Monday, May 12, 2008

Ron Paulites

Post 4:


So, you might notice that there is a theme in these last few posts; that same theme continues in this post and will for the next few, until a culmination in one post in the not so distant future. Can you guess what the theme is?


I am a regular on gaiaonline under the screenname Agrab0ekim. On there I regular the politics forums (among many other I am often on) and run into many people who claim to be well versed in politics, taxes, the IRS, the Constitution, and the like. They will start by talking about the Founding Fathers, about the degeneration of America, and about the robbing of the rich to give to the poor. They will talk about how America is now facist, how the IRS is illegal and Unconstitutional (the previous link has this same info), how the big companies are running the world (yet at the same time saying that companies should have more rights), and how the World will soon be under a New Order. Some will even say that 9/11 was an inside job. While some political supporters really annoy me and make little to no sense, there are no stopping - RON PAULITES: What Really Grind My Gigantic Notched Wheels.


Let's start by looking at who Ron Paul is: He is the other Republican running for President in 2008 (against the clear nominee McCain). His claims to fame are serving for a long time in congress, being a gynecologist, and running in 1988 as a Libertarian for President. He has several controversial positions, all of which are very, um, interesting. He supports the abolishment of income tax, all federal tax, abortions, raises in congressional pay, gun control, drug laws, and the Iraq war. He supports the extension of states rights, supports banning gay marriage, and supports unregulated businesses. In short, he supports going back to ACPU. While his positions are all fine and dandy (he can think Hitler is God for all I care), his supporters take them too far. What bugs me the most boils down to a few main things: One, they think he stands for what he doesn't - Two, they believe his lies about the IRS - Three, they are contradictory in their beliefs. Please note that not all Paulites are like this, and I have met several intelligent and properly-thinking ones in my searches on these internets.


They think he stands for what he doesn't

I have yet to meet a Ron Paul supporter who gets what he stands for right. While a few Paul supporters know next to nothing about what Ron Paul supports, most know most, if not all, of his positions. Their problems, however, is the fact that they do not take the logic as far as it should go. If my position is states rights, the abolishment of the 14th Amendment, and banning the courts from hearing any case on Marriage it sounds dandy to most Americans, and most of his supporters. But let us follow the logic. So, courts can not hear marriage cases, okay, no interracial, inter religion marriages. You still have no problem? Good, I figured you would. Lets move to the 14th Amendment, hmmm, rights and privileges no longer protected, Hello Plessy V. Ferguson and goodbye Brown V. Board. Starting to have doubts? Good. Lets move onto state rights, hmmm, I seem to remember a Civil War about this. Not even getting into slavery, religious states, and the like, let us look at something quite simple: money. If each state were allowed to mint their own money (state rights) then we would have a problem. Always remember people, we got rid of ACPU for a reason.


They believe his lies about the IRS

Do not get me wrong, I think that there are many things wrong with the way we do taxes in this country. I think that we tax the poor to highly and the rich not enough, that we have too many loopholes, and that college kids should be exempt (more specifically, any person with my SS number). I think that we need a full overhaul. However, I do not for one second think that taxes are a bad idea, nor do I think that they are Unconstitutional. Ron Paul and other libertarians will have you believe that taxes are immoral (whole different argument), illegal, and unconstitutional. They will even go out of their way to create a movie to show it. However, they are wrong, and the Courts have shown that again and again. One of my main problems with Paulites is that they will refuse to see reason in this area. They think that court decision say one thing when two sentences later they say another. They think that the movies are 100% correct and when you show them TAX LAW they say it is not real. In short, they feel that they know the truth and we are all lying to them. I find this to be a bad sign for any politician, having an idiotic base.


Three, they are contradictory in their beliefs

Everybody is contradictory in their beliefs. I feel that we should have universal health care (or at least a plan to pay companies to provide it) but at the same time think that it is Unconstitutional. I think that we should not have quotas on businesses or schools but think that we should have regulations on them. I am hypocritical and contradictory, and so are you. That said, however, I think that Paulites take it further than most of us; they take it so far that they are in a realm all to their own. There are some who say that the corporations are running the world, some that say that corporations are the only thing that should be taxed, and some that say that corporations should not exist. They then all defend the deregulation of these companies. Do you see the problems there in. More you ask? A fair bit claim that there should be equal rights for all, a fair bit support state rights, and a fair bit support the idea of free people (seems to be their motto). They then go and support the banning of gay marriage, fight quotas and affirmative action and welfare, and argue that certain persons shouldn't be allowed to do certain things. The kicker is that they all (majority) support the ending of the 'war on drugs' with the argument “what goes into our body is our call because it is OUR BODY” and yet attack the concept of abortion. I mean, come on, what is more contradictory than that. The question comes down to this, is it worth having hundreds of thousands (I think he just passed the million mark) of crazy hard-core supporters who are wrong and don't actually support what/who you are or is it better to have millions of luke-warm supporters who actually know your positions and are mainstream? This Democrat say the latter.


As always, please leave any comments, no matter how large or how small about the contents of this blog post. Also, please leave any comments/suggestions about this site/post as a whole. Thanks


Digg my article

31 comments:

Hajile said...

Hm.

This was very informational. ;o

You are soo correct about that contradictory nature of the Paulites, that it's funny.

In a ridiculous kind of way.

Um. I have more to comment about, but I need to go do something. Over there. >>

Barga said...

please comment when you can, it is greatly appreciated

Melissa said...

I feel like I am just commenting to comment..is that a bad thing because I have nothing to say other than you mentioning ackpoo made me think about Larry.
Anyway I really don't think that the Paulites are a problem if you just ignore them because trying to make them see the error in their ways will do no good. Forget about them and the gigantic notched wheels you keep talking about...and shouldn't it really be WHO really grind my gigantic notched wheels? Or maybe "they are what..." I'm not really sure but either way just remember that you are still talking about people no matter how crazy they are.

Barga said...

notched wheels are gears my dear
the thing is, i do not think that ignoring them helps. They grow and multiply if not shot down in their beginnings. That is how the 9/11 truthers expanded so quickly and are now hard to take down

sticking our heads in the sand does not work

Melissa said...

It has worked well for me so far...although it is a tad bit rough on the skin....

Barga said...

the thing is, how often do you come upon them?

Melissa said...

never. thats how it works.

Barga said...

well then you are lucky

Anonymous said...

You stereotype every Ron Paul supporter by putting them into a single category of "Paulites". Your blog is a failure from the start because of this.

You argue that Ron Paul lies about the IRS being illegal. I've watched a number of his speeches, and from what I've heard, he's never said that. What he does say is that the IRS should be abolished by cutting government spending. Is that so hard to understand? They spend less = They tax less. It would be simple to abolish the IRS if the government wasn't so broke they depend on us to pay the bills. We pay plenty of taxes already.

Also, the statement about drugs and abortion...It makes no sense. Drugs are a personal choice. Abortion is killing a baby. You don't see the difference in that? How can you compare a personal choice to something that a baby has no control over? I just don't understand how in your mind those two total separate things are in the same category.

Barga said...

When I start of a post by saying NOT ALL ARE LIKE THIS I clearly am not lumping all persons together. Furthermore, even if I were, you have not shown how that is a logical failure. No, I argue that Ron Paul Supporters think that. I never once said what RP thinks. I was smarter than that

A fetus is not a baby. Please prove that a fetus is a baby and not an unwanted growth. The exact same argument applies

Evan said...

I see your blog as an attempt to generalize some problems you have with people of particular political persuasion. You say they aren't all like that, but then you refer to them as a homogenous group as Paulites, thus creating a single term to describe millions of people with different beliefs. The majority of RP supporters I know are by far more educated on political history & policy than your average voting american. Perhaps you spend to much time on Gaia & that's why you've met so many who are a bit confused. I think whining about your frustration with the Paulites won't accomplish much. It would be better to focus on the areas that we agree so we don't have to argue over who's more contradictory when we are all contradictory. Our Federal Government has unprecedented power that needs to be restrained by decreasing the size & funding of the beauracracy to help restore the Liberties & Freedoms that are being taken away.

Barga said...

Evan -

While I do spend a fair amount of time on Gaia, the ones i communicate with on their are fairly educated. However, I was refering to the mob like ones, the ones you find on myspace, Facebook, and the less educated on Gaia. Like how I label Obamanites, the people who support blindly without much defense other than OMG BUSH SUCKS, HATE TAXES.

I explained that this blog was specific to this group of persons for that very reason.

I agree that the Executive branch, and the federal government as a whole, have been taking to many liberties away. What these are, however, we probably disagree on

Evan said...

Now I bet you we agree on a lot more than you think. I know exactly what you mean when you say "Obamanite", but then I try not to generalize people as such because it can narrow your view on people by using words to classify them as such and assume you already have an understanding of who they are & what they think by fitting them into a mental construct stereotype. Hell, I don't even like using the terms conservative & liberal because I think they're too loaded & everyone has a somewhat unique interpretation of what they really mean. I didn't even know what it meant to be a real fiscal conservative until Ron Paul explained it. A Conservative gov't spends less money, which would make the current administration & congress very un-conservative. People have said Bush is a compassionate conservative, well I can't see the compassion or conservation.

Evan said...

Now I bet we have a lot more in common than you think. I know exactly what you mean when you say Obamanite. But I try not to generalize people as such because when you use words to classify groups of people it can narrow your view of who they really are by using words to fit them into a mental construct/stereotype so that you believe that you understand who they are and what they think without taking the time to get to know them as individuals. Hell, I don't even like to use the words liberal & conservative because I feel they're too loaded & every has a somewhat unique interpretation of them. I didn't even know what it meant to be a real fiscal conservative until Ron Paul explained it. Conservative gov't spends less money. Now I understand why this current administration & congress are not at all conservative. People say Bush is a compassionate conservative, well I can't see the compassion or conservation.

Barga said...

And why have you not commented on my party hardliners post??

I agree that it is not good to group, but it works because then we both know what we are talking about (just define your group, as I did)

Ben said...

I have a belief system similar to Ron Paul's because I *have* followed it through to the logical extreme. The logical extreme of what I believe is that the very idea of government is an instrument of evil, which should be abolished from the face of the earth as quickly as possible. But since I live in the real world, I will content myself with doing what I can to mitigate the damage government can do to society.

Peruse the articles at http://www.lewrockwell.com and http://www.mises.org and not only will your English skills improve (I can tell it wasn't your first language; this blog is a valiant effort and I applaud your willingness to learn!) but your understanding of economics and the logic behind what Ron Paul stands for will become more apparent.

Barga said...

Ben -

If you believe that their should be no government than I really have no counter argument. That would be an impasse area.

English is my first language, as I have always lived in Ohio, except for a few short stints in other locales. I have attempted to get correct grammar and spelling throughout this blog. Would you care to point out where I have screwed up?
Thanks
-Barga

Ben said...

Take all this with the reassurance that I don't mean to offend. I'd like to help you write better if I can. I have a BA in English composition.

After a second look, I found you didn't break any grammatical rules (except for a there/they're mishap) or misspell. You just weren't very creative in how you crafted your prose. Your vocabulary appears limited. In your meticulous editing, you forgot that occasionally taking some liberties with the rules of grammar can help the flow of the text and give your article some personality. The samey simplicity of your prose makes it read like a fourth grade book report. Your real errors are in paragraph structure and organization, and I believe you misunderstand the meanings of a few words. You'll improve with these things with time and practice and more reading. What fascinates me most are the logical leaps you make. They are not uncommon among RP detractors, but they still need some thinking through. I'd love to talk about those.

Email might be a better medium than a comment thread; you can email me at bjt AT rabidquill DOT com.

Sean said...

This article is so full of holes, misrepresentations and misunderstandings it's hard to know where to start.

I'll just touch on a few:

You say Paul wants to get rid of "all Federal taxes". This is BS. He is against the taxing of wages. He is for certain tariffs and other forms of Constitutional taxation.

You say Paul wants to abolish the 14th Amendment. This is BS as well. He wants to do away with one part of the 14th--

"All persons BORN or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

He wants to remove the part that says people are citizens even if they illegally get into the country and they have a child which automatically becomes a citizen.

You say Paul is lying about the IRS yet you show no example of a lie. And you ignore the fact the IRS was created the same year as the Federal Reserve....without which we wouldn't need an IRS.

Then you try to misrepresent what Dr. Paul is about by saying that he wants Corporations to run the country. But this is BS. Paul wants to open up competition. This is what the Corporations fear the most. That someone can come along and cheaply make something better than they are doing it. Paul has never said, nor hinted, that he wants to let Corporations take more control. He has always stated he wants to open up the markets to competition.

Then you spew more ignorance about the war on drugs and abortion. Two totally different things! Abortion is about State sanctioned killing of innocent human beings and the drug war is about usurping our Rights to our own body to medicate and ingest what we think is best for ourselves. To say abortion is about Rights to your own body is a BS argument. It's about the Rights to the unborn who is victimized by abortion. It's obvious this left-wing-nut thinks people should not have to bear responsibility for their own actions. I mean, that's the mantra of a left-wing loon.

You my friend are doing nothing more then spewing the same old tired left-wing fearmongering lunacy, and I pitty the fool who can't see through it...

Anonymous said...

No no, you have it all wrong about be against this issue and that issue. We want the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT left out of the issues and let the STATED DECIDE. Ron Paul thinks the Federal government should not be into marriage, as it is a religious function. He believes abortion should be left up to the states as well as drug use.

About the taxes, the INCOME tax is immoral, not the rest of the taxes. Would it be moral if they raised the income tax to 99%? I hope you wouldn't think that would be okay. It's hard earned money you worked for. It's the same as stealing. What moral difference does it make for the government to take a lesser amount then? We didn't have an income tax till 1913. It's essentially forced labor, slavery. The rich know how to legally avoid taxes anyways.

Anonymous said...

in addition to what others have said, ron paul is not going to ban gay marriage and i don't know where you got that idea. his approach to deal with it is pretty much the exact same as what obama would do. he's not going to mandate that it's legal (this infringes upon the church's rights), but he is *definitely* not going to mandate that it's ILlegal. he's personally against abortion, but he also wouldn't mandate that that be illegal either. just because someone doesn't personally like something and isn't going to make it legal, doesn't mean they're going to do the opposite and make it illegal. i know it's hard to understand that because that's what our country's politicians seem to like to do. but please take your own advice and think things through logically before jumping to conclusions.

Barga said...

---- he's not going to mandate that it's legal (this infringes upon the church's rights),----
How so, marriage is a social contract, not just religious

He is planning on banning the courts from hearing any cases regarding Abortion and/or gay rights, to me, seeing as the polls show a banning is the lead, means he is for banning

Peter said...

i apologize in advance if this comment offends anybody.
first thing that needs to be acknowledged is that there are many untrue statements within this article,

" He supports the abolishment of income tax, all federal tax, abortions, raises in congressional pay, gun control, drug laws, and the Iraq war. He supports the extension of states rights, supports banning gay marriage, and supports unregulated businesses"

some corrections, hes does NOT support: abolishment of all federal tax, gun control, drug laws, iraq war, banning gay marriage, unregulated business.
he does support abolishment of all federal taxes, just the income tax, there are many more federal taxes we pay, even some we arent fully aware we are paying. I dont know where u got gun control from, he supports the opposite, he wants to get rid of gun control laws- he simply believes in less governmental intervention in social issues, same goes for his drug laws. banning gay marriage??? im sorry i am not aware. (background check - Dr. Paul was not only a gynecologist, but he also served as a doctor who delivered babies, he brought over 4000 babies into the world, which could be the reason he is personally against abortion) ron paul said that abortion is a state issue and should even be discussed on a federal level. Iraq War, in case i wasnt clear on what you were saying, Ron Paul is AGAINST the iraq war, in fact he is the only candidate whos principles support his ideas against the iraq war. (ron paul is a libertarian, in other words he is how conservatives are supposed to act, the exemplar of conservatives if you will. and what real conservatives believe are free markets, free trade, liberty, pretty much each citizen can make decisions for himself, less government spending and less government taxing, makes sense right? and when a country is at war they need to tax, this goes against the main conservative belief, therefore all real conservatives MUST be non-interventionist, so it would make sense for him to not support the war) (obama on the other hand, a harcore liberal wants to get out of the war, this doesent seem to make much sense, and wehn things dont make sense its usually because its a lie. liberals absolutly LOVE taxing people then spending it, and since wars are just another mode of governments to spend what they taxed, why not tax more then spend on the war? this makes governments huge and YOUR economic and civil liberties will slowly diminish)
and as for unregulated business, that my friend is anarchy, and last time i checked ron paul isnt exactly an anarchist. he supports LESS regulated business, this simply means that the corporations may do whatever they please if it does not infringe on another corporations liberty to suceed. Trusts are an example of shutting busniesses out, which is why they are illegal via sherman anti-trust act. but what i always ask is why are corporations always portrayed as evil????? corporations expand throughout the entire world, then people throughout the entire world spend on the corporations and fuel our economy, and ultimately the world economy, seems pretty kind-hearted to me. and people will always revert to what makes them the most profit, not just CEO's of corporations, this applies to MOST people.
and to answer your last question about ron paulites, (you can just refer to them as conservatives, libertarians, even constitutionalists, those are more fitting names), it takes an educated person to look through liberal bullshit, so i honestly dont think that these people are the ones who dont know what they are talking about, but you don't know what point libertarians are trying to make, and by libertarians i simply mean people who want to have control of their own life

Anonymous said...

actually you're wrong about what he supports fellow man. he has said countless times that he is pro-life but believes it is a state issue. i don't what bullshit source you got this from but it wasn't from him.
i'm a supporter but you have to realize that as president he wouldn't be able to do any of that anyway because of checks and balances and what not. i doubt your going to convince a liberal congress or even conservative congress to repeal the 14th amendment. so think outside the box ron paul's good outweighs the bad even though most of the things you've said about him is false.
i've watched countless videos read all kinds of books on him, and most of this is pure bullshit.

Barga said...

im sorry, i just look at the legislation he passes and what he says. Obviously you are right

Lorenza said...

FIRST of all, there wil be a North American Union

ever heard of the Euro??

Once upon a time, each counrty had its own currency. That is no longer true in Europe, seeing as they all use the EURO!,

here ill show you what i mean.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y30k3nkk54&feature=related

look even the news talks of it
occasionally of course

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wCdULj6fOQ

Lorenza said...

FIRST of all, there wil be a North American Union

ever heard of the Euro??

Once upon a time, each counrty had its own currency. That is no longer true in Europe, seeing as they all use the EURO!,

here ill show you what i mean.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y30k3nkk54&feature=related

look even the news talks of it
occasionally of course

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wCdULj6fOQ

Barga said...

Ron Paul making a statement with no backing or anything else does not mean anything. Furthermore, an international highway is nowhere near the same as a north american union. Also, europe is not america.


your second link, again, has little backing

how about you find us some actual evidence please

Al Barger said...

At this point, I am second to no one in my disdain for Ron Paul - coming at it as a libertarian.
(www.morethings.com/senate)

Let me take a couple little points of disagreement with you. 1)"If each state were allowed to mint their own money (state rights) then we would have a problem." I don't think so. What would that problem be, exactly? I think that basically ANY person or institution should have the right to issue their own currency.

That would introduce competition into the system, which would be a very good thing. However, there's a strong institutional throw weight to the US dollar, and that would very likely remain the way that 99% of business is done. The thing is that this would be a check against the US government. They start inflating the crap out of the money supply to pay for a bunch of this bogus bailout crap, more businesses and customers start wanting to deal with, say, silver certificates or gold certificates. The more people actually start trading through alternate currencies, the more pressure there is on the US government to restrain themselves.

Also, drug laws and abortion laws are not the same thing, and there is no inconsistency in favoring drug legalization but being pro-life. Drugs are unambiguously you doing stuff to yourself. Abortion involves killing a little person - that's another human.

Personally, I am reluctantly pro-choice. I just don't believe in government enough to feel good about granting them that much authority over stuff going on up inside you - even if I tend to think of it as a terrible sin.

Whalertly said...

"Let me take a couple little points of disagreement with you. 1)"If each state were allowed to mint their own money (state rights) then we would have a problem." I don't think so. What would that problem be, exactly? I think that basically ANY person or institution should have the right to issue their own currency."

--I have no issue with the concept of bartering. The biggest issue, though, is that we have seen that it did not work in the past. We got rid of it after ACPU for a reason--


"That would introduce competition into the system, which would be a very good thing. However, there's a strong institutional throw weight to the US dollar, and that would very likely remain the way that 99% of business is done. The thing is that this would be a check against the US government. They start inflating the crap out of the money supply to pay for a bunch of this bogus bailout crap, more businesses and customers start wanting to deal with, say, silver certificates or gold certificates. The more people actually start trading through alternate currencies, the more pressure there is on the US government to restrain themselves."

--FYI, the government does not do the inflating. Anyways, I agree that the bartering is good, but as a currency only one makes sense. Otherwise, you could have the same issues we had at the start with states only accepting their money, and everything in the shitter--


"Also, drug laws and abortion laws are not the same thing, and there is no inconsistency in favoring drug legalization but being pro-life. Drugs are unambiguously you doing stuff to yourself. Abortion involves killing a little person - that's another human."

--Have you read the violinist thought expieremnt? Read it--


"Personally, I am reluctantly pro-choice. I just don't believe in government enough to feel good about granting them that much authority over stuff going on up inside you - even if I tend to think of it as a terrible sin."

--Only select exestentialists are pro-abortion, all of us which it happened less--

Anonymous said...

This is pissing me off. First of all I am sick of this right wingers always blaming liberals for everything.

I am sick of the right making it seem like liberals and democrats are the same fucking thing.

News Flash I support Ron Paul and I am a fucking liberal. My friends are liberals and we support Ron Paul. Shut the hell up.

News Flash, majority of our founding fathers were liberals. I can't believe you guys will blindly just say you are all about constitutionalism and you know economics and history but continue to confuse liberals and democrats. If your that stupid to not know what liberalism is and what classic liberalism/neo-liberalism is. You are stupid. Milton Friedman, Ludwig von Mises, Thomas Jefferson. These are all liberals. And considered themselves classic liberals.

And No don't give me that crap that classic liberals back then are conservatives today. How about we all grow up get a brain and realize that there are many branches from both sides that have different political philosophy. Spreading the Wealth is a more far left political thing and Supply-Side Economics/Reaganomics/Trickle Down economics are far right. Bush was a far right person. How about some of you radical right wing conservatives grow up and realize that your side, the right wing party spends and is involved with taxes and regulation just as much as the left. There are different branches on both sides that both involve spending. Ever heard of Neo-Cons. Have you all looked at the republicans budget plan for this year do you see how much they are actually spending and doing. Do you see that they spend just as much and do just as much but for different things then the DEMOCRATS.

If I can see that true conservatives aren't republicans why in the hell do you douche bags keep making it seem like liberals are to blame and liberals favor government. I just named three people including a founding father who was liberal. There are many liberal and left wing politicians that are not in the republican party.

Do you EVEN know or TRY to at least research what libertarianism is and what its about. I mean you claim to be libertarians but still blame the left. When Libertarianism isn't left or right its both. LIBERTARIANISM IS BOTH SIDES. Old school conservatives and old school liberals were the same exact people except for some small tiny things mostly dealing with religion I think. But seriously there are liberals that are upset with somethings Obama is doing. I am I know, I know my parents are, I was talking to my dad saying he is fearing Obama is a blue dog,(A DEMOCRAT) and not standing for liberal values. He is still sucking up and helping corporate America and the banks.

I am just sick of being a supporter of Ron Paul and having a bunch of clueless Americans and supporters who blame liberals consider Libertarianism as just a right wing thing and not knowing that its both and not knowing that there are branches to libertarianism just like all political parties. I am sick of being a supporter of Dr. Paul but having to deal with all the dumb asses who claim to love their country and know their policies, US history, and economics in general but still ignore the fact that it liberals aren't democrats. Our founding fathers most of them and especially the ones with the biggest influence were liberals. Most economist who support Mises and Friedman were liberals also. People take a political philosophy and branch it and change some things with it all the time. Just like religion you have all these different people making their own version of it changing things around with it.

How about we stop blaming both conservative and liberal ideology stop blaming each other. Realize and learn that true conservatives aren't republicans and true liberals aren't democrats.

Redirect

You will be redirected shortly to our new website. If you are not redirected within 5 seconds please CLICK HERE!

Copyright Notice

(C) All articles, postings, images, etc. on this site are protected by relevant copyright law, unless otherwise specified. To use any original material in totality please ask for author permission.

(C) 2009, all rights reserved by whalertly.blogspot.com, Robert M. Barga, and all contributing authors.