Live data from Hacker News

Ron Paul speaks against SOPA

torrentfreak.com

161–170 of 313 posts

Re: Ron Paul speaks against SOPA

#161
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to be interested in what he had to say until I saw this: http://murphysbride.tumblr.com/post/14876601176/bacon-beer-a... I don't know how credible this is but it leaves me doubtful.

Frankly, anyone who has paid attention to what Paul has actually said or done in the last 20 years knows this in no way represents his views. In fact, quite the opposite, Paul is by far the most open and tolerant in the GOP field. The fact that some people are willing to focus on these says more about them than about Paul.

http://rightwingnews.com/election-2012/statement-from-fmr-ro... has good details on one close staffer's view of his distrust of Black and Latin@ culture.

He's not racist, as long as people of all colors assimilate into his culture. I can see the confusion: people who aren't part of this culture see that as a set of racist, irrational beliefs that lead to stop-and-frisk harassment and profiling in airports, whereas Ron Paul obviously has a cultural fear of people different from himself and doesn't equate that with skin color except by correlation. He doesn't consider this "racism", and thus is offended by the implications.

We disagree on the terms and on whether or not it is a disqualifying feature for the highest office in the land, but we should at least be able to agree that the only evidence we have for what he believes have been the things he's done or said. That he began claiming he never did them when they became politically inconvenient doesn't mean he's changed his mind.

I wouldn't care what he said 20 years ago if he stood up and said, "yes, I said those things. Since then, however, I have spent more time with people from cultures I had previously been isolated from and feared, as many of us do when faced with the unfamiliar. I now appreciate that theses communities have come together in the face of adversity and are an assets to this nation." Instead he claimed that Not Me did it, and looks about as mature as that kid from Family Circus while doing so.

Re: Ron Paul speaks against SOPA

#162
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also this is worth reading[1]. Paul seems to be directly linked to an anti-gay rhetoric that is leading part of his campaign. [1] http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/ron-paul-hired-ant... Edit: I'm curious to know why anyone would downvote this? When presented with direct evidence, is it really logical to immediately push it away? Oh well... To the commenter below, if you had read to the second paragraph of the…

I didn't downvote (I don't have enough points yet), but I can already see some problems with that article. For one, it's based on newsletters published 20 years ago which he's repeatedly told the media that he did not authorize to use his name. The only other thing that's trying to stick to Ron Paul in this article is completely based on hearsay. So no, it's not direct evidence. EDIT: I seriously hope you're not tryi…

He doesn't "favor the death penalty" he calls for the execution of people based on their sexual preference in accordance with Biblical law. This man's endorsement was touted by Paul's Iowa campaign. So yes, I find that offensive and reprehensible; Paul should immediately repudiate the endorsement.

Re: Ron Paul speaks against SOPA

#163
post #73
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just said that Ron Paul is not against abortion, but that he is opposed to it.

megablast said he wants laws... against abortion and CWuestefeld pointed out that, although he doesn't like it, he doesn't support federal laws against it.

From his campaign page: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/abortion/

  And as President, Ron Paul will continue to fight for the same 
  pro-life solutions he has upheld in Congress, including:
  
  Immediately saving lives by effectively repealing Roe v. Wade and 
  preventing activist judges from interfering with state decisions 
  on life by removing abortion from federal court jurisdiction through 
  legislation modeled after his “We the People Act.”

  Defining life as beginning at conception by passing a “Sanctity of Life Act.”
It's very difficult to interpret that as anything but being anti-abortion at the federal level. Passing a law outright banning it is unnecessary if life is defined at the federal level as beginning at conception.

Re: Ron Paul speaks against SOPA

#164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I could come up with a list of things that I don't like about Ron Paul personally, and a few things that worry me politically. That's completely OT and not really related to your post in particular but what's with the disclaimers lately? Are we becoming the sort of community where you need to preface every thought with a bow to group's believes? Are we so stuck in the "singaling game" [1] even here, on a niche webs…

You have to admit that most people immediately roll their eyes when they read another die-hard Ron Paul supporter. That disclaimer lets people know/believe that this isn't a fanatic speaking. While I agree with Robin Hanson that I wish we didn't need disclaimers, it truly is an effective way of signalling, and often essential in tone-less, emotionally-ambiguous internet discussions. Disclaimer: Ron Paul supporter (ho…

Fallacies abound in politics. If anything, I think the majority of political discourse is based solely on fallacies. Such as "individual X is Y and is associated with group Z, hence all individuals associated with Z must be Y".

It's a game of influence, not rationality. If calling people names "wins" an argument with less effort and time than applying logically sound arguments, why bother with logical arguments?

The sad part is that Paul has been the only politician in a long time to resist the trend and talk about the issues in a serious and straightforward manner, only to be attacked and ridiculed.

Re: Ron Paul speaks against SOPA

#165

I could come up with a list of things that I don't like about Ron Paul personally, and a few things that worry me politically. But none of that really matters. He's the only candidate that I feel I could actually trust to stick by his campaign rhetoric, and the only one I would trust to actually defend the constitution. Ironic, given that we have a constitutional scholar in the White House and a historian running for…

I can't vote for anyone who, when reality conflicts with his mental model of the world, believes reality is wrong. Paul's not just wrong; he works from false assumptions to come to consistently illogical conclusions. I don't care if my politicians disagree with me, but I certainly care that they live in a world of evidence-based decision making.

Can you please cite some of his false assumptions and the illogical conclusions. I believe his argument against SOPA and regulation/censorship of internet is quite sound. His arguments for a sound fiscal policy is based on evidence that governments (or individuals or corporations) spending beyond their means usually lead to their downfall. Results of Vietnam war, Iraq war provide alot evidence that much more diplomacy is needed before going to war, and once you go to war, fight it win it and get out, don't go into nation building.

Re: Ron Paul speaks against SOPA

#166

Ron Paul message resonates with people because he is talking about something none of the other candidates are talking about: returning freedoms and sanity to America. It would be hard to rollback all the damage done by the likes of Obama and his predecessors but I think it can be achieved gradually and with some culture changes in America. This is a great country and I hope to see its freedoms preserved and reinstate…

My understanding is that Ron Paul's idea of freedom is to limit the role of the Federal Government by moving the legislative burden to each State. I can relate to the frustration that most Americans seem to have towards “Washington”, but would this really be in the best interest of the country?

It's 2011, not 1787. The US is a vastly different country than it was when the idea of States Rights was created. Would the level of innovation that you describe be possible in a country that does not have a strong central government? Could an individual State put someone on the moon? Would sectors of the economy that are closely associated with a specific area (Technology – CA etc) still be as prosperous without a central government? I am skeptical.

Abandoning the Federal Government because it is dysfunctional seems short sighted. Personally I do not see how the US can prosper in the modern world without a central government. We need more political compromise and a more consistent government agenda, not a shift towards one political agenda. Government should represent everyone, not just the 51% of constituents that elected them this term.

Also, suggesting that human rights should be legislated at a State level is absurd. It astounds me that a Libertarian such as Paul can so proudly proclaim that government intrusion is wrong, but then defer to the State on issues such as gay marriage and abortion. Legislating religious views at a State level is no different than doing it at the Federal level. Rob Paul style libertarianism only brings “freedom” for some.

Re: Ron Paul speaks against SOPA

#167

I could come up with a list of things that I don't like about Ron Paul personally, and a few things that worry me politically. But none of that really matters. He's the only candidate that I feel I could actually trust to stick by his campaign rhetoric, and the only one I would trust to actually defend the constitution. Ironic, given that we have a constitutional scholar in the White House and a historian running for…

>> But none of that really matters.

I would bet that you are neither a woman, black, jewish, poor, or gay.

So the fact, for example, that ron paul is a huge racist is something that you can discount at no cost to you.

edit: wow, i see the ron paul brigade is out in force, as usual. thank you all! never been so proud of being downvoted.

Re: Ron Paul speaks against SOPA

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a British person I don't know much about American politics but I often see this Ron Paul guy turn up in discussions about politics in general. He seems to a hero to many people including those who aren't the stereotypical republican voters. I have to admit I don't quite understand his appeal, his position seems to always just be to oppose any new legislation on government involvement in anything. His position alwa…

He says "no" a lot because the federal gov't has become way too bloated. There already is a free market solution to your scenario - it's called "insurance".

Actually, I usually hear him promote local (and often church-based) fundraisers and volunteer efforts to assist in these situations. Admittedly, that may not be enough for a Katrina-size disaster -- that might genuinely warrant federal intervention via the Reserves/Nat'l Guard.

Re: Ron Paul speaks against SOPA

#169
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The newsletter debacle is 'damning' simply because the US corporate media has decreed it so. The newsletters are definitely offensive, and are reasonable cause for disliking Paul as a candidate and perhaps even a person, but as others have pointed out, they are relatively mild as far as political skeletons in the closet go. If the media favored him, they could be easily downplayed as have been countless much more ser…

You're inappropriately comparing the actions of candidates with people who have actual power. Neither George W. Bush nor John Yoo is running for office. Ron Paul is, and as a non-leadership representative, he's not in a position to affect policy in any significant way. He hasn't had the opportunity do things that Bush did. In order to assess him as a candidate, we have to understand how he acted given his opportuniti…

he's not in a position to affect policy in any significant way

I think you misunderstand the separation of powers in the US government. As a member of the House of Representatives, part of the Congress, it's been explicitly Paul's job to set policy.

As president, on the other hand, the job is to find ways to implement the policies that the Congress has defined.

We get all excited about Presidential election, but at least in theory, the Executive is less important than the other branches.

On the other hand, Congress has ceded so much power to the Executive branch (e.g., giving the EPA, IRS, FDA, etc., so much latitude in defining regulations) that power tilts significantly in that direction -- although not to that office itself, but to that branch.

And I suppose that it's natural to focus on the single individual figurehead, when the power of the Legislature, even if it really is more important as I claim, is more diffuse across all the members of that body.

Re: Ron Paul speaks against SOPA

#170
post #155

It's not surprising that Ron Paul would be against SOPA. That said, libertarians like Paul would have been against funding the projects that led to the Internet, and are today against funding similar government projects that might lead to future innovations. In many cases, innovations are bootstrapped by government funding or research, and then handed off to an appropriate role by the free market. Libertarians are us…

It's often assumed that without the ARPA the internet never would have existed. ARPA, however, is just one of many "internets" that sprung up over the years. There was also FIDOnet, Prodigy, BIX, Compuserve, MCInet, etc. Everyone with more than one computer thought to hook them together. Heck, even some friends of mine invented their own internet back in the 70's.

If it wasn't ARPA, it would have been something else.

Post reply on HN