Ahh the libertarian mind (aka Rand gets smackdowned by Sanders)
- Thread starter tmonster
- Start date
non-intervention is for weaker nations that have to depend on others.The notion that a libertarian candidate could make it into office without conceding many positions is naive.
That said, his reluctance to engage in intervention and undeclared wars, places him well ahead of anyone else in the field IMO.
I love how we went from, 'there is a need for force', to 'what force?' 
Not debating intervention(yet), but based on Paul's voting record, how is he considered a war hawk?
I'm just asking for evidence...
Cause people are claiming a 'right' to Wal-Marts services and the labor of its employees.
Cause "right to healthcare" means you have the right to come my house and conscript me, it means you believe in slavery.Not debating intervention(yet), but based on Paul's voting record, how is he considered a war hawk?
I'm just asking for evidence...
We should ignore his proposed budget flip flop?
Not at all... as I stated, for me, his reluctance to bomb brown countries puts him ahead of the other candidates.We should ignore his proposed budget flip flop?
The budget leanings of any candidate isnt high on my list of concerns.
That and his assumed belief in 'small govt.'.
It does suggest a "right" to the labor/effort of another individual, does it not?
I've got him now
No it doesn't. No one is forced to become a health care professional. Its a choice.
Not at all... as I stated, for me, his reluctance to bomb brown countries puts him ahead of the other candidates.
The budget leanings of any candidate isnt high on my list of concerns.
That and his assumed belief in 'small govt.'.
So you have no problem with potentially wasteful govt. spending on defense and you're cool with continuing to feed the military industrial complex that contributes to disastrous policy decisions like Iraq.
Paul flip flopped on the budget why should I believe he's going to stay true to his "reluctance" to bomb brown countries?
88m3
Fast Money & Foreign Objects
So you have no problem with potentially wasteful govt. spending on defense and you're cool with continuing to feed the military industrial complex that contributes to disastrous policy decisions like Iraq.
Paul flip flopped on the budget why should I believe he's going to stay true to his "reluctance" to bomb brown countries?
Paul loves Israel now too. You know he craves blood.
You're gonna love the circular gem I got coming up.I've got him now
Just need some one to drop the right key word.
Last edited:
Unless your not voting at all, you have to compare these candidates to each other, and in comparison, he is the least militaristic.So you have no problem with potentially wasteful govt. spending on defense and you're cool with continuing to feed the military industrial complex that contributes to disastrous policy decisions like Iraq.
Paul flip flopped on the budget why should I believe he's going to stay true to his "reluctance" to bomb brown countries?