Ron Paul votes to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 28, 2010 10:17 PM GMT
    He was one of only five Republicans to do so.

    http://reason.com/blog/2010/05/28/ron-paul-on-repealing-dont-ask
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 28, 2010 11:39 PM GMT
    Many people confuse conservatism with libertarianism. This leads to their surprise when a Republican congress coupled with a Republican president differs from our current Democrat version only in degree as it grows government and increases debt.

    Libertarians will vote for freedom and smaller government even in cases they might find personally repugnant.

    Ron Paul tends more libertarian than conservative. This vote doesn't surprise me at all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2010 2:28 AM GMT
    today "conservatism" stands for excessive spending and NOT raising taxes and GROWING government to legislate religion.

    if libertarianism stands for less government spending and smaller government then sign me up. (though i always considered that TRUE conservatism). when the republicans finally decide to rally behind people like ron paul and not palin, i might consider voting republican again.

    Dakota_gent saidMany people confuse conservatism with libertarianism. This leads to their surprise when a Republican congress coupled with a Republican president differs from our current Democrat version only in degree as it grows government and increases debt.

    Libertarians will vote for freedom and smaller government even in cases they might find personally repugnant.

    Ron Paul tends more libertarian than conservative. This vote doesn't surprise me at all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2010 2:30 AM GMT
    excellent! icon_biggrin.gif
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    May 29, 2010 2:40 AM GMT
    Yeah .... and he's still a LOON icon_confused.gif

    Like Father Like Son

    <object width=">

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2010 2:51 AM GMT
    Libertarians typically oppose laws that constrain individual freedoms. However, they also typically oppose laws that enforce those freedoms. That's why Ron's son can say he finds racial discrimination abhorrent but can't support a law that makes it illegal in the workplace.

    I haven't checked the Libertoonian platform lately, but their position historically has been that gay people should have the civil rights accorded all citizens, but they oppose legislating the guarantee of those rights. Thus they supported, for example, the Boy Scouts' "right" to exclude gay people.

    Isn't that a wonderful philosophy? "Yes, of course, you deserve your rights, but we're not going to legislate protections of those rights. Fuck reality."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2010 3:35 AM GMT
    eh... I'll still take Ru over Ron any day.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2010 3:43 AM GMT
    Won't this get him kicked out of the republican party?icon_question.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2010 3:49 AM GMT
    ObsceneWish saidLibertarians typically oppose laws that constrain individual freedoms. However, they also typically oppose laws that enforce those freedoms. That's why Ron's son can say he finds racial discrimination abhorrent but can't support a law that makes it illegal in the workplace.

    I haven't checked the Libertoonian platform lately, but their position historically has been that gay people should have the civil rights accorded all citizens, but they oppose legislating the guarantee of those rights. Thus they supported, for example, the Boy Scouts' "right" to exclude gay people.

    Isn't that a wonderful philosophy? "Yes, of course, you deserve your rights, but we're not going to legislate protections of those rights. Fuck reality."


    The "right" of the Boy Scouts to exclude gay people is actually a right to freedom of association protected by the First Amendment and is a completely necessary liberty in a free society.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2010 4:23 AM GMT
    HTownRunner saidtoday "conservatism" stands for excessive spending and NOT raising taxes and GROWING government to legislate religion.

    if libertarianism stands for less government spending and smaller government then sign me up. (though i always considered that TRUE conservatism). when the republicans finally decide to rally behind people like ron paul and not palin, i might consider voting republican again.

    Dakota_gent saidMany people confuse conservatism with libertarianism. This leads to their surprise when a Republican congress coupled with a Republican president differs from our current Democrat version only in degree as it grows government and increases debt.

    Libertarians will vote for freedom and smaller government even in cases they might find personally repugnant.

    Ron Paul tends more libertarian than conservative. This vote doesn't surprise me at all.



    The soul of the Republican party is owned, bought and paid for, by the religious right.
    That's why almost all of the rest of the Republicans voted against repealing DADT.
    To please the gay-hating religious right base of their party.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2010 5:27 PM GMT
    cbdtw79 said
    ObsceneWish saidLibertarians typically oppose laws that constrain individual freedoms. However, they also typically oppose laws that enforce those freedoms. That's why Ron's son can say he finds racial discrimination abhorrent but can't support a law that makes it illegal in the workplace.

    I haven't checked the Libertoonian platform lately, but their position historically has been that gay people should have the civil rights accorded all citizens, but they oppose legislating the guarantee of those rights. Thus they supported, for example, the Boy Scouts' "right" to exclude gay people.

    Isn't that a wonderful philosophy? "Yes, of course, you deserve your rights, but we're not going to legislate protections of those rights. Fuck reality."


    The "right" of the Boy Scouts to exclude gay people is actually a right to freedom of association protected by the First Amendment and is a completely necessary liberty in a free society.


    I'm quite aware of the libertarian argument in this respect (and the decision by the Supreme Court). It's the same argument some libertarian thinkers have used in defense of Rand Paul's rejection of Title II of the Civil Rights Act.

    Of course, Paul later reversed himself, noting that segregation was such a problem in the South that we probably needed to involve the government.

    That's a perfect example of the fate of libertarian ideology when it comes in contact with reality. We do not live in an inherently "free society" and because we don't, the state must intervene to protect its members from systematic discrimination.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2010 9:49 PM GMT
    Here's a very pointed defense of Ron Paul by Glenn Greenwald:

    http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/05/28/crazy/index.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2010 11:22 PM GMT
    I wonder if Bruno had anything to do with this?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7RnlPQCKBQ