Posted on 10/16/2007 9:45:44 AM PDT by traviskicks
Winston's diaphragm was constricted. He could never see the face of Goldstein without a painful mixture of emotions. It was a lean Jewish face, with a great fuzzy aureole of white hair and a small goatee beard -- a clever face, and yet somehow inherently despicable, with a kind of senile silliness in the long thin nose, near the end of which a pair of spectacles was perched. It resembled the face of a sheep, and the voice, too, had a sheep-like quality. Goldstein was delivering his usual venomous attack upon the doctrines of the Party -- an attack so exaggerated and perverse that a child should have been able to see through it, and yet just plausible enough to fill one with an alarmed feeling that other people, less level-headed than oneself, might be taken in by it. He was abusing Big Brother, he was denouncing the dictatorship of the Party, he was demanding the immediate conclusion of peace with Eurasia, he was advocating freedom of speech, freedom of the Press, freedom of assembly, freedom of thought, he was crying hysterically that the revolution had been betrayed -- and all this in rapid polysyllabic speech which was a sort of parody of the habitual style of the orators of the Party, and even contained Newspeak words: more Newspeak words, indeed, than any Party member would normally use in real life. And all the while, lest one should be in any doubt as to the reality which Goldstein's specious claptrap covered, behind his head on the telescreen there marched the endless columns of the Eurasian army -- row after row of solid-looking men with expressionless Asiatic faces, who swam up to the surface of the screen and vanished, to be replaced by others exactly similar. The dull rhythmic tramp of the soldiers' boots formed the background to Goldstein's bleating voice.
Before the Hate had proceeded for thirty seconds, uncontrollable exclamations of rage were breaking out from half the people in the room. The self-satisfied sheep-like face on the screen, and the terrifying power of the Eurasian army behind it, were too much to be borne: besides, the sight or even the thought of Goldstein produced fear and anger automatically. He was an object of hatred more constant than either Eurasia or Eastasia, since when Oceania was at war with one of these Powers it was generally at peace with the other. But what was strange was that although Goldstein was hated and despised by everybody, although every day and a thousand times a day, on platforms, on the telescreen, in newspapers, in books, his theories were refuted, smashed, ridiculed, held up to the general gaze for the pitiful rubbish that they were in spite of all this, his influence never seemed to grow less. Always there were fresh dupes waiting to be seduced by him. A day never passed when spies and saboteurs acting under his directions were not unmasked by the Thought Police. He was the commander of a vast shadowy army, an underground network of conspirators dedicated to the overthrow of the State.
Still waiting.
In detail, what is Paul going to do and how is he going to do it?
NO slogans. NO sound bite answers. Actual serious plans. Screaming “He will protect the 2nd Amendment” “he will dismantle the IRS” are not answering how and what he would do. Those are slogans, not an agenda or a plan.
It’s clear you don’t understand the basic idea of LESS GOVERNMENT. What’s Ron Paul’s “plan”? What’s he going to “do”? He’s going to end all the various government programs that are out to “help” people, not revamp them or create new ones. It’s really quite simple.
I noticed Paul didn't present any statistics to back up his claim. ;)
And would continue to do so if he were ever (by some 'miracle') become President.
What the hell are you talking about? I called you out. You said “Factually untrue and absurdly silly. Another example of how Paul simply makes up his own reality.”
I listed 4 independent sources showing that Dr. Paul knows exactly what he is talking about. You listed no sources and instead of trying to defend your position you back away from the argument and call names.
You’ve lost the argument. Go away, the adults would like to discuss conservatively principled, free market economic conservation here.
May no attention to Johnny, he’s a sad little troll.
I provided the statistics in post 13.
Man oh man, who was that guy that used to post “SHOW THE STATISTICS TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS?!!!”
He got banned a few years ago but I still miss the humor in those posts. That phrase will live on in FR-infamy!
Sadly, it appears he’s a Minnesotan too. Don’t worry, most of us are actually quite friendly.
Given that most of Congress would be willing to override his vetoes, he'd still have Congress in his way. (And frankly, given some of the nutty stuff I've heard from Paul, I'd actually want that.)
Still waiting. IN DETAIL tell us, what in particular would Paul do, and how would he do it. Screaming slogans like "He will abolish the IRS", "He will end the WAR" does not answer the question.
Picking a Presidential Candidate is a serious business, not a popularity contest. Takes more then mouthing some slogans and slamming everything and everyone else to be qualified for the Presidency.
Paul fails in the basic qualifications for President in a whole lot of ways. Perhaps most importantly his complete inability to understand how a President is required to defend the USA.
Look at his drivel about a "tradition, non Interventionist Foreign Policy" The USA has NEVER had any such thing. The Founders fought an Undeclared Naval War with France and fought the Barbary Pirates. During the 1920s and 30s, at the height of the Isolationist movement, we fount a number of banana wars in Caribbean and Central American.
Defending the US does not start and stop at the US border. It never has. No matter how relentless the Paulbots try to ignore reality, the world is a much more interdependent place then it was in 1792.
There are any number of regions the US cannot afford to fall under the sway for hostile powers. The free flow of oil from the ME is a vital US economic, thus a vital National Security, issue.
Yanking the troops our of the ME so that the whole region falls under the influence of China, via their proxy Iran, would be an a gross dereliction of the President's oath to defend the USA.
That Paul advocates exactly that course of action indicates his complete unfitness to be President.
You could first explain how it is possible to take initiative action under any enumerated powers of the executive branch.
The only unilateral policy powers he has are to stop the war and rescind executive orders.
He can’t introduce legislation. He can only veto it.
It takes a Congress to tango.
And if a Republican becomes president, he’s bringing a Republican majority with him.
Unless they pander to Dems for a supermajority, they are going to know real quick that keeping Dr. No happy is the only way to get anything through.
In stark contrast to typical presidents.
Please read Post 33. Nice you have feelings. That Dr Paul mouths the slogans you want to hear doesn’t qualify him to be President.
If you look around you’ll see that much like a screaming child, nobody is paying any attention to you. Go poop in another sandbox.
You keep chirping that same old mantra time and time again when you have been given a link to over 900 speech's and articles outlining his positions. That is more information in the public domain on Ron Paul's views then all the information on the rest of the candidates combined.
I suspect that it is not information about Paul's policies that you seek however. I suspect that you hope that through enough repetitive inane posts as the one I referenced by you are intended to posit an inaccurate picture of a candidate whose political ideas are "pie in the sky".
Would you have me start posting the 900 articles and speech's that answer your question one at a time?
Reagan ran on cutting the taxes to drive up revenues. Gave specific data how how that would work. Was going to use those increasing revenues to fund a massive military build up. Once we were in a position of Military superiority, he would negotiate with the Commies.
In each step he had a detailed specific plan. Ron Paul, and you his mindlessly followers, have NO plans. You merely scream slogans. “Paul will abolish the IRS”.
Ok HOW? What he going to replace it with? How much revenue will that generate? How is it to be collected? etc etc etc
So HOW is Paul going to do a single thing? So far NO one has the slightest hint, including Paul.
Slogans are not solutions. Time the Paulites grow up and face that painful reality.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.