Progressives = Neo-Liberal

Democrats = Neo-Conservatives

It's not a left/right scale as you think.  The political spectrum is more like the following:

 

|------left----------middle --------right-------|

 

Left = Communist/Socialist/Fascist

 

Left/Middle = Democrat/Progressive/Neocon servative

Middle = Classic democrats/Republicans

Right/Middle = Paleo-Conservatives/Small (l) libertarians

Right = Minarchists, Anarcho Capitalists, Autarchists, Anarchists

Unfortunately, most people don't understand what freedom truly is.  Your post is factually incorrect and not objective.

There was nothing "Libertarian" about the last 10 years of the market.  You are missing the point.  Who signed into law the deregulation of wall street & the CDO market?  Clinton.  Who was one of the architects of it.  Larry Summers, Robert Rubin and all the Repubs & Democrats that voted for it.

You complain about the financial mess we are in now.  Ask yourself one question.  "Where did they get money?"  One answer - The Federal Reserve.  If the FED didn't create the money in the first place, then none of this would have happened.  

Ask yourself about regulation when the current administration does away with "mark-to-market".   The same loophole that allowed Enron to hide all the illiquid assets.  They are working on that right now.

You also mentioned that Ron Paul is a Reactionary.  Not even close.  He's been the lone voice in the wilderness regarding ALL of the problems we are facing today.  He's been speaking of these things for 30 years.  I think what is reactionary is throwing Trillions of Dollars at something the Bush & Obama administration know nothing about.  Too much credit, borrowing and spending was part of the reason we are in this mess.  It's good to continue with the same failed Keynesian  policies.

Ron Paul seems quite progressive if you ask most people.

No unnecessary wars - Check

No corporate welfare - Check

No Fiat money/central bank - Check

Streamlined government agencies - Check

Balanced budgets - Check

Ending War on Drugs - Check

No patriot act - check

No FISA - Check

No personal income tax - Check

No Crony Capitalism - Check

No Afghanistan War - Check

Sounds like he does pretty well on these issues.  How do the other politicians stack up?

by sdczen on 03/26/2009 08:02:50 PM EST

Very nicely done - These liberals on this site are looking for their rebuttals as we speak - lucky they won't find any, because there isn't any there! :)

by bobo1 on 03/26/2009 10:38:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Libertarian whack job- Check


by Chinese Democracy on 03/26/2009 08:31:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]
and yet another of your predictions

sorry tiny isnt here

Im sure he would get as big a laugh as I did


by Chinese Democracy on 03/27/2009 12:24:27 AM EST

[ Parent ]
that you should probably go with him


by Chinese Democracy on 03/27/2009 12:26:02 AM EST

[ Parent ]
gibberish

Progressive? NOT EVEN

  • Ron Paul is for the government making health care decisions for pregnant women.

  • Ron Paul wants to end birthright citizenship.

  • While he opposed the Federal Marriage Amendment, he is a key supporter of Defense of Marriage Act, and the chief sponsor of a legislation that would remove from federal courts the jurisdiction to even decide if DOMA is Constitutional.

  • Ron Paul was one of the only 33 members of Congress to vote against the renewal of the Voting Rights Act in 2006, and believes 1964 Civil Rights Act violates the Constituton.

  • According to Ron Paul, the separation between Church and State has "no basis in the Constitution..." As the title of that article BY RON PAUL indicates, he also believes there is a "war on religion" in America.

  • Ron Paul opposes the Kyoto treaty.

  • Ron Paul believes all tax cuts are good.

  • Ron Paul would drain out social security by cutting the money collected on social security taxes, so that "young people can invest" it elsewhere.

  • Ron Paul wants to repeal the Brady bill, introduced legislation to repeal the assault weapons ban even before it expired in 2004, thinks you should be able to carry handguns on national parks, and end our membership in the Untied Nations, because the UN somehow wants to get your guns.

  • Ron Paul believes parents ought to be able to home school their kids and that those kids should get diplomas without ever having to adhere to pretty much any public standards.

He impresses conservatives because he is one of the few far right wingers that is actually articulate.

GIVE ME FREEDOM FROM RON PAUL

Im sure young people are abandoning their ideals and flocking to him as if he where David Koresh .

CHECK


by Chinese Democracy on 03/27/2009 12:46:14 AM EST

[ Parent ]

Abortion is such a bs issue.  RP does not want the Fedgov involved in legislating life or death.  He also does not want taxpayer money spent on abortions.  Why should someone in Arizona pay for an abortion of someone in Maine?  I'm prochoice, but when a baby can survive anywhere after 24 weeks, it makes me raise an eyebrow when people can still go through an abortion.....Dr. or patient.

Birthright citizenship? Oh please.  By all means when a government has free healthcare & welfare, who wouldn't drop anchor babies to get all the freebies?  You realize this is an actual, habitual thing that happens.  Being indirectly involved in the healthcare industry, I can tell you it's quite the mess.  Something the founding fathers probably didn't think about when they drafted that part of the constitution.  By the way, keep the birthright clause and eliminate welfare for the anchors and it will solve the problem.

He believes government shouldn't be involved in legislating marriage of either/any sex.  He doesn't care who gets married to whom.  He, as many people don't think that the government should even be involved in marriage.  

You're going to hang your hat on the voting rights act?  Which was packaged full of other suspect provisions.  It was an overreach of the fedgov, as usual.  Do you really think that if that act wasn't passed, that the states would try to prevent people from voting based on racial lines?  I highly doubt it.  Those problems have been resolved years ago.

The civil rights act was unconsitutional.  Not to mention that most of the southern democrats opposed it as unconstitutional as well.  These were states rights obligations and would have been handled through free association of people, without any of the quotas.  If you are sworn to uphold the Constitution of the USA, why would you complain about people that vote to uphold it?

The separation of Church & state.  Wow, you're really digging now.  Because I'm sure we would have a Baptist sermon before each congressional meeting.  Funny thing, isn't there a prayer at the beginning and end of most of these political functions?  Who said the prayer at Obamas inauguration?  Being an Atheist myself, I could really care less.

Any country that believes in sovereignty would oppose the Kyoto treaty.  There is no reason to sign on to a globalist pact, when we will be the country paying for all of it.  Environmental issues can be handled within the US, not at the behest of the UN and lobbyists.

All tax cuts are good.  We should eliminate ALL personal income taxes.  If we did that, we would still have the same amount of money coming into the US Treasury as we did in 1999.  Think about that for a minute.  If we were able to streamline and reduce spending back to 1999 levels we could eliminate the entire personal income tax and still fund our government operations, including the military by other means (tariffs, surcharges, fuel taxes etc...).  I say that would be a good stimulus program, don't you?

RP would not drain the Social Security system.  In fact he's stated many times that he would reduce the spending from overseas imperialism & military adventurism and use the money to stabilize the SS program.  You realize that Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid will be practically bankrupt in 10 years, right?  That's before all the other trillions of dollars have been added to the deficit.  What are you going to do when the SS program bankrupts itself?  I for one, would like my own money to invest my own way.  

Another note aboug Social Security.  If the government established a personal account for each of us for our SS, and provided a fixed 5% return on Treasury bills, we could then finance our own SS program, while paying for the T-bills at the same time.  Novel idea eh?  The government couldn't touch our accounts & drain them for their "For the public good" mentality.

How does the Brady bill & the assault weapons ban improve our lives?  It did absolutely nothing for violent crime and murders.  besides, it's unconstitutional.  The 2nd ammendment was established to protect the people from the government.  Somehow, this is always overlooked.  

Who needs to be in the UN?  Are you kidding?  What benefit does the UN do?  Oh wait, unless you mean UN's involvement in Rwanda?  I believe there was 1 million people killed and the UN just sat by and watched.  What else has the UN botched?  We could be here all day.

Who cares how people educate their kids?  If they can pass the competency tests at the end, why does it matter if they attend a public indoctrination school?  You realize the home schooled kids test much higher than the public educated kids, don't you?  

 

by sdczen on 03/27/2009 02:07:55 AM EST

[ Parent ]
and all you really had to type was.. yes he is a right winger.


by Chinese Democracy on 03/27/2009 02:24:47 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Unfortunately, most people don't understand what freedom truly is.

So, for your new mancrush(s) , KenTX and Bobo, please explain what, in your estimation freedom, truly is.

You could have saved us all a great deal of time by simply stating that from the beginning.

 

 

by MRFred on 03/27/2009 10:08:55 AM EST

[ Parent ]

Ken, you are a full blown Neocon. There is almost nothing libertarian about you.

I looked through the list and I can find at least 100 posts by you supporting these things.

Unnecessary wars - Check

Patriot act - check

FISA - Check

Afghanistan War - Check

Probably a few others if I think about it.

Plus there quite a few posts by you that said only liberal moon bats would vote for Paul for president.

by z1p101 on 03/27/2009 05:51:02 PM EST

[ Parent ]
You are saying that you would have voted for him for president?

by z1p101 on 03/27/2009 06:54:37 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Ron Paul's way would lead to anarchy, and complete collapse. I do agree with some of his stances on the wars and the drug war, but he really has not thought through any of his economic stands.

by jrolsen on 03/27/2009 05:54:36 PM EST

[ Parent ]