Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
When John Boehner was up for House Speaker, Ron Paul voted for him. The choice was between Boehner and Nancy Pelosi. Hardly a choice for liberty-minded people, but still, Dr. Paul chose Boehner without hesitation.
The same was true the last time Republicans controlled the House before Boehners tenure, when Dennis Hastert was House Speaker. Ron Paul voted for Hastert as House Speaker despite the fact that under Hasterts watch Congress approved No Child Left Behind, Medicare Plan D, authorized President Bushs war in Iraq and implemented the Patriot Act.
Lets go back even further to when Ron Paul voted for Newt Gingrich as House Speaker in 1996. This was right after Dr. Paul was re-elected to Congress and Gingrich had supported Rons establishment opponent in the Texas GOP Primary. Conservative leaders like David Keene, Phyllis Schlafly and Milton Friedman all endorsed Ron Paul in that primary. But not Newt (I wish I had remembered this during my Newt Gingrich is Not a Conservative series on Paulitical Ticker).
In 1996, there was even a move by some House Republicans to deny Gingrich the speaker position. Conservative Republicans were ticked off, believing Gingrich had abandoned with Contract with America and Republican Revolution of 1994.
Ron Paul did not join their efforts. He voted for Newt Gingrich as House Speaker.
My political ideology is called realism.
When John Boehner was up for House Speaker, Ron Paul voted for him. The choice was between Boehner and Nancy Pelosi. Hardly a choice for liberty-minded people, but still, Dr. Paul chose Boehner without hesitation.
The same was true the last time Republicans controlled the House before Boehners tenure, when Dennis Hastert was House Speaker. Ron Paul voted for Hastert as House Speaker despite the fact that under Hasterts watch Congress approved No Child Left Behind, Medicare Plan D, authorized President Bushs war in Iraq and implemented the Patriot Act.
Lets go back even further to when Ron Paul voted for Newt Gingrich as House Speaker in 1996. This was right after Dr. Paul was re-elected to Congress and Gingrich had supported Rons establishment opponent in the Texas GOP Primary. Conservative leaders like David Keene, Phyllis Schlafly and Milton Friedman all endorsed Ron Paul in that primary. But not Newt (I wish I had remembered this during my Newt Gingrich is Not a Conservative series on Paulitical Ticker).
In 1996, there was even a move by some House Republicans to deny Gingrich the speaker position. Conservative Republicans were ticked off, believing Gingrich had abandoned with Contract with America and Republican Revolution of 1994.
Ron Paul did not join their efforts. He voted for Newt Gingrich as House Speaker.
Ron Paul, John Boehner and Endorsements*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign CommitteeRon Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
This pretty much sums up my feelings regarding the Romney endorsement.
When John Boehner was up for House Speaker, Ron Paul voted for him. The choice was between Boehner and Nancy Pelosi. Hardly a choice for liberty-minded people, but still, Dr. Paul chose Boehner without hesitation.
When John Boehner was up for House Speaker, Ron Paul voted for him. The choice was between Boehner and Nancy Pelosi. Hardly a choice for liberty-minded people, but still, Dr. Paul chose Boehner without hesitation.
The same was true the last time Republicans controlled the House before Boehners tenure, when Dennis Hastert was House Speaker. Ron Paul voted for Hastert as House Speaker despite the fact that under Hasterts watch Congress approved No Child Left Behind, Medicare Plan D, authorized President Bushs war in Iraq and implemented the Patriot Act.
Lets go back even further to when Ron Paul voted for Newt Gingrich as House Speaker in 1996. This was right after Dr. Paul was re-elected to Congress and Gingrich had supported Rons establishment opponent in the Texas GOP Primary. Conservative leaders like David Keene, Phyllis Schlafly and Milton Friedman all endorsed Ron Paul in that primary. But not Newt (I wish I had remembered this during my Newt Gingrich is Not a Conservative series on Paulitical Ticker).
In 1996, there was even a move by some House Republicans to deny Gingrich the speaker position. Conservative Republicans were ticked off, believing Gingrich had abandoned with Contract with America and Republican Revolution of 1994.
Ron Paul did not join their efforts. He voted for Newt Gingrich as House Speaker.
Ron Paul, John Boehner and Endorsements*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign CommitteeRon Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
This pretty much sums up my feelings regarding the Romney endorsement.
Something is not right with what Paul said:
When John Boehner was up for House Speaker, Ron Paul voted for him. The choice was between Boehner and Nancy Pelosi. Hardly a choice for liberty-minded people, but still, Dr. Paul chose Boehner without hesitation.
Isn't the speaker of the house a member of the majority party of the house?
No it means acting like adult and making adult decisions.
How fortunate for you that acting like an adult so conveniently fits in with your political ideology.
My political ideology is called realism. I work with what I have I don't sit there with a thumb up my ass wish for things to be different. You want to know the true difference between conservatives and libertarians???? It is not pot cause most dont care ...No it is conservatives deal with reality and libertarians deal in philosophy . Conservatives know there is no utopia. Libertarians think there is.
How fortunate for you that acting like an adult so conveniently fits in with your political ideology.
My political ideology is called realism. I work with what I have I don't sit there with a thumb up my ass wish for things to be different. You want to know the true difference between conservatives and libertarians???? It is not pot cause most dont care ...No it is conservatives deal with reality and libertarians deal in philosophy . Conservatives know there is no utopia. Libertarians think there is.
The "conservative" ideas that form the republican party were put forth by libertarians. In deed calling republicans "conservative{" was thanks to libertarians. The libertarian "purists" are stuck- but they don't know it. Libertarianism is impractical in application as a pure ideology, because it depends on man to do good. As soon as man does not do good a law must be created and so on and so on.
There were Conservatives in the republican party AS WELL as libertarians...To think you have to be libertarian to be conservative is bullshit. I am not sure libertarians can even be considered conservative seeing their stances on things like defense and abortion.
There were Conservatives in the republican party AS WELL as libertarians...To think you have to be libertarian to be conservative is bullshit. I am not sure libertarians can even be considered conservative seeing their stances on things like defense and abortion.
I actually have to agree with thanatos on this one. Even when conservatives agree on some policy goals, it's for different reasons - and they have different priorities. Which is why conservatives are quick to drop limited government principles when it conflicts with their authoritarian ambitions.
There were Conservatives in the republican party AS WELL as libertarians...To think you have to be libertarian to be conservative is bullshit. I am not sure libertarians can even be considered conservative seeing their stances on things like defense and abortion.
I actually have to agree with thanatos on this one. Even when conservatives agree on some policy goals, it's for different reasons - and they have different priorities. Which is why conservatives are quick to drop limited government principles when it conflicts with their authoritarian ambitions.
Oh please....What have the libertarians did again????? Cause I know there are conservatives like Gingrich that actually put forth and got passed Conservative ideals.
I actually have to agree with thanatos on this one. Even when conservatives agree on some policy goals, it's for different reasons - and they have different priorities. Which is why conservatives are quick to drop limited government principles when it conflicts with their authoritarian ambitions.
Oh please....What have the libertarians did again????? Cause I know there are conservatives like Gingrich that actually put forth and got passed Conservative ideals.
You're really deep sea fishing if you think newt getrich is a conservative.
There were Conservatives in the republican party AS WELL as libertarians...To think you have to be libertarian to be conservative is bullshit. I am not sure libertarians can even be considered conservative seeing their stances on things like defense and abortion.
I actually have to agree with thanatos on this one. Even when conservatives agree on some policy goals, it's for different reasons - and they have different priorities. Which is why conservatives are quick to drop limited government principles when it conflicts with their authoritarian ambitions.
Oh please....What have the libertarians did again????? Cause I know there are conservatives like Gingrich that actually put forth and got passed Conservative ideals.
Oh please....What have the libertarians did again????? Cause I know there are conservatives like Gingrich that actually put forth and got passed Conservative ideals.
You're really deep sea fishing if you think newt getrich is a conservative.
What part made him not one? getting welfare reformed or getting a balanced budget?
I'm STILL trying to figure out just what he was thinking?
Guest Post: The Trouble with Rand Paul | ZeroHedge
And the money shot:Rand Paul just endorsed a man who is deeply hostile to human liberty.
Perhaps thats Rands idea of playing politics? Come to the table, strike a deal, get what you can. Trouble is, its tough striking a good deal when the guy on the other side of the table believes that the government should be allowed to claim without having to produce any evidence whatsoever that certain people are terrorists, and therefore should be detained indefinitely without any kind of due process.
Thats textbook tyranny.
But Mitt Romneys stances on these issues seem much, much, much closer to Barack Obama than they do to Ron Paul. In fact, he might as well have endorsed Obama for President. And the Ron Paul supporters are noticing: Rand has probably burnt most bridges to his Fathers supporters now
My political ideology is called realism. I work with what I have I don't sit there with a thumb up my ass wish for things to be different. You want to know the true difference between conservatives and libertarians???? It is not pot cause most dont care ...No it is conservatives deal with reality and libertarians deal in philosophy . Conservatives know there is no utopia. Libertarians think there is.
The "conservative" ideas that form the republican party were put forth by libertarians. In deed calling republicans "conservative{" was thanks to libertarians. The libertarian "purists" are stuck- but they don't know it. Libertarianism is impractical in application as a pure ideology, because it depends on man to do good. As soon as man does not do good a law must be created and so on and so on.
You have proof of this or are you as I know talking out of your ass? There were Conservatives in the republican party AS WELL as libertarians...To think you have to be libertarian to be conservative is bullshit. I am not sure libertarians can even be considered conservative seeing their stances on things like defense and abortion.
Rendition is sending people to torture-friendly countries.All from one website yes, but I detect at least four different libertarian authors there. Regardless, your assertion that libertarians in general did not oppose Bush is ridiculous.
As for the "astroturfed movement" when Obama became President, you don't have to tell me. It was natural that partisans would suddenly come out of the woodwork to oppose the new President, just as the same thing happened to Bush when he was elected.
Oh, and as for your assertions that Obama doesn't authorize torture, you're wrong. It's called rendition, and Obama has been allowing it since he became President.
That is not the same as torture at the hands of Americans.
A minor distinction, if you are the one being tortured, but it complies with U.S. law, at least.
Personally, I think it's more effective to kill them with kindness.
Who cares if it complies with U.S. law? Obama said he was going to end torture, and yet he has no problem sending people to be tortured by foreign countries who are probably far more ruthless about it than Bush's people ever were.
Rendition is sending people to torture-friendly countries.
That is not the same as torture at the hands of Americans.
A minor distinction, if you are the one being tortured, but it complies with U.S. law, at least.
Personally, I think it's more effective to kill them with kindness.
Who cares if it complies with U.S. law? Obama said he was going to end torture, and yet he has no problem sending people to be tortured by foreign countries who are probably far more ruthless about it than Bush's people ever were.
Link?
Who cares if it complies with U.S. law? Obama said he was going to end torture, and yet he has no problem sending people to be tortured by foreign countries who are probably far more ruthless about it than Bush's people ever were.
Link?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM5FKawx1No]Obama: U.S. `Will Not Torture' - YouTube[/ame]
Revisionist history by a libertarian. What about Buckly? Regan? Those are conservatives. They didnt need libertarians to tell them they were ether.The "conservative" ideas that form the republican party were put forth by libertarians. In deed calling republicans "conservative{" was thanks to libertarians. The libertarian "purists" are stuck- but they don't know it. Libertarianism is impractical in application as a pure ideology, because it depends on man to do good. As soon as man does not do good a law must be created and so on and so on.
You have proof of this or are you as I know talking out of your ass? There were Conservatives in the republican party AS WELL as libertarians...To think you have to be libertarian to be conservative is bullshit. I am not sure libertarians can even be considered conservative seeing their stances on things like defense and abortion.
I do not have the ability to "talk out my ass" as I am certain we have no relation so I could not have inherited your gene.
Yes, conservatives have always been in the GOP. The idea of and movement of the party as ideological contrast to American liberalism was born and first articulated by libertarians within the republican party.
For a little interesting read check out the link. Be aware that you may need an interpreter- the article does not speak "outyourassese" either.
Campaign For Liberty — Are Libertarians 'Conservative'? ** by Jack Hunter
