Debate Over 2012 Presidential Debates

The following debate originally took place on my Facebook wall, upon my post, “Leaked Debate Agreement Shows Both Obama and Romney are Sniveling Cowards“…

Obama & Romney: Sniveling Cowards

Rayn: Leaked Debate Agreement Shows Both Obama and Romney are Sniveling Cowards:
http://gawker.com/5951977/leaked-debate-agreement-shows-both-obama-and-romney-are-sniveling-cowards

Since the Republi-‘Crats continue to agree on WAR, they have once again framed the entire presidential election around it! Meanwhile the two-party fraud colludes behind the scenes to ensure that each of their puppets are beyond reproach throughout the debates!!! As you can see, there is no need for peer review in political “science,” because TYRANNY HATES INQUIRY!

Some of the rules Obama and Romney negotiated with the Commission on Presidential Debates for: “They aren’t permitted to ask each other questions, propose pledges to each other, or walk outside a “predesignated area.” And for the town-hall-style debate tomorrow night, the audience members posing questions aren’t allowed to ask follow-ups (their mics will be cut off as soon as they get their questions out). Nor will moderator Candy Crowley.”

Brian J.: I think Obama did a great job, and beat Romney. And he did get some tough questions, and he’s managed to take responsibility for all his screw ups. Which is something that Bush and Clinton never did.

Daniel F.: The biggest problem in the last four years have been the republicans in Congress opposing every little thing that Obama tries to do and who don’t care if the country is brought to the brink of ruin so long as they can blame it on Obama and the democrats. Obama has been far from perfect, but the republicans have been FAR worse.

Brian J.: Exactly. And Obama only tries to take away our rights, and make more war, just to appeal to the republican base. He does things to please both parties, and the Republicans still don’t like him. It’s just a race thing.

Rayn: “Obama did a great job, and beat Romney,” Brian? At what? Manufacturing public consent for more war?

“And, he did get some tough questions?” Oh, really? Was Obama asked about his current war operations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, and Uganda? Was he questioned about his drone bombings in Pakistan and Yemen, among other nations? Was he asked about Guantanamo Bay’s continued operation under his administration? Was he asked the continued use of extraordinary rendition and torture by the US military and CIA, or the international “Black Sites” where it is taking place? Was he asked about his secret “Kill List”? Was he questioned about his extension of Bush’s PATRIOT Act? Was he asked about his support for the anti-protest bill (HR 347)? Was he questioned about his signing of the Indefinite Detention of Americans Bill (NDAA)? Was he asked about his administration’s legalization of extra-judicial Democide of American citizens abroad? Was he questioned about his war against whistle-blowers? Was he asked about his aggressive continuation of the fallacious federal “War on Drugs”? Was he asked about the world’s largest prison population that our country holds as a result of it? (As you’ll recall, I provided citations for most of this information during our discussion, here:
http://acidrayn.com/2012/10/15/has-obama-been-helping-to-restore-america-or-is-he-just-another-warmongering-corporate-puppet/)

During these Presidential “debates,” ALL MODERATOR QUESTIONS WERE SELECTED IN ADVANCE (and NOT through election), while ALL AUDIENCE QUESTIONS WERE SCREENED IN ADVANCE. Besides this, in spite of all those efforts to frame the debate, FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS WERE ALSO NOT ALLOWED, in case a REAL question did manage to slip through! It was PURE PUPPET SHOW – COMPLETELY STAGED, and absent ALL INTEGRITY!

“He’s managed to take responsibility for all his screw ups”? Absolutely impossible, even on face value. Among other things, Obama is still drone-bombing Pakistan, Yemen and others, he still has our military engaged in war operations in multiple foreign nations, he still holds a secret “kill list,” he has continued to militarize the police and imprison the population in the “War on Drugs,” he is still prosecuting whistle-blowers, he has kept Guantanamo Bay open, and he has continued to maintain the legality of indefinite detention, torture, extraordinary rendition, PATRIOT Act, HR 347, the NDAA, and even extra-judicial Democide of US citizens!

Rayn: If “the biggest problem in the last four years have been the republicans in Congress opposing every little thing that Obama tries to do,” Daniel, how do you explain the fact that Obama had a Democrat-controlled Congress for the first TWO YEARS of his presidency, and still delivered no real “change”? He actually EXTENDED expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act TWICE with their approval, gained more war funding, and expanded the “War on Terrorism” to include at least four new nations! In a number of cases, Obama even went AROUND the Democrat-controlled Congress through use of signing statements:

Obama’s Embrace of a Bush Tactic Riles Congress (August 2009 article):
http://acidrayn.com/2009/08/09/obamas-embrace-of-a-bush-tactic-riles-congress/
(Obama condemned “signing statements” as a candidate, promised not to use, then promptly did that very thing, once elected into office)

Meanwhile, under the current Republican-controlled Congress, Obama has passed the HR 347 and NDAA, while again, extending provisions of the PATRIOT Act, and still receiving more war funding! He has received BIPARTISAN support for the Federal war against human rights in the name of the “War on Terrorism”!

“Obama has been far from perfect, but the republicans have been FAR worse,” you say? You present a comparative fallacy based upon a False dilemma. Wrong is wrong, regardless of the amount! And, this is especially evident when human rights and lives are on the line!

Brian J.: Again, how are those screw ups. Obama did take responsibility for his actual screw ups, during his recent debate with Mitt Romney. And you’re criticizing his foreign policy, which isn’t that good. But he and many people think that it’s the best option. You don’t think Moses is evil, and yet, Obama is doing exactly what Moses was doing. It’s survival of the fittest. These terrorists have it coming. Their civilians have it coming, it’s called collateral damage. And we also have it coming. This war will never come to an end, unless America stops supporting Israel, and lay down our arms. But if we actually call for peace, we would be destroyed. Islam is a religion of violence, and they have commands to kill all of us. It cannot be ignore, and it has to be stopped in one way, or another. Maybe a peaceful solution could help, but it wouldn’t last.

Brian J.: Obama was siding with the right, and trying to make them happy, and the Patriot Act is one of those things that he supported, to make the Republican party happy, and they still don’t like him. And I’m not saying it’s right or wrong, but it’s the best usage to fight terrorism, and the terror of Islam. Sadly, this won’t go anywhere, and it won’t make any progress. If their gonna fight a war, they should do it in a better way.

Genaire: This video highlights just a few of the lies told by Obama during his last run at president:

The Illusion of Choice: Obama Vs. Romney, Democrats Vs. Republicans:

Brian J.: I’m still voting for Obama, because he supports gay rights and women’s rights. I can’t say that about Romney. And Obama supports atheists and science as well.

Daniel F.: Romney is worse than Obama in just about every way possible. And at the end of the day, it’s going to be one of those two who gets to be president for the next four years. Though if you can come up with a plausible, realistic scenario in which someone other than those two is president for the next four years, I would love to hear it.

Rayn: “Obama only tries to take away our rights, and make more war, just to appeal to the republican base,” you claim, Brian? That’s an unfounded assertion, with no evidence to support it. Obama EXTENDED expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act TWICE under the Democrat-controlled Congress, and by the time they were voted out, the had approved more military spending for him than they had even granted to Bush! Make NO mistake! The drive to “make more war” receives BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, along with the effort to reduce the rights of American citizens!

John W.: lol i can’t tell if brian is lampooning the typical obama zombie or if he’s serious. i hope it’s the prior.

John W.: “And Obama only tries to take away our rights, and make more war, just to appeal to the republican base. He does things to please both parties, and the Republicans still don’t like him.”

lol…well, i’m sure the pakistani men, women, and children blown to smithereens by the drones that obama has authorized would be pleased to hear that line of reasoning as a justification for furthering dangerous and immoral bush policies.

Rayn: “Again, how are those screwups,” you ask, Brian? Hmmm… What do you mean, “again”? We haven’t gone over any of Obama’s “screwups” during this discussion, nor did we previously talk about them. Either way, to answer your question: the reason I labeled Obama’s actions as “screw ups” is because he SCREWED UP when he chose to do them!
______________________________________________________

“You’re criticizing his foreign policy, which isn’t that good. But he and many people think that it’s the best option,” you say? Well, I feel sorry for those individuals… Imperialism, wars of aggression and murder of civilians are really only valid foreign policy to criminals. To agree with such atrocities simply because they receive major support is a Logical fallacy/Bandwagon. Remember when eugenics was popular in this country? And, even now, slavery is at an all-time high. Should we re-legalizing it simply because it is a popular practice? Of course not.

If you’ll recall, the war in Iraq once received major public support. And, all it took was government lies about and media spin about the facts… Every day, the American public is bombarded by a relentless stream of misinformation insidiously spread by the mainstream media monopoly – the same group that fed us WMDs and the Iraq War. Our information about the ongoing wars is being controlled, and most are not even aware of it, or its consequences:

Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand (April 2008 article):
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/20generals.html?_r=3&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Pentagon Pundit Scandal Broke the Law (April 2008 article):
http://www.prwatch.org/node/7261

Army Denies Journo-Iraq-Embed for Critical Reporting on War (June 2009 article):
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/06/army-denies-reporter-iraq-embed-for-critical-reporting/

Pentagon Hired Contractors to Vet War Reporters Who Were Refused to Highlight Good News (Aug. 2008 article):
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/08/pentagon-hired-contractor-to-vet-war-reporters
______________________________________________________

“You don’t think Moses is evil, and yet, Obama is doing exactly what Moses was doing,” you say? I never even mentioned Moses here, so that is an irrelevant digression from the topic, and a FARCICAL comparison, at best.
______________________________________________________

“It’s survival of the fittest. These terrorists have it coming,” you claim? The American government helped to recruit, radicalize, fund and train those “terrorists” in the first place, during our “Cold War” with Russia! And, since then, our “leaders” have continued to use them like puppets to overthrow other governments around the world! The only thing the “terrorists” have coming is more funding from the US!

If you’re prepared for the challenge, check out the following two articles to read all about how America funded the Mujahadeen, the MAK, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and other “terrorists”:

US Armed, Trained, and Funded Mujahideen Becomes Maktab-Al-Khidamat (MAK), Al Qaeda, Taliban and Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) Terrorist Groups:
http://acidrayn.com/2011/03/31/us-armed-trained-funded-mujahideen-becomes-maktab-al-khidamat-mak-al-qaeda-taliban-and-libyan-islamic-fighting-group-lifg-terrorist-groups/

Questioning the Motives Behind the American Invasion of Afghanistan:
http://acidrayn.com/2009/12/18/questioning-the-motives-behind-the-american-invasion-of-afghanistan/

Even SHILLary Clinton, herself, has now admitted to it on national television a few times:

Hillary Clinton Admits U.S. Government Created Al-Qaeda:

And, this goes beyond the scope of anything you could imagine! Our tax dollars were used to corrupt GENERATIONS of Afghani children with the HATRED and LIES of “Jihad”:

US Educates Afghanistan’s Children on Violent Jihad During Cold War (and After):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A5339-2002Mar22?language=printer

And, our government’s support for terrorism has NOT ceded since that time, of course:

Clinton-Supported KLA Rebels of late 1980s Trained in Terrorist Camps Run By Bin Laden (May 1999 article):
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/KLA-binladen.htm

The Crimes of the KLA: Who Will Pay? (March 2003 article)
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/jatras9.html

Al Qaeda’s Balkan Links (November 2001):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/561291/posts

Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein – U.S. Tilts toward Iraq, 1980-1984 (February 2003 article):
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

How Washington Funded the Taliban in Fighting the “War on Drugs” (August 2002 article):
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3556

US Indirectly Funding Al-Qaeda Linked Sunni Groups in Move to Counter Iran (Feb. 2007 article):
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/2/28/investigative_reporter_seymour_hersh_us_indirectly

U.S. Funds Sent from Iraq Ended Up with Al-Qaeda (Sept. 2008 article):
http://rt.com/Top_News/2008-09-23/US_funds_sent_from_Iraq_to_al-Qaeda_-_source.html

Al Qaeda Now a US Ally in Syria (Sept. 2012 article):
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/opinion/alqaeda-now-a-us-ally-in-syria-20120910-25oby.html

Due to the sorry state of today’s mainstream media monopoly, it’s easy to overlook the fact that Bush planned to attack Afghanistan and Iraq long before 9/11 :

US Planned Attack on Taliban and Osama Bin Laden in July 2001, Months Before 9/11 (Sept 18, 2001 article):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1550366.stm

U.S. Established Plans for World-Wide War Against Al-Qaeda (May 2002 article):
(Bush was Expected to Sign Them Into Action Just Days Before 9/11, But Was Delayed)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4587368/

British Aircraft Carrier & Fleet Head for the Middle East for War Exercise (September 3, 2001 article):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1522987.stm

In fact, our government was well on its way to war with Afghanistan before 9/11, even as they were funded the Taliban with our tax dollars in order to fight the “War on Drugs”:

US Attack Aimed at Bin Laden in Afghanistan (Jan. 1999 article):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/241477.stm

India Joins US and Russia in Invasion of Afghanistan –
Collaboration with Northern Alliance to Drive Taliban Out (March 2001 article):
http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jir/jir010315_1_n.shtml

(update: archived copy of above link located here: http://web.archive.org/web/20010715054155/http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jir/jir010315_1_n.shtml)

Anti-Taliban Opposition in Afghanistan Launches Spring Offensive After Winter Reinforcement by Russia, India and Iran (March 2001 article):
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1328352/Anti-Taliban-forces-on-offensive.html

And, just like our military plans against Afghanistan before 9/11, we know that our government had plans to wage war against Iraq before 9/11:

Bush Planned Iraq Invasion Before 9/11 (Jan. 2004 article):
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/10/oneill.bush

A Buried 60 Minutes Interview / Indictment (2004 airing):

Buried 60 Minutes Interview with Paul O’Neil:

(Bush’s ex-Secretary of the Treasury, Paul O’Neil, reveals that Bush planned to attack Iraq eight months before 9/11, when he first entered office)

There was even specific strategy planning for an attack against Iraq before the propogation of the “Saddam has WMDs” lie:

Bush Began to Exact Plan of Attack Against Iraq Three Months After 9/11 (Apr. 2004 article):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17347-2004Apr16.html

Rayn: “Their civilians have it coming, it’s called collateral damage,” you claim, Brian? Well, you can give it any slick, fancy political title you like, but it’s still MURDER, and it does, in fact, constitute WAR CRIMES!

It was Orwell who said, “political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

“war crimes serious violations of the laws applicable in armed conflict (also known as international humanitarian law) giving rise to individual criminal responsibility. Examples of such conduct include ‘murder, the ill-treatment or deportation of civilian residents of an occupied territory to slave labor camps,’ ‘the murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war,’ the killing of prisoners, “the wanton destruction of cities, towns and villages, and any devastation not justified by military, or civilian necessity’.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime

Voltaire said it well, “those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities”!
______________________________________________________

“And we also have it coming.” Indeed, we do. The CIA agrees with your sentiment – just not your reasoning. According to them, it symbolizes BLOWBACK (the unintended consequences of the our government’s international activities that have been kept secret from us):

Blowback (Oct. 2001 article):
http://www.thenation.com/article/blowback

Bin Laden Comes Home to Roost (Aug. 1998 article):
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3340101/
Check the date, here! All of the politics and emotions of 9/11 are nonexistent at this point!

Terror ‘Blowback’ Burns CIA (November 1998 article):
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/terror-blowback-burns-cia-1182087.html
Note that this article, too, is PRE- 9/11!

Bin Laden, Taliban Created During Cold War Era (Oct. 2001 article):
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0110/S00004.htm
Another PRE- 9/11 article!
______________________________________________________

“This war will never come to an end, unless America stops supporting Israel, and lay down our arms,” you say? If you including putting an end to America’s imperialistic military expansion to that list, then we agree, 100%!

America’s Empire of Bases – “702 Overseas Bases in 130 Different Countries” (Jan. 2004 article):
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0115-08.htm

According to this article, these bases are run by the Pentagon, who:

“has another 6,000 bases in the United States and its territories. Pentagon bureaucrats calculate that it would require at least $113.2 billion to replace just the foreign bases — surely far too low a figure but still larger than the gross domestic product of most countries — and an estimated $591,519.8 million to replace all of them.”

The article also notes:

“These numbers, although staggeringly large, do not begin to cover all the actual bases we occupy globally. The 2003 Base Status Report fails to mention, for instance, any garrisons in Kosovo — even though it is the site of the huge Camp Bondsteel, built in 1999 and maintained ever since by Kellogg, Brown & Root. The Report similarly omits bases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, and Uzbekistan, although the U.S. military has established colossal base structures throughout the so-called arc of instability in the two-and-a-half years since 9/11.

For Okinawa, the southernmost island of Japan, which has been an American military colony for the past 58 years, the report deceptively lists only one Marine base, Camp Butler, when in fact Okinawa “hosts” ten Marine Corps bases, including Marine Corps Air Station Futenma occupying 1,186 acres in the center of that modest-sized island’s second largest city. (Manhattan’s Central Park, by contrast, is only 843 acres.) The Pentagon similarly fails to note all of the $5-billion-worth of military and espionage installations in Britain, which have long been conveniently disguised as Royal Air Force bases. If there were an honest count, the actual size of our military empire would probably top 1,000 different bases in other people’s countries, but no one — possibly not even the Pentagon — knows the exact number for sure, although it has been distinctly on the rise in recent years.”

And, the number of bases continues to rise! This article is from the same author, who goes on to use the 2005 issue of the same Base Status Report to write an later article on the same topic:

737 U.S. Military Bases = Global Empire (Feb. 2007 article):
http://www.alternet.org/story/47998

From the article:

“Interestingly enough, the thirty-eight large and medium-sized American facilities spread around the globe in 2005 — mostly air and naval bases for our bombers and fleets — almost exactly equals Britain’s thirty-six naval bases and army garrisons at its imperial zenith in 1898. The Roman Empire at its height in 117 AD required thirty-seven major bases to police its realm from Britannia to Egypt, from Hispania to Armenia. Perhaps the optimum number of major citadels and fortresses for an imperialist aspiring to dominate the world is somewhere between thirty-five and forty.”

What sort of government do we really want, as Americans? A REPUBLIC or AN EMPIRE? We must choose wisely, because we cannot have both!

Rayn: “But if we actually call for peace, we would be destroyed,” you claim, Brian? I’m not very well-versed in Newspeak, so you’re going to have to help me understand… Are you saying that PEACE is DESTRUCTION? And, are you imply that WAR is responsible for our current state of PEACE? Finally, have you ever read the book, “1984”?
______________________________________________________

“Islam is a religion of violence, and they have commands to kill all of us”? Untrue and laughably untrue. How many of your Muslim friends have actually tried to kill you? NOT ONE of mine has! You have fallen into the Faulty generalization fallacy, here. It is ALWAYS the extremists that talk the loudest, speak the most, embrace the most outrageous tactics for attention, and receive the most media coverage, drowning out their moderate, progressive and pacifist peers. This does not make them “spokes models” for their stated ideology. Do fundamentalist, pro-life Christians represent all of Christianity? Do you represent all Athiests. No and no!
______________________________________________________

“Maybe a peaceful solution could help, but it wouldn’t last,” you claim? Peace is the ONLY lasting solution!!!
______________________________________________________

“The Patriot Act is one of those things that he supported, to make the Republican party happy, and they still don’t like him”? As I noted in my last comment, of Obama EXTENDED expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act TWICE under the Democrat-controlled Congress. He also gained more war funding than Bush with their approval!
______________________________________________________

“And I’m not saying [the Patriot Act’s] right or wrong, but it’s the best usage to fight terrorism, and the terror of Islam. Sadly, this won’t go anywhere, and it won’t make any progress,” you claim? There is ZERO evidence that the PATRIOT Act has been the “best usage to fight terrorism,” and much proof that it has continued the ongoing federalization and militarization of local law enforcement agencies, while establishing a vast, expensive government spying operation against American citizens. Aside from this, it legitimized the “indefinite detention” of immigrants, and was used to establish the rampantly abusive, ever-expanding powers of the TSA!

Benjamin Franklin said it best, when he stated ,”those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” And, I am in full agreement!
James Madison also said, “The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home.” TRUTH!

The other day, while debating another friend about Obama, she indicated that she would vote for him due to his support of Roe vs. Wade. I replied with the following, “I do not consent to be governed by injustice, and I will not negotiate away even one of my natural-borne rights in exchange for the worthless recognition of another. Furthermore, I will not negotiate away the natural-borne rights of any other individual in exchange for the worthless acknowledgment of my own. If our natural-borne rights are not inalienable, then they are really just privileges by another name…” I refuse to negotiate with terrorists!
______________________________________________________

“If their gonna fight a war, they should do it in a better way,” you say? Well, war IS TERRORISM, so it’s time to stop the hypocrisy and the criminality, and work towards a true PEACE – which will NEVER come from INJUSTICE!!!

Rayn: Sorry to break up my reply, Brian, but Facebook wouldn’t allow me post it all in one shot – or, even in two parts, strangely!

Daniel F.: Brian – there is no excuse for civilian casualties or collateral damage. With regards to the War on Terror, Obama has been almost as had as Bush (and I only say ‘almost’ because he did get Bin Laden and he got us out of Iraq).

But understand that the president alone does not determine our foreign policy – Congress does have a large say in the matter. I think he’s trying to do what he thinks is best (though some of us may disagree with what he thinks that is), but he has a nearly impossible job. And it’s made worse by the fact that the republicans in congress have opposed him tooth and nail on absolutely everything he has tried to do while in office (save those things that a republican like Bush would have done). Obama’s biggest flaw as a president has been his refusal or inability to confront them and call them out on it, and instead trying to meet them half way, despite the fact that every time he has tried to reach out across the aisle it has been thrown back in his face.

Daniel F.: Rayn – you asked why even when Obama had a majority in the House and a supermajority in the Senate he still couldn’t get done what he had promised to during his campaign. It was because unlike the republicans, the democrats don’t seem to have absolute control over their members in Congress and how they vote in the same manner. On the Affordable Care Act, he had to make a lot of consessions just to get the “Blue Dog” democrats on his side in order to break through the republican filibuster. While the republican leaders were able to cow every single one of their members in the Senate into voting in lock step with how they were told, to the point where even supposed “moderates” such as Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe dared not cross them.

Brian J.: I’m not talking about the democratically controlled congress. The fact is that Obama has done certain things that would appeal to Republicans, like creating more wars, and fighting the terrorists. And while his foreign policies are wrong, I understand why he’s doing it, because we’re dealing with radical Islamic fundamentalists, who want to kill us. So if we call for peace, we might get up getting attacked, and killed. There’s no peace, if the other side don’t want it. I want peace, I think the war is useless, I think we should lay down our arms. But we’re dealing with people that never want peace, and they want to destroy us. So the concept of peace, is probably a useless concept. I’m not a pacifist, I’m just a realist.

Brian J.: Yeah, Rayn forgets about the blue-dog Democrats who weren’t giving a lot of support to Obama. So even under a democratic congress, Obama had a tough time to get things done. So under a Republican congress, it got even worse. And with Obama trying to start wars, he’s just trying to appeal to the republican base, and protect the American people. It’s probably not gonna work, but I understand why he feels a need to do it.

Brian J.: Yeah, it’s murder, and we should of been prosecuted as war criminals. But it’s collateral damage, and it happens. And these terrorists, had it coming. So did the innocent civilians. Technically, we all have it coming. And these people don’t want peace, they want death and destruction, and their gonna go to war with us for eternity. We could make a call for peace, but it’s not gonna happen, since other people want to drop a bomb on us.

Brian J.: This country is an empire, and it’s gonna fall like an empire.

Brian J.: There is no excuse for collateral damage. But it’s the way it is. War is evil, but it’s also a necessary evil. Because without no negatives in the world, there would be no positives.

Genaire: Brian, you do realize our foreign policies are the cause of all our problems in the middle east. Our support for imperialist Israel and our own imperialistic nature are the cause of our problems in that region. Despite what you believe or what you have been told they do not hate us for our freedom. They hate us cause we are constantly interfering in matters that are honestly none of our business. If our government would stop needlessly wasting tax payer money and our soldiers lives we could actually start improving things here at home, but as long as the few war profiteers continue to benefit from this madness and the people continue to vote for these candidates that spoon feed them bullshit we will see no change.

Genaire: These two videos highlight just how counterproductive this whole war on terror actually is:

Reality Check: One on One with President Obama, Why Is The U.S. Supporting Al Qaeda In Syria?

CIA Agent Explains How Al-Qaeda Doesn’t Exist:

Rayn: I checked out the first video you posted here, Genaire, entitled “The Illusion of Choice”, and I’d say that it’s something every American voter should watch AT LEAST once! Thanx for sharing! 🙂

Rayn: “I’m still voting for Obama, because he supports gay rights and women’s rights. I can’t say that about Romney. And Obama supports atheists and science as well,” you say, Brian? Meaningless, as NEITHER candidate supports HUMAN RIGHTS! Civilians will continue to be murdered in the “War on Terrorism” under BOTH men, and, the Bill of Rights will continue to be eviscerated by the federal government, as well! Personally, I refuse to negotiate with terrorists, so I will not vote for either of these warmongers!

Rayn: “Romney is worse than Obama in just about every way possible,” you say, Daniel? Tell that to all of those murdered Afghani, Iraqi and Pakistani civilians!
______________________________________________________

“At the end of the day, it’s going to be one of those two who gets to be president for the next four years”? Indeed. And, this is called COERCION to those of us who do not consent to the charade! Here is what I wrote in my blog in 2010, after the Republicans won a majority in the house: “our elections are simply THEATER in order to create the ILLUSION of CHOICE, and hence, MANUFACTURE PUBLIC CONSENT to a MOSTLY PRE-DETERMINED OUTCOME. Pre-selected candidates are thrust upon us (like Bush vs. Kerry in 2004, who were BOTH members of Yale’s Secret Society – Skull & Bones), presidential outcomes are chosen by electoral college, and machines are rigged to prevent INDEPENDENTS from EVER GAINING more than a FEW PERCENTAGE POINTS (in order to psych individuals out of “wasting” their vote on those THAT ACTUALLY DESERVE IT)!!”

Lysander Spooner said it well: “a man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.” Living as an Abolitionist during America’s slavery era, he understood FULL WELL the false political choices that were being presented to the public of his day, as well as the need for REAL CHANGE, beginning with his DISSENTING VOICE!

The Jones Plantation:

Here are two ANTI-WAR presidential candidates that have been completely DISENFRANCHISED by the same MAINSTREAM MEDIA that fed us the War in Iraq and WMD’s:

Green Party Candidate Jill Stein Arrested Outside Debate (Oct. 16, 2012):
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/16/green-party-candidate-jill-stein-arrested-outside-debate/

Jon Stewart Did An Amazing Piece Exposing the Media’s Woeful Lack of Coverage for Ron Paul:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-15-2011/indecision-2012—corn-polled-edition—ron-paul—the-top-tier
____________________________________

“If you can come up with a plausible, realistic scenario in which someone other than those two is president for the next four years, I would love to hear it,” you say?

As I’m sure you know, not much can be done about the upcoming election cycle, since it’s only two weeks away… However, the most realistic approach that Individuals can take towards effecting any real political change, even now, is to stop being spoon-fed lies by the mainstream media, and to passionately investigate the facts FOR THEMSELVES, while also educating others about where to find the information! Until the public at large finally begins to make INFORMED DECISIONS about the political future of this country, we will ALL continue the slow death-march from REPUBLIC to EMPIRE!

The smallest unit of change IS, in fact, the INDIVIDUAL – and, that is where the real work must be done if we are to create a TRULY FREE, VOLUNTARY, JUST and therefore, PEACEFUL, society!
Samuel Adams famously said, “it does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” And, this is TRUTH:

Minority Rules: Scientists Discover Tipping Point for the Spread of Ideas is a Convicted 10% of Population:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110725190044.htm

We the Individuals must ABANDON the illusion of choice presented by our current government system, and work tirelessly to expose the two-party fraud! It is directly responsible for the corrupt, plutocratic, oligarchical, fascist form of government that we now live under, along with the perpetual wars that feed the beast!

47% of Congress Members Millionaires — a Status Shared by Only 1% of Americans (Nov. 2011 article):
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/47-of-congress-members-millionaires-a-status-shared-by-only-1-of-americans/

Congress Members Back Legislation that Could Benefit Themselves, Relatives:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/congress-members-back-legislation-that-could-benefit-themselves-relatives/2012/10/07/c2fa7d94-f3a9-11e1-a612-3cfc842a6d89_story.html
(There are currently “73 members of Congress who have sponsored or co-sponsored legislation in recent years that could benefit businesses or industries in which either they or their family members are involved or invested, according to a Washington Post analysis.”)

The above two articles represent the the MATH OF CLASSISM! And, it’s time to END THIS MADNESS! Americans must learn to seek out INDEPENDENT alternatives to the parasitic corporate stooges that claim to “represent” us! And, this goes for EVERY aspect of our lives, really!

Rayn: “i can’t tell if brian is lampooning the typical obama zombie or if he’s serious. i hope it’s the prior,” you say, John? I’m sad to report that it is NOT the prior.

Here’s a recent debate we had on the same topic:
http://acidrayn.com/2012/10/15/has-obama-been-helping-to-restore-america-or-is-he-just-another-warmongering-corporate-puppet/

By the way, thank you, kindly, for pointing out the “pakistani men, women, and children blown to smithereens by the drones that obama has authorized”! Too many choose to remain silent about the war crimes of the American government, failing to realize that complacency is complicity! They simply shrug off the fact that WE are the ones funding such atrocities with our tax dollars!

Rayn: Thank you for pointing out the fact that “there is no excuse for civilian casualties or collateral damage,” Daniel. We are in full agreement, there!

“With regards to the War on Terror, Obama has been almost as bad as Bush (and I only say ‘almost’ because he did get Bin Laden and he got us out of Iraq),” you say? I’d say that he’s just as bad!

The Shocking Pattern of Obama Repeating Some of the Worst of George W. Bush:
http://www.alternet.org/story/152095/the_shocking_pattern_of_obama_repeating_some_of_the_worst_of_george_w._bush/
(The subtitle of this article reads, “Obama forged a continuation of the Bush years, doubling Bush’s war in the Arab world, hiring staff from the Bush Administration, and tossing civil liberties aside for ‘security.’)

It’s exactly as I told Brian in our previous FB debate:

*****************************************************
“Obama actually escalated America’s war in Afghanistan, while also aggressively continuing war operations in Pakistan, and authorizing new military strikes against Yemen, Libya and Somalia. Therefore, he has unequivocally engaged the U.S. in EVEN MORE WAR:

The Nine Surges of Obama’s War [in Afghanistan] (December 2009 article):
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/10/opinion/main5962574.shtml

Obama’s 262 Drone Strikes in Pakistan (June 2012 article):
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/map_of_the_week/2012/06/obama_drone_strikes_the_president_ordered_more_than_george_w_bush.html

Obama Ramps Up Covert [Drone] War in Yemen (June 2011 article):
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/11/opinion/bergen-yemen-drone-war/index.html

White House Defends Continuing U.S. Military Role in Libya Operation (June 2011 article):
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/16/us/politics/16powers.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Obama (Finally) Notifies Congress of Troops Deployed to Libya and Yemen (September 2012 article):
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/obama-notifies-congress-of-troops-deployed-to-libya-and-yemen/

Obama’s New War in Uganda (October 2011 article):
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/10/31/obamas-new-war-in-uganda

Obama Acknowledges Waging War in Somalia in Latest War Powers Report (June 2012 article):
http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/18/president-obama-acknowledges-waging-war
____________________________________________________

Then, there’s the matter of Obama’s numerous threats to engage in even more new wars:

Obama Threatens Force Against Syria (August 2012 article):
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/world/middleeast/obama-threatens-force-against-syria.html

Obama Ordered Wave of Cyberattacks Against Iran (June 2012 article):
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/world/middleeast/obama-ordered-wave-of-cyberattacks-against-iran.html?pagewanted=all

Armada of US and British Naval Power Amassing in Persian Gulf, Prepared for Possible Iran Strike (September 2012):
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/9545597/Armada-of-international-naval-power-massing-in-the-Gulf-as-Israel-prepares-an-Iran-strike.html“
*****************************************************

I also pointed out the following:

*****************************************************
“Now, while Obama certainly did promise to remove combat troops from IRAQ… that was only because he intended to send them to war in AFGHANISTAN, instead!

Speaking on August 1, 2007 in an address to the Woodrow Wilson International Center in Washington, DC, presidential candidate Obama stated:
‘The first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.’
(http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=58663)

In a July 20, 2008 interview on ‘Face the Nation,’ President Obama said:
‘It’s time for us to withdraw some of our combat troops out of Iraq, and deploy them here in Afghanistan, and I think we have to seize that opportunity. Now’s the time for us to do it.’
(http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4275914n)

And, of course, as I cited in my last comment, Obama has more than fulfilled his murderous promise in Afghanistan:

The Nine Surges of Obama’s War [in Afghanistan] (December 2009 article):
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/10/opinion/main5962574.shtml

Obama’s Watch: 39 Months, 69 Percent of Afghan War Casualties (May 2012 article):
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-s-watch-39-months-69-percent-afghan-war-casualties
__________________________________________________

However, in reality, Obama’s promises about ‘getting out of Iraq’ are really just empty political rhetoric, as the American war and occupation of the foreign nation are still ongoing:

Last U.S. Combat Troops Leave Iraq; 50,000 Remain as Advisers (August 2010 article):
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2010-08-18/news/27073013_1_combat-troops-train-iraqi-forces-2nd-infantry-division

Obama Announces End of Iraq War, Troops to Return Home by Year End (October 2011 article):
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20123800-503544/obama-announces-end-of-iraq-war-troops-to-return-home-by-year-end/

13,000 U.S. Troops Deployed in Iraq Again (September 2012 article):
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/13000-us-troops-deployed-in-iraq-again

5,500 Mercenaries to Protect U.S. Fortresses in Iraq (February 2011 article):
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/02/5500-mercs-to-protect-u-s-fortresses-in-iraq/“
*****************************************************

Brian J.: I know that they don’t hate us for our freedom. Most of them probably hate us, for supporting Isreal. But there’s no sense in really asking for peace, when none of them want peace. They want to destroy us, and it’s based on religious grounds. And they need to be stopped. I’m not saying what Obama is doing is right, and America is a terrorist nation, and an empire. It’s just the way it is. I’m sure we could aim for a more peaceful world, but I just don’t see that happening.

Brian J.: There’s no excuse for collateral damage, but it’s still collateral damage. And a lot of these terrorists, are terrorists for a reason. But this is survival of the fittest. We have to stop them, before they attempt to stop us.

Brian J.: I think Obama does support human rights, he just doesn’t support terrorists. And those civilians are just collateral damage. You say that it’s murder, as if it’s wrong. I can say that it’s wrong, but what if it’s being done for a greater good?

Rayn: “I think he’s trying to do what he thinks is best (though some of us may disagree with what he thinks that is), but he has a nearly impossible job,” you say, Daniel? I haven’t really bothered concerning myself with what Obama “thinks is best,” as I’m far too busy paying attention to what he’s been DOING, instead! And, Obama DID campaign for that “nearly impossible job,” IRONICALLY winning on a platform of “CHANGE”! Ha! Meanwhile, he’s delivered nothing but BUSH!
__________________________________________________

“Obama’s biggest flaw as a president has been his refusal or inability to confront them and call them out on it,” you claim? I’d say that his biggest flaw has been his continuation and expansion of murderous policies against foreign civilians, and I would follow that with his continued expansion of America’s Military Empire, and his continued destruction of the Bill of Rights!
__________________________________________________

As for your continued efforts to blame Republicans in Congress for Obama’s inability to deliver “change”, and now, “Blue Dog” Democrats, along with them, there is something you should keep in mind… Regardless of what bills they DIDN’T pass, what the Democrat-controlled Congress DID manage to do was extend the PATRIOT Act TWICE, while also funding MORE WAR through Obama, using even more money than they approved for Bush!!! They did NOTHING to roll back the Human Rights abuses of the Bush administration, and merely CONTINUED them, instead! There is NO EXCUSE for this! It is NOT the “change” that the American public voted for! And, considering that ALMOST HALF Congress are members of the 1%, it’s NO SURPRISE! This is PLUTOCRACY in action!

Aside from this, allow me to point out some facts. In the House, there are 100 Senators and 435 Representatives. After the 2008 House election, a mere 52 of the 256 Democrats that took seats in Congress were “Blue Dogs.” That equals only 20% of the Democrats in office at that time. Meanwhile, only about 7-12 of the 55 Democrats that took Senate were “Blue Dogs.” That equals about only 22% of the Democrats in office at that time, at most. Congress requires a majority vote of 218 to pass a bill to Senate, and Senate requires a majority vote of 51 to pass it. These figures indicate that only a handful of “Blue Dogs” in Congress and Senate would be needed to pass any particular piece of legislation, while the same was the case of the Senate! And, if you’ll recall, as a case in point, Obama passed his “stimulus” package with the help of almost EVERY ONE of these stooges! Who do you think these “Blue Dogs” voted for, in the first place?

As for the “Affordable Care Act,” the issue with its passage wasn’t merely about “Blue Dogs” in Congress. A lot of the problem revolved around the State-granted MONOPOLY created by the INDIVIDUAL MANDATE, a campaign issue that Obama had BROKEN HIS PROMISE ABOUT!

How Obama Broke His Promise on Individual Mandates (June 2012 article):
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/06/how-obama-broke-his-promise-on-individual-mandates/259183/

Aside from this, there was also the issue of the corporate welfare that Obamacare provided to the Health Insurance Industry:

The Manufactured Debate over Obamacare (It’s Just Corporate Welfare for Big Health Care Corps):
http://www2.hernandotoday.com/news/hernando-news/2012/jul/01/the-manufactured-debate-over-obamacare-ar-422941/

This is all besides the point, of course, because it has nothing to do with the WAR, nor the federal evisceration of the Bill of Rights. However, it is still worth mentioning!

John W.: brian – do you know what blowback is? regardless of how “dangerous” the so-called terrorists are, do you think it’s a smart idea to attack civilians in those countries (the majority of the ones who die are NOT terrorists btw) that would cause them to hate us more? it’s the equivalent to batting a hornets’ nest with a stick knowing that the outcome is going to bad.

“I can say that it’s wrong, but what if it’s being done for a greater good?”

lol…once again, i’m sure the civilians in those regions whose parents, children, spouses have been killed by our hellfire missiles would be appreciative of that response.

Genaire: Brian, if you watch the first video I posted on my last comment it shows that Obama is in fact supporting terrorists. He sending aid and weapons to the Al Qaeda in Syria. Do you not believe these arms and funds are not also used to kill not only American soldiers but also used to fund further terrorists acts here at home?

Genaire: This aid to Al Qaeda is very similar to the Fast and Furious gun running program that the Obama administration is also responsible for. The United States ran guns into Mexico to aid the drug cartels. One of these guns was found to be the murder weapon used to kill one of or own border patrol agents (this seems like a perfect example of aid to terrorists which led to the loss of American life).

Brian J.: It’s not a bright idea to attack civilians, but that’s collateral damage. And it’s not murder, if it’s just killing. These civilians were killed by our Drone attacks, which is basically “accidental.” So it’s not murder, and I’m not exactly disturb by that. It’s not Obama’s intention to kill civilians, he’s trying to keep the terrorists from killing us. I don’t think it’s right, but that’s the way it is.

Brian J.: Genaire, I’m not denying that. But America has been doing this for decades, so it’s nothing new. Like I said, it is what it is.

John W.: So accidental murders are okay, got it. Actually it’s fine if you feel that way as long as you still feel that way if a republican is in power.

Brian J.: It’s not murder, and I never said that it’s okay. I’m saying that collateral damage, is not murder. Murder involves intent, and Obama doesn’t intend to murder civilians, only the terrorists. I never said that it was right, or that I’m okay with it. Please don’t put words in my mouth, and learn how to read what I’m saying.

John W.: Accidental murder is murder. If someone bombs your apartment complex in order to kill someone and you were in the blast radius, you were murdered.

Genaire: It is what it is, but what we are saying is don’t call Obama a good president when he does what all the others have done. He is just as much guilty for the countries present state as the president before him. I for most of my life tended to lean towards republican ideology (small federal government larger state government). I have over the years watch both parties expand the federal government at an alarming pace. I’ve watch both parties continue to manufacture reasons for war and I’m sick of it. We have had a few good candidates from all the parties over the years yet the uninformed public continue to vote for the mass media propped up mainline candidates that continue us on a path to ruin.

Genaire: Brian, we created the groups we are now fighting but honestly they aren’t our enemies. We continue to use these groups as an excuse to wage war with nations that hold resources that our governments politicians want to exploit at the whim of the lobbyist that pay them to do so. That’s why we support them in one region then in another we claim they are our enemies. We need to realize that we don’t elect these people to police other nations. Most people are against the wars yet as long as money can be made by waging war and the people are still fooled by the boogie-man Al Qaeda the wars will continue. During Obama presidency he has created actual laws that give him the ability to indefinitely detain real journalist that try to uncover the war fraud. Its all actually jaw dropping when you think about it.

Brian J.: Accidental murder, is not murder. Killing and murder are two different things. Collateral damage is not murder, since it’s not done with intent.

Brian J.: And I do call Obama a good president. He’s just the best that he could do with this economy. He’s turned the economy around, and it’s much better than what it use to be. Sure, it’s mainly better for the rich and the wealthy, but the middle-class is better off with Obama, than with Romney. Obama’s foreign policy is even better than Bush, since Obama is catching these terrorists. Obama also supports gay rights, and gays in them military don’t have to get kicked out for being gay. Obama also supports women’s rights as well. So he is a good president, he’s just not a great president. And he’s not a good politician.

Genaire: Brian, Obama didn’t catch any terrorist it was the military that caught the so called terrorists. The military was actually a little upset with Obama’s handling of the entire operation

Dishonorable Disclosures:

As far as the economy being better under Obama that is also laughable. The unemployment rate is still at depression level numbers propped up by welfare and his extension of unemployment benefits for up to two years for some people. Then you have the people who actually just have given up looking for work. This all has to be paid by someone and yes the middle class is taking the biggest hit. It can’t be said that he is better for the economy when he has spent more then any other president in world history! We are all going to have to pay for this, our children are going to have to pay for this, our children’s children will still be paying for this:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/06/14/president-obama-the-biggest-government-spender-in-world-history/

Honestly I’m not gay so I don’t concern myself as much with gay rights as I should but ok 3 claps for his gay rights! Policies put in place will now have straight and gay married middle class couples paying together for all the excessive spending Obama is doing.

Brian J.: Obama did catch the terrorists. He’s the commander n chief. The buck stops with the president, he ordered the hits on Bin Laden, and other terrorists. Give Obama credit, for actually being a boss.

Brian J.: The unemployment rate has actually gone down under Obama. The economy is slowly getting better. And there’s no sense is going back to the Bush tactics with Romney, who will make things worse. We need Obama at this time. Yes, America is a terrorist nation, but I’m not worried about that. Obama supports human rights in America, and he does show some support for atheism and secular ideas. With Romney, we will be lost.

Genaire: No one us saying Obama is better or worse then Romney w are saying they both are bad. You seem to be completely ignoring the articles that prove that he is doing more harm then good. Yes he has added some jobs but he has (as pointed out in my last post) spent more money and grew the government at a downright alarming rate.

Brian J.: I don’t think Obama is bad. He’s a damn good president, he’s done his best to protect the American people, and he’s still fixing the economy. If we don’t get Obama back into the White House this November, we’re all gonna regret it.

Brian J.: I’m not ignoring the articles, but it’s all just a matter of opinion, based on the facts. You say he’s bad, and I don’t think he is. Obama has done more positive things, than negative. At least for the American people. You can keep your opinion, but don’t even try to pretend that it’s a fact.

Brian J.: I can criticize Obama for being a war monger. But I don’t mind him expanding the Government. I’m fine with that. The problem, is that whatever he puts in place, will be used by a very unstable President in the future. All of Bill Clinton’s treatment of the economy back in the 90’s, looked great. Then Bush took over, and ruined it. Obama’s ideas look great, when he’s president, and it works. But under Romney, everything will fall apart. With Obama’s plan on the economy, things are getting better. With Romney, things will only get worse.

Genaire: What also is not debatable is Obama has added many new jobs my concerns on the whole job issue is he has extended unemployment Benifits for what use to be 6 months to two whole years the money to pay for this will be paid for by the tax

Brian J.: That’s fine.

Genaire: I do feel that Obama would be better then Romney if this was truly a two party race. I would personally vote for the libertarian representative Gary Johnson since Ron Paul had pulled out of the race. What I see as undebatable is that he has done very little to end the war. Moving our troops from Iraq to Afghanistan and Pakistan is not ending the war. What I also see as undebatable is his drone bombing campaign is doing massive amounts of collateral damage that is further damaging the reputation of the United States abroad

80% of Drone Strike Victims Innocent Civilians:

Brian J.: I don’t see how a libertarian will do anything better.

Brian J.: Ron Paul sucks!

Genaire: Bite your tongue! Ron Paul is awesome! He’s the only real anti war, anti drug war, pro constitution candidate.

Brian J.: He was full of shit. Lol! And he is racist. lol!

Genaire: He’s not a racist that just how the spun the mainstream media put on comments made but some if his supporters. They would say the same for all the caucasians that don’t support Obama.

Brian J.: No, it was racist comments by Ron Paul, in his younger years. He’s a racist, and his views are extreme conservative. Libertarians will ruin this country.

Genaire: Libertarians are the only hope for this country. I challenge you to find the racist statements you claim he made.

Brian J.: Look them up. Type in Ron Paul is a racist. He’s old, he’s a racist, and he would destroy this country.

Brian J.: Check this out! http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/President/2011/1229/Racist-newsletter-timeline-What-Ron-Paul-has-said

Jonas A.: That is old news propaganda, used by old fashioned divide and conquer policies of the 2-party duopoly to clamp down on dissent…just look what happened to Jill Stern of the Green Party…she was arrested for protesting the 2-party duopoly at Hoefstra….

Jonas A.: Then again, old racist and will destroy the country applies to everyone political…even Al Sharpton….no one is excempt

Genaire: Just as I said, Brian, there were no “racist comments by Ron Paul,” like you claimed. Even the article you cited notes that the newsletters in question were not written by the Texas Congressman, but only “published in Mr. Paul’s name.” That same article quoted Ron Paul as saying the following in 2001 to a magazine: “It wasn’t my language at all. Other people help me with my newsletter as I travel around. I think the one on Barbara Jordan was the saddest thing, because Barbara and I served together and actually she was a delightful lady.” And, the article also notes, “the magazine itself says the newsletter statements are not ‘remotely like’ Paul’s public utterances.” And, anyone who’s been paying attention would also add that Ron Paul’s ACTIONS are the BEST proof against accusations of “racism”! Read the following article for yourself, and just TRY calling him “racist,” afterwards!

22 Reasons Ron Paul Is Not A Racist:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/ccbaxter/22-facts-that-dont-jibe-with-ron-paul-being-a-rac-41xp

Now, watch this:

Reality Check: The Name Of A ‘Mystery Writer’ Of One Of Ron Paul’s ‘Racist’ Newsletters:

As the journalist in the video noted, “what you may not know is that in this presidential election cycle, every single candidate for president, including President Obama, has been called a racist.” Find out why!

Jonas A.: If wanted to say that to all…the 2-party duopoly is old, racist and ready to destroy the country….it’s too late unless all multi-party candidates will stand up and rise against this trend…

Brian J.: Check out these facts. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/12/27/395391/fact-check-ron-paul-personally-defended-racist-newsletters/?mobile=nc

Brian J.: Ron Paul is racist!

Rayn: Though I have so far been replying to the comments made on this post in order so far, for the sake of clarity, I will temporarily break from this routine to make an important point. Ron Paul is NOT racist, nor has he EVER made any racist statements, Brian. I challenge you to provide EVEN A SINGLE INSTANCE of HIM engaging in racist speech or activity at any point in time! It is gravely irresponsible to make such serious allegations against another Individual without SOLID EVIDENCE to back your words! Racist quotes from articles within obscure old online newsletters that Ron Paul didn’t actually author himself, oversee, or approve of, only convict him of “guilt by association” in the court of fallacy, not in reality! And, considering Ron Paul’s track record as a TRIED and TRUE public servant, it is sad that you so flagrantly attack his character in the absence of ACTUAL PROOF (and, yet, are so willing to defend Obama, even with absolute proof of his engagement in WAR CRIMES)! Rest assured that your allegations against Ron Paul simply represent a fallacious Argumentum ad hominem. Try as you may, but no amount of Poisoning the well will detract his from EXEMPLARY record as a Libertarian, as a Congressman, as a Medical Practitioner, as a Peace Activist, and as a Human Being!
______________________________________________________

To begin, this video, released by the independent “Revolution PAC,” completely contradicts your assertions that Ron Paul is racist:

The Compassion of Dr. Ron Paul:

As the description for the video above points out, and you can see and hear for yourself:

“James Williams of Matagorda County, Texas recounts a touching true story. Living in a still prejudiced Texas In 1972, his wife had a complication with her pregnancy. No doctors would care for her or deliver their bi-racial child. In fact one of the hospital nurses called the police on James.

Dr. Ron Paul was notified and took her in, delivering their stillborn baby. Because of the compassion of Dr. Ron Paul, the Williams’ never received a hospital bill for the delivery.

Ron Paul views every human being as a unique individual, afforded the rights endowed by our creator and codified in the Bill of Rights.”
______________________________________________________

Just a few minutes of research reveals the fact that Dr. Ron Paul delivered babies and provided surgeries to an untold number of low-income African-American women and families at NO COST, as an OB/GYN!

Before He Delivered For Voters, Dr. Paul Delivered Babies (2011):
http://www.npr.org/2011/10/25/141653000/before-he-delivered-for-voters-paul-delivered-babies

According to the article, Dr. Pruett, who sought to partner with Dr. Paul in his OB/GYN practice, had to first agree “that the practice would not participate in any federal health programs, which meant, as Paul described it, ‘that we will see all Medicare and Medicaid patients FREE OF CHARGE, and they will be treated just like all of our other patients, but we’re not going to charge them and accept federal funds.’

Still in debt from his medical training, Pruett said that was a little harder for him to swallow. ‘But I liked Ron, so I decided that I would agree to that, too. And in all those 20 years, we never accepted one penny of federal money. We saw all those patients for free, delivered their babies free, did their surgeries free; whatever they needed we did, and we didn’t charge them’.”

Dr. Paul helped so many families that he couldn’t even remember delivering the child of James Williams (parent from first video) when questioned about it!

Ron Paul Reacts to “Revolution PAC” Ad:

Show me A SINGLE OTHER two-party Presidential candidate leading by the sort of example Ron Paul ACTUALLY LIVES!
______________________________________________________

With that said, the latest article you posted is completely speculative sensationalism, Brian. While the author fully admits that the racist statements in question came NOT from Ron Paul, but through a newsletter in his name, he goes on to implicate the Congressman as the author, anyway, under the allegation that Dr. Paul defended the words. Yet, to begin, the true author of the racist statements has already been discovered as one James B. Powell, not Ron Paul! Besides this, Dr. Paul’s so-called “defense” statements are *noticeably* LACKING in racism! The most that can be gathered from the article you posted, along with the previous one on the same topic, is that Ron Paul originally made a futile, and unwise, effort to downplay the racist newsletter statements in question simply because they were not his own, but later changed his position on the matter, choosing to completely dissociate himself the words, while taking “moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out in [his] name.” And, incidentally, his initial deflection gave him ample time to rigorously fact-check the matter first, so as not to be baited into the media feeding frenzy that was already brewing with being well-armed with fact. Of course, authors should IDEALLY sign their works – at least, under a pen-name. But, since that wasn’t the case here, it was, INDEED, Ron Paul’s responsibility to either give up the name(s) of the offender(s) to the court of public opinion, or face more public backlash. Apparently, the Congressman chose the latter, and suffered the consequences. We could speculate all day on the possible reasons, but the poor decisions Dr. Paul made leading up to and during course of this over-hyped “controversy” are ABSOLUTELY TRIVIAL in today’s political climate of perpetual war, murder, imperialism, tyranny and Empire! Either way, it’s exactly I said from the beginning: Ron Paul is NOT racist, nor has he ever made any racist statements! If you’re interested in some REAL statements the Congressman has made about racism, watch the following videos:

Ron Paul Calls for End to Drug War and Racist Policies Inherent to It (2007):

This video is from around the time that some of those racist newsletters in question were published:

Ron Paul: Drug War Has Racist Roots (1988):

Presidential Candidate Ron Paul Would Pardon ALL Nonviolent Drug Offenders (2011):

I CHALLENGE YOU to show me any of the two-party presidential candidates of 2012 EVER engaging in such a candid, honest, insightful well-spoken and very necessary discussion about America’s racist “War on Drugs,” let alone consistently!!!

______________________________________________________

Ron Paul Addresses False Allegations of Racism: Anti-War is the true Pro-Minority Position (2007):
(He also points out that his Anti-Drug War Stance is Defends Minorities)

Ron Paul on Classism, Racism of Death Penalty (2007):

Ron Paul: I’m The Only Candidate in Either Party ‘That Understands True Racism’ (2012):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/07/ron-paul-new-hampshire-debate_n_1191953.html
(He exposes the Drug War, Death Penalty and Wars Overseas as Racist)

Ron Paul Denounces Racist Ethnic Profiling, Religious Profiling in “War on Terrorism” (2011):

(He also denounces the “War on Terrorism” pointing out that it wasn’t voted on by Congress, and that the wording is careless, because “terrorism is a tactic; it isn’t a person, it isn’t a people”)

Jonas A.: Brian….Rayn has a really good point…unless is he is an overt and covert “racialist’ in the vein of the KKK or and espoused such philosophy, then I too am disinclined to believe that Ron Paul is racist….on the other hand, I don’t see you saying the same thing about Al Sharpton….

Brian J.: Well, I’ve already provided the evidence that shows Ron Paul being a racist. And even though he might be a good person, I still don’t trust him. I’d trust Obama more than Ron Paul. And I don’t know what Ron Paul’s position on women’s rights and gay rights are.

Brian J.: Al Sharpton is not a racist. Jonas, where’s your evidence for that. Sharpton has done plenty of work for both white and black people, but the media wouldn’t talk about that. Sharpton supports his people, but he also supports the American people in general. He’s not a racist. Meanwhile, Ron Paul has been caught defending racist comments.

Brian J.: Here are the facts about Ron Paul being a racist. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/12/27/395391/fact-check-ron-paul-personally-defended-racist-newsletters/?mobile=nc

Rayn: There is absolutely no “evidence” or “facts about Ron Paul being a racist” within either of the articles you cited, Brian. Ron Paul is NOT racist, nor has he EVER made any racist statements. I ONCE AGAIN challenge you to provide EVEN A SINGLE INSTANCE of HIM engaging in racist speech, writing, or actions at any point in time! It is gravely irresponsible to make such serious allegations against another Individual without SOLID EVIDENCE to back your words! Racist quotes from articles within obscure, old online newsletters that Ron Paul didn’t actually author himself, oversee, or approve of, only convict him of “guilt by association” in the court of fallacy, not in reality! And, considering Ron Paul’s track record as a TRIED and TRUE public servant, it is sad that you so flagrantly attack his character in the absence of ACTUAL PROOF (and, yet, are so willing to defend Obama, even with absolute proof of his engagement in WAR CRIMES)! Rest assured that your allegations against Ron Paul simply represent a fallacious Argumentum ad hominem. Try as you may, but no amount of Poisoning the welll will detract his from EXEMPLARY record as a Libertarian, as a Congressman, as a Medical Practitioner, as a Peace Activist, and as a Human Being!
______________________________________________________

To begin, this video, released by the independent “Revolution PAC,” COMPLETELY CONTRADICTS your assertions that Ron Paul is racist:

The Compassion of Dr. Ron Paul:

Ron Paul Reacts to “Revolution PAC” Ad:

Show me A SINGLE OTHER two-party Presidential candidate leading by the sort of example Ron Paul ACTUALLY LIVES!
______________________________________________________

With that said, the latest article you posted is completely speculative sensationalism, Brian. While the author fully admits that the racist statements in question came NOT from Ron Paul, but through a newsletter in his name, he goes on to implicate the Congressman as the author, anyway, under the allegation that Dr. Paul defended the words. Yet, to begin, the true author of the racist statements has already been discovered as one James B. Powell, not Ron Paul! Besides this, Dr. Paul’s so-called “defense” statements are *noticeably* LACKING in racism! The most that can be gathered from the article you posted, along with the previous one on the same topic, is that Ron Paul originally made a futile, and unwise, effort to downplay the racist newsletter statements in question simply because they were not his own, but later changed his position on the matter, choosing to completely dissociate himself the words, while taking “moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out in [his] name.” And, incidentally, his initial deflection gave him ample time to rigorously fact-check the matter first, so as not to be baited into the media feeding frenzy that was already brewing by being well-armed with fact. Of course, authors should IDEALLY sign their works – at least, under a pen-name. But, since that wasn’t the case here, it was, INDEED, Ron Paul’s responsibility to either give up the name(s) of the offender(s) to the court of public opinion, or face more public backlash. Apparently, the Congressman chose the latter, and suffered the consequences. We could speculate all day on the possible reasons, but the poor decisions Dr. Paul made leading up to and during course of this over-hyped “controversy” are ABSOLUTELY TRIVIAL in today’s political climate of perpetual war, murder, imperialism, tyranny and Empire! Either way, it’s exactly I said from the beginning: Ron Paul is NOT racist, nor has he ever made any racist statements! If you’re interested in some REAL statements the Congressman has made about racism, watch the following videos:

Ron Paul Calls for End to Drug War and Racist Policies Inherent to It (2007):

This video is from around the time that some of those racist newsletters in question were published:

Ron Paul: Drug War Has Racist Roots (1988):

Presidential Candidate Ron Paul Would Pardon ALL Nonviolent Drug Offenders (2011):

Ron Paul Addresses False Allegations of Racism: Anti-War is the true Pro-Minority Position (2007):
(He also points out that his Anti-Drug War Stance is Defends Minorities)

Ron Paul on Classism, Racism of Death Penalty (2007):

Ron Paul Denounces Racist Ethnic Profiling, Religious Profiling in “War on Terrorism” (2011):

Brian J.: Ron Paul did back up those racist statements, and defended them. So he is a racist. And well, he’s also a libertarian, so that’s not surprising. I shouldn’t even say that Ron Paul is racist, he’s just a libertarian. Lol!

Brian J.: You’ve challenged me, and I gave you the evidence. Ron Paul can deny it all he wants, but he has made racist statements. He’s a libertarian, so it’s not surprising. Just look up the facts, if you want to evidence, or look it up yourself. Just type in “Ron Paul is racist”, and a lot of articles will pop up. It was on the news all last year. He’s a shitty politician, just like a the rest of them. And he seems to be a two-face on this as well.

Brian J.: So at the end of the day, I don’t trust Ron Paul, and I don’t buy into the whole compassionate bullshit. He’s a libertarian, so he would destroy this country, if he had too. Although, I like the fact that he’s against the War on Drugs, which isn’t even a war. Because wars….end. And Ron Paul is probably too old to be President. He probably has a bucket list by now. LOL!

Rayn: Ron Paul is NOT racist, nor has he EVER made any racist statements, Brian. I challenged you to provide evidence, and you FAILED! Where are the racist quotes FROM RON PAUL? Where are his racist DEEDS? I’m still waiting! Quotes that RON PAUL DIDN’T ACTUAL WRITE HIMSELF from articles within obscure, old online newsletters that he didn’t directly oversee, or directly approve of, only convict him of “GUILT BY ASSOCIATION” in the court of fallacy, not in reality! Meanwhile, Dr. Paul’s so-called “defense” statements stand out as mere efforts to deflect media-fueled controversy, and as proof, they are *noticeably* LACKING in racism! As I have stated again and again, it is gravely irresponsible to make such serious allegations against another Individual without SOLID EVIDENCE to back your words!

As a doctor, Dr. Ron Paul PROVABLY fought against racism in his hometown, just like I showed you in the video I provided earlier. He has also likely provided more charity to African-Americans in his life than YOU OR I COMBINED, delivering babies and provided surgeries to an untold number of low-income women and families at NO COST, as an OB/GYN! THESE ARE NOT THE ACTIONS OF A RACIST, and there is NO EXCUSE for brushing over this information in favor of CONJECTURE! Dr. Paul has also consistently spoken out against the racism of the War on Drugs, the Death Penalty, and the War on Terrorism, on behalf of minorities, even when being ONLY ONE DOING SO in the two-party charade! Dr. Paul is a champion of civil liberties, and considers Dr. Martin Luther King as one his heroes. You can’t dismiss these INCONVENIENT TRUTHS, no matter how many times you parrot the mainstream media monopoly mantra that he is racist! To leap-frog over important FACTS in order to cling to speculative sensationalism is an unreasonable path to conclusion!

Rayn: By the way, Brian, I’m REGISTERED to vote as a LIBERTARIAN in the state of New Jersey! To label me, or anyone else, as racist because of this is ILLOGICAL, EXTREMELY IRRESPONSIBLE, ABSOLUTELY OFFENSIVE and PROVABLY FALSE, simply employing more of the same “GUILTY BY ASSOCIATION” logical fallacy that you continue to fall back on! It’s also PURELY HYPOCRITICAL to accuse others of PREJUDICE, even while you display vitriolic PREJUDICE against them!

Brian J.: Except Ron Paul did defend those racist comments. So as far as I’m concerned, he’s a racist. And if he’s not a racist, he’s libertarian. Which is just as bad in some cases.

Brian J.: And not all libertarians are bad. But Rayn, you’re probably not a real libertarian. It’s the REAL libertarians like Ron Paul, who will ruin this country. And maybe Ron Paul is not a racist, but I don’t trust him. Nor do I trust any libertarian who runs for President.

Genaire: As defined by Wiki: The Libertarian Party is the third largest [2] political party in the United States. It is also identified by many as the fastest growing political party in the United States. [3] The political platform of the Libertarian Party reflects the ideas of libertarianism, favoring minimally regulated markets, a less powerful state, strong civil liberties (including support for same-sex marriage and other LGBT rights), the legalization of cannabis, separation of church and state, open immigration, non-interventionism and neutrality in diplomatic relations (i.e., avoiding foreign military or economic entanglements with other nations), freedom of trade and travel to all foreign countries, and a more responsive and direct democracy. [4] The Libertarian Party has also supported the repeal of NAFTA, CAFTA, and similar trade agreements, as well as the United States’ exit from the United Nations, WTO, and NATO. [5]

I’m proud to be a libertarian!

Brian J.: Libertarians will just be another corrupted party. This country is corrupt!

Genaire: Following that same logic Obama himself is also corrupted.

Genaire: I guess we do agree!

Brian J.: Well yeah, Obama wasted the first two years of his presidency, bailing out the rich and the wealthy. Which totally broke the promises that he made. He said he wouldn’t make the rich richer, and the middle-class suffer. He didn’t say that he would be kicking out more Mexicans than Bush. He didn’t say that he would get even more hardcore with the drug war, which is a bullshit war. He didn’t say he would do those things, and he’s doing them. So yes, Obama is corrupted. And so is Romney, and so would Ron Paul. The world has a way of making Presidents do things, and go back on what they promised. That’s why I like Jimmy Carter. Not one bomb was dropped, and not one bullet was shot in his name.

Genaire: Have you ever looked into Ron Paul’s voting record? He’s been in congresses for a long time and had a stellar voting record.

Genaire: But I’m not here to push Ron on anyone I just wanted you to admit that Obama is corrupt also.

Brian J.: Right, and so would Ron Paul, and Libertarian party. Plus, Ron Paul is old.

Rayn: “Not all libertarians are bad. But Rayn, you’re probably not a real libertarian,” you say, Brian? I AM a REAL Libertarian, and I am NOT racist! Instead of clinging to your No true Scotsman logical fallacy, why not just admit to the falsehood of your accusations? To erroneously label a large and vast group of individuals as “racist,” in an effort to discredit them is very prejudice, hypocritical and psychologically manipulative! Don’t you find it even a little ironic that your justification for holding such a horribly prejudice belief against Libertarians is that WE are the ones with prejudice!? I sure do! And, your addition of a disclaimer that “not all Libertarians are bad” is actually just another weak effort to support your original propaganda point. You still imply that the majority of the third largest political party in America are racists! And that accusation is completely UNSUPPORTED BY FACT!

Here’s an idea! Instead of Poisoning the well about the Libertarian Party, why not do some real research into the matter? You’d be surprised, apparently, since your preconceived notions are so wrong!

Brian J.: To be a libertarian, you can’t really care about poor people, and it’s basically man for themselves. But Rayne, I don’t think your a real libertarian. To be a libertarian, you can’t be on Medicaid, food stamps, or Medicare. It’s everybody for themselves. So fuck Ron Paul. He might not be a racist, but he is a conservative, and a libertarian. That’s a problem.

Brian J.: After doing some research, I don’t think that libertarians are racist. It’s just Ron Paul. The whole problem with this group of people, is Ron Paul. Check out this link. http://ronpaulsurvivalreport.blogspot.com/2007/12/faq-ron-paul-and-his-racist-newsletter.html

Genaire: Actually Brian true republicans feel the same way about Medicare, medicaid and foodstamps. These social welfare programs don’t need to be mandated at a federal level. These programs can be better managed at the local state level. I personally have never had to go on public assistance of any kind due to the fact that I’ve worked nonstop since I moved out at 18 years of age. These programs should vary from state to state giving you the option of how much you want to be taxed by your local government (if you don’t like the amount taxed in your state move to another, but at a federal level you have no choice in how much you’re gouged). Democrats want to keep all these programs at a federal level which leads to higher taxes and gross management of funds.

Rayn: “To be a libertarian, you can’t really care about poor people, and it’s basically [every] man for themselves,” you claim, Brian? This is your “research”? Seriously? A FLAT-OUT LIE!? Show me even a SHRED of EVIDENCE to back it! Look no further than Ron Paul’s charity work to help low-income mothers and families as an OB/GYN for PROOF against this claim!

In case you haven’t been paying attention, it is our own PLUTOCRATIC FEDERAL government that hurts poor individuals the most! And, unlike the two-party fraud system, the Libertarian Party is made of up those who work to RESTORE LIBERTY and end the REAL abuses of the STATE by CUTTING BACK on government control of our day-to-day lives! From the “War on Drugs,” to all VICTIMLESS CRIME, to ALL FORMS of CORPORATE WELFARE, to the FEDERAL RESERVE, to unrepresentative-based taxation, to the bureaucratic anti-free-market licensing fees that create a Nanny State and DE FACTO discrimination against lower-income citizens, etc, we look to END THE CORRUPTION inherent to our “representative” form of government, and return the power of DECISION-MAKING back to the INDIVIDUAL! We FIRMLY believe that WE INDIVIDUALS can do ANYTHING more efficiency than THE STATE DOES! And COERCION from a murderous, thieving STATE in the form of “taxes” to “help” the “poor,” the “disabled” and the “retired” are OBSOLETE in a FREE and OPEN SOCIETY! If WE “THE PEOPLE” stop caring about these groups, and ourselves, no amount of FORCE will create MORALITY!

Just remember: “Real charity doesn’t mean giving away someone else’s money!”

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=443437682366589&set=pb.107087879334906.-2207520000.1351049249&type=1&

Artwork by BastiatInstitute.org. (originally located here)

Artwork by Bastiat Institute. (originally located here)

Read this article to dispel your MYTHS about Libertarians:

Libertarians and the Poor:
http://political-economy.com/libertarians-and-the-poor/

As the article notes, “In fact Milton Friedman, a great Libertarian said we have a responsibility to the poor. Friedman believed ‘trying to do good with other people’s money simply does not work’. It is about making real gains to help the poor, instead of just ineffective government programs’.”

The author also writes, “I live in post socialist Poland. I see now that after 20 years of capitalism and the movement away from socialism, people are giving more and more each year. In fact under socialism the state freed the individual from the responsibility of helping the less fortunate. And believe me nothing was accomplished. Everyone was poor and did not live well. The poor were not really helped, only government officials and bureaucrats. This is why Libertarians are for helping the poor, just in a more efficient way than Democrats.

Government hurts the poor in ways that people can not see. Author Charles Dickens who grew up under much darker times economically than we have, opposed government help for the poor? Why? He felt it was ineffective. The author of Hard Times and Oliver Twist felt private charity reformed and changed people, while government charity brought people down. I live in Poland and believe me this is the case. I know there are empirical studies to back this up, but I do not need to look at these studies to know, I just have to look around.”

______________________________________________________

Meanwhile, the so-called “radical” belief in Self-ownership that we Libertarians adhere to is NOT an “every man for themselves” scenario! It directly ties into The Non-Aggression Principle and Voluntaryism, which empowers the INDIVIDUAL, and OUR MANY FORMS OF SOCIETY, OVER THE STATE! Under such a system, ALL individuals are born with equal rights, no matter what their ethnicity, gender, religion, culture, ability, sexual orientation, or otherwise, is!

Apparently, since you are having trouble distinguishing SOCIETY from GOVERNMENT, you would do good to read Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” as it is the inspiration for the “Declaration of Independence.” Paine, considered the “Father of the American Revolution,” wrote the following words: “SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamities is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer!”

In “The Rights of Man,” Thomas Paine also wrote the following: “for upwards of two years from the commencement of the American War, and to a longer period in several of the American States, there were no established forms of government. The old governments had been abolished, and the country was too much occupied in defence to employ its attention in establishing new governments; yet during this interval order and harmony were preserved as inviolate as in any country in Europe. There is a natural aptness in man, and more so in society, because it embraces a greater variety of abilities and resource, to accommodate itself to whatever situation it is in. The instant formal government is abolished, society begins to act: a general association takes place, and common interest produces common security.”

Rayn: “Rayne [sic], I don’t think your a real libertarian. To be a libertarian, you can’t be on Medicaid, food stamps, or Medicare,” you claim, Brian? I AM a REAL LIBERTARIAN! And, I don’t know where you’re getting your information from, but I’m NOT ON MEDICAID or FOOD STAMPS! I don’t collect PUBLIC ASSISTANCE!

As for Medicare, it is an ENTITLEMENT program, based solely on TAX DOLLARS that the Federal Government collected from MY paycheck WITHOUT MY CONSENT – for the purpose of securing my “retirement.” I WAS NOT given a choice about my payment into the program, NOR was I given the option to “opt out”! And, though I have my own private medical insurance, I was forced into Medicare “Part B” while I lived in New York, because it is considered the legal minimum, and it covers emergency health. This was a PURE WASTE OF TAX DOLLARS, and JUST A TASTE of the INEFFICIENT, COERCIVE, BUREAUCRATIC STATE measures taken AGAINST THE INTEREST OF INDIVIDUALS, and in the name of CORPORATE HANDOUTS! You don’t even WANT to know how much SERVICE-FREE FUNDING that this equaled for Big Health! Meanwhile, I was AT LEAST happily able to opt out of “Part A”! Now that I live in New Jersey, I was FORCED into both “Part A” and “Part B” of Medicare, simply because this particular State has some sort of extra federal government funding to cover “Part A.” And, apparently, “opting out” ISN’T an option! How is that for THEFT!?

This is the sort of information that only EXPERIENCE or REAL RESEARCH can UNCOVER! You seem to have neither, in this case, but that can be EASILY REMEDY if you would only realize how uninformed you actually are!

Brian J.: Well, from I’ve gathered, Libertarians don’t really care about poor people, or government assistance. Yeah, Republicans don’t care either. Anyways, based on my current research, not all libertarians are bad, and the philosophy is actually very good. I guess the problem is just Ron Paul. Libertarians are kinda cool.

Brian J.: Thanks for the information. After reading wikipedia, I haven’t a different view on Libertarians. Sorry for being ignorant on the subject. But fuck Ron Paul.

Rayn: Thank you for checking out the information, Brian, and for at least reversing your opinion enough to say that “Libertarians are kinda cool.” It’s your prerogative to dismiss Ron Paul, but there’s still a few more things you should know about him, first, so you can make the most informed decision about him as possible. If anything, the information will give you greater cause to dismiss the Congressman with even more ease in the future, or alternatively, the ability to ridicule him more successfully, from now on!

I believe it will be easiest to just quote from my December 2010 blog article:

Ron Paul: The People’s Champ in 2012!
http://acidrayn.com/2010/12/16/ron-paul-the-peoples-champ-in-2012/

“It is the three-year anniversary of Ron Paul’s record-breaking “Money Bomb” campaign, which took place on December 16, 2007 during his 2008 presidential bid. On this single day in history, Ron Paul received so many campaign donations from individuals, that he broke the record for the largest single day fundraising total in U.S. history! Of course, this information was all but ignored by the mainstream media monopoly, who brought us WMDs and the War in Iraq:

Ron Paul Beats Fundraising Record, Garnering $6 Million in Just 24 Hours:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2007/12/ron-paul-beats-own-fundraising.html

Paul’s $16M Haul… Impressive. No Buts:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2007/12/pauls-16m-haul-impressive-no-buts/51297/

The average American has little or no idea who Ron Paul is, or what he really represents to the political landscape of America. And, though he has gained a substantial backing of supporters over the years, he has still been all but outright dismissed by the corporately-owned mainstream media monopoly in our country.

Most individuals know that Ron Paul is a Congressman, serving the 14th Congressional district of Texas. However, many are not aware that he has maintained this seat since first being elected into it in 1996. Paul is currently serving his seventh consecutive term as a Congressman:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

Many don’t realize that Ron Paul is not a true “career politician.” Not only was he a former flight surgeon for the United States Air Force, since then, he has maintained a REAL job as an OB/GYN doctor in his home state of Texas:
http://www.biography.com/articles/Ron-Paul-265881

Few are aware that, as a congressman in Texas, Ron Paul has returned his salary to the Treasury every year for over a decade. This year alone, he saved the taxpayers a whopping $100,000 by declining payment for his service as a Congressman:
http://www.humblelibertarian.com/2010/03/ron-paul-returns-100000-of-his.html

Just a handful of individuals are privy to the fact that Ron Paul has refused to participate in the “immoral” Congressional pension system, declining his own ”retirement package”:
http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=999&Itemid=28

Unbeknownst to the general public, while many members of Congress receive their contributions from CORPORATIONS, as a Congressman, Ron Paul has received the vast majority of his fundraising contributions from INDIVIDUALS, who account for an average of 90% of his total donations:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=Career&type=I&cid=N00005906&newMem=N

Along with being a CONSTITUTIONAL Republican (not to be confused with NEO-CONSERVATIVE), Ron Paul is also a life-long member of the Libertarian Party. He even ran for president in 1988 as a candidate of the Libertarian Party:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul_presidential_campaign,_1988

As a Congressman who firmly believes in the principal of non-interventionism, Ron Paul has voted against every single war measure taken against Iraq:
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Ron_Paul_War_+_Peace.htm#Voting_Record

Also in the spirit of non-interventionism, Ron Paul would like to scale back the role of the CIA, limiting their actions to intelligence-gathering only. He would rescind their ability to assasinate foreign leaders and overthrow foreign countries, as it only contributes to acts of terrorism on American soil:
http://ronpaulrally.org/2010/07/ron-paul-on-the-fbi-and-cia/

Ron Paul so consistently votes against any bill he considers unconstitutional, that many of his detractors actually refer to him as “Dr. No”!

*Sigh* It’s too bad that so many voted for Obama, thinking that he would end the war (even though he voted to give it funding as a senator), while Ron Paul would have REALLY ENDED THE WAR (as a congressman, he voted against war, then, afterward, against funding the war). Individuals should have been checking TRACK RECORDS when they voted in 2008! I guess substance-free promises of “hope” and “change” are more effective than a real, committed effort to bring an end to America’s wars in the Middle-East.

At least the keen-eyed members of our military knew who the REAL anti-war candidate was! Most individuals are unaware of the fact that, before the primaries, and even after, Ron Paul received the MOST MILITARY CONTRIBUTIONS of ALL candidates, including Obama:

Military Donor Stats Before Primaries (Feb. 2008):
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/military-donors.html

Military Donor Stats After Primaries (May 2008):
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/05/army_militarydonors_050408w/

The statistics in these two articles illustrate perfectly that Barack Obama’s military contributions were not only SIGNIFICANTLY LESS than Ron Paul’s before the primaries (Obama’s $94,000 versus Paul’s $212,000 in February), but that Obama’s numbers only gained their biggest jump by DEFAULT, right after the primaries, once Paul was out of the race (Obama’s $178,465 versus Paul’s alleged “$201,271″ in May). Note that while Obama’s contributions increased by over 75% in just three months, Paul appears to have “lost” about about $11,000.

If Ron Paul chooses to run for president in 2012, individuals should finally reject the non-journalism of the mainstream media monopoly, and, instead, use sources like the internet to take notice of this man’s integrity as a real human being, with solid, unshakable principles, while also acknowledging his voting record as a Congressman! Perhaps, then, we will finally have some real “change” in this country!”

Brian J.: There’s good and bad in everybody.

(All original portions of this work, by Rayn Kleipe, are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, while all redistributed links, images, sounds, videos, and writings are protected under 17 U.S.C. § 107: Fair Use, or under Public Domain)

Debate Over 2012 Presidential Debates

2 Responses to Debate Over 2012 Presidential Debates

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Search Rayn’s Blog

Blog Archives

Blog Categories

Blog Subscriptions

Subscriber Count

Independent News Links

Recommended Art Links

Shop

Recent Blog Posts

Featured Articles

Shop