some of the insane stuff we are spending money on just in afghanistan. It would blow your mind the money we are wasting overseas. So to those who want a strong defense, you are making our country more hated involving ourselves in other peoples business.
undeadarsenal 3 months ago
@undeadarsenal I'm all for cutting waste; however, if you simply tell the military "cut fifteen percent", I guarantee you, having worked for the military for fifteen years in total, they will not go for the waste first...
There is a reason wasteful spending happens in the first place...
masercot 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle It doesn't go without saying. They could instead cut military benefits, salaries, etc. We could be enjoying a time where existing personnel is stretched to capacity...something we got to witness during Bush's regime...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "It doesn't go without saying. They could instead cut military benefits, salaries, etc."
Ron Paul explicitly said he would bring troops home and I believe him.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle I don't doubt it. But, home to unemployment? It is a very real issue. To be an effective leader one needs to plan several moves ahead. Ron Paul looks no further than one move before announcing policy...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "I don't doubt it. But, home to unemployment? It is a very real issue. To be an effective leader one needs to plan several moves ahead. Ron Paul looks no further than one move before announcing policy..."
I think that is entirely unfounded. Ron Paul is like a grandmaster of chess at thinking moves ahead. I am not claiming to embrace the Austrian school of economics, but Ron Paul clearly has a solid grasp on it and I read a book that addresses that. (See next comment for more.)
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot "I don't doubt it. But, home to unemployment? It is a very real issue. To be an effective leader one needs to plan several moves ahead. Ron Paul looks no further than one move before announcing policy..."
That is entirely unfounded. Ron Paul is like a grandmaster at chess when it comes to thinking moves ahead. You may not agree with with the logic but it is utterly false to think he has not anticipated unemployment. To back this up, read the next comment.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Where is the next comment?
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "Where is the next comment?"
For the record, you see two comments that paraphrase one another because the comment did not show up after I posted it. Then I tried posting again (hence the second comment) and it did not show up right away. Ron Paul uses Austrian school ideas. Austrians (Austrian school economists, really) believe purchase power spent on American products used in wars means the buying power ultimately come from labor here. (read next for more)
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot Jesus motherfucking Christ. I can't see my last comment yet and it is frustrating me. Anyways, think of this as Comment 2 because I can't reply to my last one. To Austrians (Austrian school economists), the buying power taken from taxation or inflation for those weapons and military labor go to waste, cut into domestic savings that would have been invested into capital goods here, and make it less attractive to run a business or work here (decreasing employment). MORE TO COME
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot Think of this as Comment 3. To Austrian school advocates, the Keynesian arguments are incorrect and paying money to repair destruction does not increase production; it is a broken windows fallacy to believe that and merely diverts production. Also, according to them, Ron Paul's efforts to get rid of minimum wage would increase employment. (I actually have a video on my channel with an audio chapter by an Austrian school economist, Henry Hazlitt, about minimum wage and unemployment.)
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot Think of this as Comment #4. I personally do not claim that Keynes was wrong and that Austrian economists are right. Plenty of people object to their arguments with a multitude of books. In this context, I am only contesting your claim that Ron Paul "looks no further than one move before announcing policy." That is an untrue statement about Ron Paul.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle My comment was not a throw-away insult of Ron Paul. He claims our rights as citizens are in danger; but, his solution simply washes the hands of the federal government of any responsibility, but doesn't look at the abysmal records of the states. He wants to get rid of public medical care, stating that prices will drop, somehow, if the poor are left to die...
His contempt of the underprivileged carries with it a short term monetary gain, but a long term destabilization...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "My comment was not a throw-away insult of Ron Paul. He claims our rights as citizens are in danger; but, his solution simply washes the hands of the federal government of any responsibility, but doesn't look at the abysmal records of the states."
I understand your point here, but your original comment mentioned employment for troops who are brought home and Ron Paul looking no further than one move before announcing policy. It seems worth highlighting he thought many moves ahead.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle I don't really think that Paul is going to want to support a wartime-sized force with no war. In this case, I think we have to disagree...
A good solution would be to put military personnel to work on American infrastructure...but, Paul wouldn't go for that in a million years...
masercot 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@masercot "I don't really think that Paul is going to want to support a wartime-sized force with no war. In this case, I think we have to disagree..."
That is a red herring fallacy.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot "He wants to get rid of public medical care, stating that prices will drop, somehow, if the poor are left to die..."
This sentence is pretty multithreaded, so I will try to address a few points separately. You say he wants to get rid of public medical care. It is widely accepted that the entitlement programs are unsustainable if recent trends continue. Ron Paul has announced his intentions to use part of the money cut from the Department of Defense and put it into entitlements.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle He wants to cut Medicaid by 645 Billion. How does that jibe with your comment?
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "He wants to get rid of public medical care, stating that prices will drop, somehow, if the poor are left to die..."
You mention Ron states that prices will drop. From what I have seen, it is pretty widely accepted by economists on both sides of the argument that Medicaid and Medicaid insurance drives prices up. I saw the extent and horrid consequences of removing programs debated, but I am not sure if you actually doubt the fact that gov programs drive med prices up. Do you?
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle I doubt, very much, that medical institutions are going to drop their rates by very much at all if Medicaid is defunded. There is no historical precedent for it...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "He wants to get rid of public medical care, stating that prices will drop, somehow, if the poor are left to die..."
Then there is the part about poor people being left to die. Again, the entitlement programs are unsustainable if recent trends continue. Ron Paul has announced his intentions to use part of the money cut from the Department of Defense and put it into entitlements. (more to come)
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot "He wants to get rid of public medical care, stating that prices will drop, somehow, if the poor are left to die..."
When it comes to health care, Ron is in a unique position because he is a physician. He stated that while in residency, he worked at a hospital before heavy government involvement in health care and never saw anyone be left on a street to die. People also can die from lack of advanced medical technology brought into existence by private competition.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle People die now from lack of money or devious insurance companies. It happens a lot. Studies show that you are forty percent more likely to die if you have no insurance...equating to 45,000 people a year.
Also, the fact that the United States ranks below most socialized medicine nations in health is a good indicator...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "Also, the fact that the United States ranks below most socialized medicine nations in health is a good indicator..."
"Also, the fact that the United States ranks below most socialized medicine nations in health is a good indicator..."
The United States has a health care model that Ron Paul is highly critical of.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot "People die now from lack of money or devious insurance companies."
The key word is "now." A lack of money is a bigger problem when medical prices are higher. Devious insurance companies may be a bigger problem when big bureaucracy creates a recipe for cronyism. Google "iron triangle us politics wikipedia" and consider the diagram.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot "People die now from lack of money or devious insurance companies. It happens a lot."
It is easy to overlook parts of Ron Paul's wholistic philosophy when discussing health. Think about the health of people in overseas wars that he wants to end. Consider the health of Iraqi children, deaths of troops in Afghanistan, injuries of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, money spent on war instead of investing into health care, etc..
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot "His contempt of the underprivileged carries with it a short term monetary gain, but a long term destabilization..."
You claim that Ron Paul has contempt of the underprivileged? That seems outlandish. Contempt? Is this supposed to be a poetic way to oppose private market philosophy, or are you sincerely suggesting that Ron Paul literally has contempt for the underprivileged?
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle I firmly believe that "contempt" is the most appropriate word, yes. I don't condemn you for supporting the man...you seem to believe in him and you seem more thoughtful than most; however, I believe that Ron Paul values money over people...
Very dangerous attitude for a leader to have...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "however, I believe that Ron Paul values money over people..."
This reminds me of George Carlin saying something to the effect that the left cares more about people and the right cares more about property. The Austrian economists, whether correct or incorrect, argue that a system with strong private property rights is in the best interest of people; they argue that property rights is the best way to maximize utility of people. Even if incorrect, is that actually "contempt?"
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot "Very dangerous attitude for a leader to have..."
The most dangerous attitude of leaders I can think of were the polar opposite of libertarianism and individual rights. They were people who pushed collectivism, war, unitarian structures, or centrally planned economics. Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, etc.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Hitler was a friend to big business and had a death sentence for communists. The governments of Mao, Stalin and Lenin were just as vicious as the capitalists that preceded them...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "Hitler was a friend to big business and had a death sentence for communists."
Hitler and Communists were both pushing collectivism. Ron Paul's philosophy is individualism. Also, Hitler was all about central planning. Check out Hayek's book "The Road to Serfdom."
"The governments of Mao, Stalin and Lenin were just as vicious as the capitalists that preceded them."
Which capitalist was as vicious as Mao, Stalin, and Lenin?
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot "Hitler was a friend to big business and had a death sentence for communists."
Hitler did not idealize a system of individual rights. He idealized a system of abridging rights. He falls in the same camp as Stalin, Mao, and Lenin.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Capitalism doesn't either. When money is involved in a capitalist society, the poor individual has the right to do as he's told. This puts capitalists in the same camp with Stalin, Mao and Lenin.
Equating American liberals with Stalin, Mao and Lenin is tired and full of fallacies. I'm sure you know this...
masercot 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@masercot (1/2)
"Capitalism doesn't either. When money is involved in a capitalist society, the poor individual has the right to do as he's told. This puts capitalists in the same camp with Stalin, Mao and Lenin."
Well, I to quote myself: "Hitler did not idealize a system of individual rights."
I think you are playing fast and loose with the word "right." What system of individual rights do American liberals advocate?
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot (2/2)
Consider the phrase "right to health care." And suppose we agree that privatized health care is inhumane, wrong, and immoral. I think it is still a word game to call it an individual right. Virtually nobody disagree that I have a "right to play Sony Playstation" in America if I want (unless, maybe, I was in prison or some strange exception). Further, virtually nobody would ever think that meant the right to threaten my neighbors with weapons to take their Playstation. Word games.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Your rights extend proportional to the thickness of your wallet. Do you have a right to a fair trial? If you consider substandard public defenders against seasoned lawyers fair. A right to free speech? Folks like Ron Paul equate dollars with speech.
You have the right to contact your representative. If you have money he will even listen to you.
You cannot have "rights" and capitalism, without wealth. And, Adam Smith states we can't all be wealthy...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "A right to free speech? Folks like Ron Paul equate dollars with speech."
Whether 10 people listen to you or 300 people listen, you have just as much free speech if you are not being arrested for what you say. The "right to free speech" does not mean the right of gang-robbing your neighbor to afford studio technology and broadcast to a wider audience. Libel, slander, and yelling fire in a movie theater may raise questions about the definition, but the number of listeners does not.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle How 'bout the wealthy buying up the airwaves to force feed us their opinions and deciding what is appropriate to give us from the internet? It isn't the number of listeners...it is the number of sources...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot (1/2)
"How 'bout the wealthy buying up the airwaves to force feed us their opinions"
1. Jon Stewart does not kick in your door and take you to a secret dungeon where you are bound to watch his show.
2. We do not have privatized media. As Ron Paul says all the time, there is presently corporatism in this country, not capitalism. I do not believe 9/11 was an inside job or any of that, but I think there is evidence to support the existence a military-media-industrial complex.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot (2/2)
I saved a ton of links that serve as good evidence for a military-industrial-media complex after a lot of tedious research. I would be happy to present it if you want.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@masercot "Do you have a right to a fair trial? If you consider substandard public defenders against seasoned lawyers fair."
I am glad you brought this up because part of me wonders whether or not you are right. First, exactly what would the alternative look like? Would there be a voucher system for all defendants to match a multi-million-dollar prosecutor? Would everybody be forced to have socialized, substandard public defenders? Aren't substandard public defenders heterogeneous (skill-wise)?
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle I think that, in our current legal system, the judge takes too passive an approach. If a lawyer misses the obvious, the judge lets it happen. It isn't the fault of the judges...they are overloaded with cases...but, there are consequences for actual human beings regardless...
I don't offer a solution. There isn't an easy one...our judicial system is very sick and multi-tiered...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "I don't offer a solution."
The Objectivists (Ayn Rand loving capitalists) had a very good argument. They argued a huge key the problem is laws that are not written objectively enough, and that subjective interpretation creates a huge disparity in outcomes arises from different attorneys and spins.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle The problem is the vague nature of the human language. Any two words (excepting proper nouns) can be link through synonyms...even opposites. It usually only takes a few steps.
Of course, that is also the beauty of the English language...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot I can see that being a problem to some extent, but I still subscribe to the correspondence theory of truth. When describing wavelengths of light, a writer can be highly, highly specific and construct reasonably unequivocal statements. With enough effort, the same effort can be used to screen out some gray areas in law. There are, of course, postmodernists who will get really semantic and deny language can describe any objective truth, but those arguments are impractical for courts.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle I'm not a Wittgenstein man...more of a semiotics/Umberto Eco kind of a guy. In my opinion, though, no matter how careful one writes a law, there will always be weasels to twist them...
masercot 2 months ago
@masercot "Why not? First, tell me what you support as a Ron Paul supporter...as in policy."
I agree with Ron Paul that Federal prohibition is bad news. As a doctor, he called it a health problem. I had several friends with addiction problems and this resonated as true. I met frail, weak people who engaged in selling marijuana and were locked up with murderers and rapists. And marijuana was easier to obtain than alcohol, so trying to attack supply backfired there.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Ron Paul doesn't support making drugs legal. He supports states making their own laws concerning drugs. States could make laws even more draconian.
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "Ron Paul doesn't support making drugs legal. He supports states making their own laws concerning drugs."
As a president, he would be a federal official and his role to reject prohibition is therefore (legally) limited to federal actions. He explicitly stated he wants to get rid of the DEA. That is a prodigiously radical position to oppose prohibition (within his legal power) and it appeals to me.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Much about that appeals to me...but, even though he sees drug laws as being out of the realm of the Feds, he still sees the states as being fully entitled to tell us what to do in our homes...
You do understand why the federal government got into the business of enforcing civil rights, don't you?
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "Much about that appeals to me...but, even though he sees drug laws as being out of the realm of the Feds, he still sees the states as being fully entitled to tell us what to do in our homes..."
He also sees Jesus as the son of God, which I find preposterous, I am focused on his actual political actions as a president. And again, as a present, he can only legally operate at the federal level. At the federal level, he would work to vanish the DEA . That's good enough for me.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@masercot "Why not? First, tell me what you support as a Ron Paul supporter...as in policy."
I do not support internet censorship. Ron Paul opposes internet censorship. I do not support a federal ban on prostitution. When a woman has not posed a safety hazard, I oppose the government using firearms, handcuffs, and jail cells to forcefully dictate what she does with her private, personal sex life.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle So, Ron Paul wants to pass a law telling Internet Providers that they cannot censor their content? As for prostitution, again he wants states to decide. Are there any federal laws against prostitution?
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "So, Ron Paul wants to pass a law telling Internet Providers that they cannot censor their content?"
Ron Paul opposed the Protect IP Act, a vague law that opens the door for governmental censorship. It authorizes bureacracy to selectively block websites (with the pretense of preventing piracy while remaining very ambiguous, of course).
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Yes, he opposed a bill that contains censorship, but not because he is against corporate entities censoring content. He is opposed to government regulating those businesses. Don't be insincere...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "Yes, he opposed a bill that contains censorship, but not because he is against corporate entities censoring content. He is opposed to government regulating those businesses. Don't be insincere..."
Insincere? That is ridiculous. I should have been more specific with language and said "governmental censorship" but the "insincere" charge is bogus. At any rate, I am not a utopianist. Governmental censorship scares me a lot more than private firms monitoring their own property.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Corporate power is way more horrible than anything our government can come up with. But, if Paul has his way on restrictions are removed from business, your corporations WILL be our government. We're practically there anyway...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "Corporate power is way more horrible than anything our government can come up with."
I gave you the example of corporate searches being more benign and the searches being more intrusive when the government got involved. Video ID X_Ww-d71J-A is footage of a 9-year-old having fingers stuck down her waist band. You have not provided any evidence or argument that the private airport security was worse. Have any evidence that government is doing better than private airport security did?
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Well, like it or not, your party blamed the private contractors who worked security at the airports for the 9/11 attacks.
The corporate power I refer to are the killings in Ron Paul type nations (like Guatamala) where labor organizers were murdered with impunity...or in this country, during its Ron Paul phase (the industrial revolution) where they were shot dead by private detectives working for the corporations...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "The corporate power I refer to are the killings in Ron Paul type nations (like Guatamala) where labor organizers were murdered with impunity..."
Guatemala is a "Ron Paul nation?" lol whaaat? Is that supposed to be strident to grab attention or are you serious? Guatemala is a unitary state. Ron Paul does not advocate a unitary state.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle He advocates the laissez faire type of government that brought about the Coca Cola killings in Guatemala...
masercot 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@masercot "He advocates the laissez faire type of government that brought about the Coca Cola killings in Guatemala..."
I am only guessing and I realize this would not negate anything, but this sounds like an attempt to build on the documentary called "The Cost of a Coke." Exactly what are you blaming for the killings? Are you suggesting an unregulated Guatemalan economy caused it?
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle I am suggesting that a government ruled by money, much like the one Ron Paul is suggesting, is the cause...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "Well, like it or not, your party blamed the private contractors who worked security at the airports for the 9/11 attacks."
I am an individual, not a collective. Unless you are challenging me personally for something I did or said, there is no reason why I am intellectually obliged to defend a position.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle It is the party that Ron Paul continues to associate himself with...
There has to be a reason for that...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot "As for prostitution, again he wants states to decide. Are there any federal laws against prostitution?"
No, but there is intense lobbying to ban prostitution at the federal level. (I can cite sources if you wish.) Dennis Hof (owner of the most popular brothel in America) endorsed and actively raised money for Ron Paul during his 2008 campaign. Federal policy can work both ways. Prostitution is nationally banned in most countries. Citizens can at least move to Nevada in the US.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle You might've guessed, by now, that I am against the prosecution of "crimes of morality". You are probably becoming aware, at this point, that I think giving the decision to the states is a rotten idea...
masercot 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@masercot "You are probably becoming aware, at this point, that I think giving the decision to the states is a rotten idea..."
We have too many fanatical, fundamentalist, socially conservative jackasses in this country to leave decisions up to the federal government. It is better to have a minority of states be socially free than none at all.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle Yeah, then you get Jim Crow-type laws and anti birth control and anti Muslim laws...all of which are being attempted at a state level...
masercot 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@masercot "Yeah, then you get Jim Crow-type laws and anti birth control and anti Muslim laws...all of which are being attempted at a state level..."
I have seen no indication that you have even considered the possibility that the federal government could apply the insane laws to all 50 states. Do you assume these problematic laws would all disappear if they started being handled at the federal level?
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago
@streetmagicstyle You are right...I definitely don't see the federal government outlawing birth control, like they almost did in Mississippi. I also definitely don't see Jim Crow laws being put back into place on a federal level. If they didn't pass anti-Muslim legislation after 9/11, they probably are never going to.
The states, on the other hand, are quite capable. You obviously are aware of that fact...
masercot 3 months ago
@masercot The Defense of Marriage Act is a federal law that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. You conveniently left out any example that demonstrates federal policy is not immune from social bigotry. But the use of track record is very questionable anyways: The bat shit crazy Republicans historically left decisions to the state. Now they are trying to impose that stuff at a federal level, so historical policy at the federal level is less apposite for future prediction.
streetmagicstyle 3 months ago