Like Ron Paul? Avoid Mitt Romney [punish Romney, Ryan and the GOP in swing states - vote Obama]

New York Daily News ^ | October 12, 2012 | Michael Tracey

[freeandfreezing]

I call BS on the article. No real libertarian is ever going to vote for President Obama, holding their nose or not. They might pass on Romney too, which although foolish is similar to strong pro life advocates refusing to vote for the "lesser of two evils" when a Republican is insufficiently pro life relative to their pro abortion Democrat opponent, but they are not going to vote for a socialist statist.

Ron Paul may have attracted some young people who have vague understandings of politics, but those who believe in libertarian ideas certainly can't support a statist like President Obama.

[OneWingedShark]

If Virgil had gotten ballot access in as many States as Johnson, I'd probably be leaning that way.

*nod* - It's kinda interesting to note how the Democratic and Republican parties have made it so that their national conventions are given monies from the taxpayer...

As for EV... "If you can't say anything nice about someone..." No thanks.

*shrug* - My point was more that I think any of the three (Johnson, Goode, or Hoefling) would be a better President than either Romney or Obama. (Of course that's kind of a really low bar, so I suppose it could be taken as a backhanded complement, even if it's not meant as such.)

[wita]

Romney is a great candidate for the Republican party, precisely because he talks one way and acts [governs] another.

You have no idea how the man will govern until he is or is not President. Frankly Scarlett, he could govern however he will and conservatives would like and appreciate it far more than what is presently an empty suit in an empty chair.

Of that I am supremely confident. You of course have every right to throw your vote in any direction you choose and depending on the outcome, we of the opposite view have every right to hold you responsible if the empty suit is granted four more years.

All that said, I couldn’t agree more with your other issues. Let’s just talk NFA for one. Eighty plus years that anti Constitutional travesty has been in place, and it isn’t even on the congressional radar screen. If the government had left well enough alone, who knows the mobsters may have all done themselves in and the good guys would own all the Thompsons.

I can dream.

[X-spurt]

Come on admit it, you paulnutz are happy with nobama and have no problems with “the end justifies the means” philosophy... With the insane hope he will eventually destroy America and what rises from the ashes is Paulnutland where anything goes and the dope's easy and cheap.

[Dante3]

Romney is not my favorite candidate. But he is enormously better than Obama. Just one of the reasons to vote for Romney - Eric Holder.

[Dead Corpse]

My point was more that I think any of the three (Johnson, Goode, or Hoefling) would be a better President than either Romney or Obama.

Agreed.

*beer*

[wita]

“Romney is not my favorite candidate”.

Nor mine, but now it is past decision time.

Some seem to think, (poor choice of word) an empty chair is a better choice.

[Crimson Elephant]

This is ridiculous. Even if you wanted to vote against Romney, you’d at least vote for Johnson...not Obama. Obama is as far away from Paul as you can get. He actually is the worst of Bush, the worst of the left...the worst of everything.

[OneWingedShark]

Come on admit it, you paulnutz are happy with nobama and have no problems with “the end justifies the means” philosophy... With the insane hope he will eventually destroy America and what rises from the ashes is Paulnutland where anything goes and the dope's easy and cheap.

There's so much wrong with that statement it's hard to know where to begin:
First, I didn't say anything about supporting Ron Paul.
Second, the "ends justify the means" is far more of the spirit of the War on Drugs [WOD] than those who deny that policy's legitimacy.
(

• The fourth amendment is routinely violated for the WOD, to the point where the most unreasonable of searches, the no-knock raid, are commonplace and where warrants which are supposed to "particularly describe the person or items to be seized" ramble on describing things in such sweeping terms as to render the clause as pointless. [See warrants which describe computer-related crimes: they describe EVERYTHING that's remotely connected to the computer.]
• The fifth is rendered futile because the WOD has allowed and legitimized the practice of "arresting" property.
• The sixth is rendered impotent because the government claiming "drugs" instantly taints the jury and they very often do not consider the legitimacy of the law the accused is said to have violated. Additionally, there are WOD-related crimes that are based wholly on psychic-powers discerning intent, rather than the actual actions where-which the law is supposed to be concerned.
• The eighth is trashed because of ridiculous sentence-lengths for drug-related crimes.
• The ninth is violated in rulings like Raich in that the government claims that growing your own product, of an item that has no [legal] market impacts the market-that-would-exist-if-it-were-legal and therefore the [federal] government can regulate it.
• The tenth is repudiated in that the State's are powerless to determine whether or not they wish to allow such drugs.
• Additionally, the mental-gymnastics [aka Troll-logic] required to legitimize the WOD undermines the whole of the Judiciary. (See Raich.)

)
Third, I think that Romney will not do anything good for America. Period. (Given that Obama's out-and-out corruption is at least waking people to the need to guard liberty, he may actually be better in the long run than electing Romney who, being a statist, will not reduce the power of the federal government but may cause complacency to return due to people believing that changing President is "doing something" with respect to liberty. [That's not the way it works, you are the front-line guardian of Liberty.])
Let me put that into a diagram:

OBAMA        ROMNEY
Elected      Elected
    |          |
    |          |
    |          |
 RADICAL      FABIAN
 SOCIALIST    SOCIALIST
      \       /
       \     /
        \   /
         \ /
          |
          |
      IMPLEMENTS
      SOCIALISM

[AmericanSamurai]

This is sickening. I believe Ron Paul is senile if he wants me to vote obama.

[OneWingedShark]

You have no idea how the man will govern until he is or is not President.

I'be heard that some where before... Oh, right: "We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it."

So now you're ascribing to Pelosi's mindset to promote Romney?
*Unsuccessfully tries to refrain from laughing*

[OneWingedShark]

This is sickening. I believe Ron Paul is senile if he wants me to vote obama.

That's not Ron Paul, it's some reporter's opinion. [As far as I can tell.]

[AmericanSamurai]

Probably one of those jackass libertarian left-wingers. lol

[Emperor Palpatine]

A vote for anyone but Romney is a vote for Zero.

Your flawed “principles argument” aside, MATH AND NUMBERS NEVER LIE.

Go ahead, waste a vote on some goofball third party kook, but just remember two words...ROSS PEROT.

[wita]

“I’ve heard that some where before... Oh, right: “We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.”

I thought your WOD logic was pretty well done. The above statement is in direct conflict with reality.

Romney/Ryan have announced their plan, it includes specifics.

Unlike the affordable care act, which even after reading, left everyone wondering what was in it.

[OneWingedShark]

“I’ve heard that some where before... Oh, right: “We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.”

I thought your WOD logic was pretty well done. The above statement is in direct conflict with reality.
Romney/Ryan have announced their plan, it includes specifics.

Thank you; I have a fairly low tolerance for BS, and the more I look into the WOD and the specific "arguments" supporting it [particularly the legal arguments] the more I realize what as sack of BS it is... add that to the rampant injustice it actively promotes and I don't think it incorrect to term it evil.

The "we have to pass it" remark was actually in direct response to "You have no idea how the man will govern until he is or is not President." [See post #23]
That sort of non-logic deserves to be called out, just like it was here (to some extent) on Pelosi's statement.

[OneWingedShark]

A vote for anyone but Romney is a vote for Zero.
Your flawed “principles argument” aside, MATH AND NUMBERS NEVER LIE.

How is my principals argument flawed? Please show me.

Go ahead, waste a vote on some goofball third party kook, but just remember two words...ROSS PEROT.

So, everyone in a third party is a kook? That's ridiculous, almost as ridiculous as saying that anyone who opposes the War on Drugs is a druggie.

If the republican party wanted my vote then they should have done something in the past fifteen years to further their major platform planks; as it is they have not:

• 2nd Amendment -- They have not said one thing about repeal of the NFA or GCA.
• Abortion -- When they had control of both the executive and legislative [under Bush] they did nothing, not even a token gesture, despite repeal of Roe v. Wade being an official party-plank.
• National Security -- Two words: Mexican border.
• Fiscal Responsibility/Smaller government -- When was the last time a whole government agency was dissolved? [Not rolled into another agency or renamed.]
• Government Accountability -- Fast & Furious, it's literally state sponsored terrorism, and almost certainly qualifies for the Constitution's definition of Treason. But what has the GOP done about it? Tell me again how they're working tirelessly to expose the matter.

That they selected Romney, and indeed before the primaries they had selected him, is proof to me that there is no intention of them starting to pursue their party planks now.

And don't give me any shit about "party loyalty" -- NY-23 proved that the party is not loyal to us.

[CyberAnt]

The person who wrote this article is the one full of baloney!!

Ron Paul may not agree with Romney on a lot of things .. but I have never believed Ron Paul would do anything to ruin Romney .. especially since it would mean another 4 years of Obama - which would destroy the country even further.

I’m not a Ron Paul follower, but for him to refuse to support Romney is just plain not important enough to worry about. A lot of people don’t support Romney .. SO ..??

[MNJohnnie]

He is the problem the Libertarians always have. They are so busy arguing their political theology they lose any contact with practical political reality.

Romney or Obama will be the next President.

Romney is a pragmatic business man. We will have to work daily to keep his feet to the fire but he will listen to us. Obama will work tirelessly against us.

If Obama is reelected by 2016 we will be so far over the fiscal cliff there will be no climbing back. Romney sees the chart below as a problem. 0bama thinks the problem is we have not spent enough!

FY 1992-1993 Bush 1 and Dem Congress. FY 1994-95 Clinton and a Dem Congress. FY 1996-2001 Clinton and a GOP Congress. FY 2002-2003 Bush 2 and GOP House/Dem Senate. FY 2004-2007 Bush and a GOP Congress. FY 2008-2011 Obama and Dem Congress. FY 2012+ Obama/GOP House/Dem Senate.

Obama added planks favoring Gay Marriage and taxpayer funded abortion on demand up to birth to the 2012 Democrat Party platform.

By contrast the 2012 GOP platform is the most Conservative one in their history.

No matter how much one might hate Romney, no one with a brain would refuse to see the stark difference between Romney and Obama on both fiscal and social issues.

With Romney Fiscal and Social Conservatives have a seat at the table, while Obama will actively promote everything real Conservatives are against.

By 2016 everything Conservatives claim to be so passionate about will be legislated. As Roe V Wade should of taught Conservatives once something is legislated it become almost impossible to undo.

Once 2016 rolls around the Judiciary will be so packed with Obamabots anything Conservatives DID manage to legislate would simply be undone by Judicial Fiat.

If Obama is reelected there will be nothing left to win.

After another 4 year term of Obama the USA will be a European style 1 party state with a state directed media, that will allow just enough political window dressing from a “loyal opposition” to keep their peon classes passive.

And those around here who feel their political sour grapes from the 2012 GOP Primaries are more important then the future of our country will have been the active allies of that destruction

[MNJohnnie]

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/260411-nra-endorses-romney-calls-him-only-hope-for-firearms-freedom

Romney or Obama will be President.

Romney has promised to repeal 0bama’s executive order authorizing taxpayer fund to be used to pay for abortions overseas.

By that act alone the number of abortions will go down under a Romney Presidency.

The NRA has endorsed Romney as “the only hope of firearms freedom”.

So the only vote a real pro lifer/pro guns right voter can make is for Romney.

Anything else is merely clinging to sour grapes because your candidate of choice did not win the 2012 GOP nomination