Jesse Ventura May Run for President in 2016 with Howard Stern as His VP Candidate

[dannno]

"It's time to bring back the draft" @ 2:50

That was back in '09 and that argument is made primarily to drive home the point that if Americans took 2 god damn fucking seconds out of their precious fucking days to contemplate what the hell we are doing overseas, that MAYBE we would actually support candidates who were committed to stopping what was going on... A draft does that because nearly everybody knows SOMEBODY in that age range and so it forces them to think about it. It could be why the Vietnam protests had more gusto. But in a sense, it's really a rhetorical argument. If you put the ballot in front of him with the option to bring back the draft, I do not think for a second he would actually cast the vote for it.

 

[eduardo89]

That was back in '09 and that argument is made primarily to drive home the point that if Americans took 2 god damn fucking seconds out of their precious fucking days to contemplate what the hell we are doing overseas, that MAYBE we would actually support candidates who were committed to stopping what was going on... A draft does that because nearly everybody knows SOMEBODY in that age range and so it forces them to think about it. It could be why the Vietnam protests had more gusto. But in a sense, it's really a rhetorical argument. If you put the ballot in front of him with the option to bring back the draft, I do not think for a second he would actually cast the vote for it.

Here he is in 2010 again supporting the draft:



Doesn't matter his reasoning, he supports it.

 

[dannno]

I don't even know who the VP is.

Howard Stern practically invented the morning comedy radio talk show format and long ago pushed the envelope and the buttons of the FCC on his radio show in New York that he has had for several decades. He is famous for having extremely attractive women on his show and then having them get naken on the radio show during the interviews. There are always a cohort of his people as well as interviewees on the show. His co-host Robin Quivers is African American, pretty damn intelligent and shares a lot of our views. As you've already heard in the thread, she is anti-gun control, and when they've had 9/11 and various conspiracy topics on the show, she is more open to them and Howard kinda plays devil's advocate and argues against them. But he doesn't treat people with disrespect unless they really deserve it.

 

[dannno]

Doesn't matter his reasoning, he supports it.

It does matter his reasoning if it's a rhetorical argument and he doesn't actually support it...... and it's 2013.

 

[Slutter McGee]

Preferences for the next election

Rand >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Corky the kid with Down Syndrome>Hillary Clinton>Jesse Ventura

Best post in RPF history. I haven't laughed that hard in a while.

Of course, like know nothing, said. If it was establishment vs Ventura Id vote for him just for entertainment purposes.

Slutter McGee

 

[bolil]

I saw him on a Piers to far, he said: "If someone gets sick in Murica, they should be taken care of." Should, I fucking hate that word. Should. We should all just get along. We should stop killing each other. Tornadoes should not happen.

You shouldn't dissemble with the world should, Jesse, next time say: "If someone gets sick in Murica, I will force others to pay for their treatment."

He doesn't have my vote, that is for damn sure.

And for the draft bullshit, someone tell Jesse that slavery is SO 19th century.

 

[dannno]

"If someone gets sick in Murica, they should be taken care of."

I agree with that statement and I'll bet Ron Paul would too. Remember, Ron Paul gave away free health care to poor people. You don't think he agrees with that statement? I wouldn't steal from somebody or enslave somebody to do it, but we are a prosperous enough society that if somebody gets sick, they should be taken care of. What prevents that from happening? High prices in health care as well as our overall economic situation. These are all very deep systemic economic problems, but at the root they come from the establishment and support of our overseas empire and the banking cartel and all of the corporate subsidies. Jesse Ventura is against these things, and as he ends them, things like medical care would be less of an issue.

And for the draft bullshit, someone tell Jesse that slavery is SO 19th century.

You should watch the video eduardo89 posted above, it's actually quite good. He said a lot of really great things that are more important than any other politician including even Rand Paul is saying. Only Ron Paul could say them better. Then he says, "I want to bring back the draft to end the war". Again, it's a rhetorical argument, because he wants to bring all of our troops home.

 

[bolil]

I agree with that statement and I'll bet Ron Paul would too. I wouldn't steal from somebody or enslave somebody to do it, but we are a prosperous enough society that if somebody gets sick, they should be taken care of. What prevents that from happening? These are all very deep systemic problems, but at the root they come from the establishment and support of our overseas empire and the banking cartel and all of the corporate subsidies. Jesse Ventura is against these things, and as he ends them, things like medical care would be less of an issue.





You should watch the video eduardo89 posted above, it's actually quite good. He said a lot of really great things that are more important than any other politician including even Rand Paul is saying. Then he says, "I want to bring back the draft to end the war". Again, it's a rhetorical argument, because he wants to bring all of our troops home.

And you've taken me out of context, grossly out of context. No shit, danno, should be. And you know what else should happen? Peace on earth and largesse for all. So you think the law should state, "anyone that is sick WILL be taken care of," because that is what he meant. Know what else? Everyone SHOULD be happy, so yes, let us legislate that.

"I want to bring back the draft to end the war." Yes, because a infusion of slave-troops tends to end wars.

 

[dannno]

Here he is in 2010 again supporting the draft:



Doesn't matter his reasoning, he supports it.

Did you just look up a video of Jesse Ventura supporting the draft, or did you actually watch the video?

If you actually watched the video and still posted it, then I am honestly baffled as to how you can be here for so long and not understand why people here wouldn't like him when 99% of what he just said could have been A FUCKING RON PAUL INTERVIEW.

You speak english alright, do you actually understand it at all?

 

[dannno]

And you've taken me out of context, grossly out of context. No shit, danno, should be. And you know what else should happen? Peace on earth and largesse for all. So you think the law should state, "anyone that is sick WILL be taken care of," because that is what he meant. Know what else? Everyone SHOULD be happy, so yes, let us legislate that.

The thing is, I'm not a single issue voter. Have you read my signature by any chance? I personally believe in NAP, but i will vote for a politician who understands the political corruption happening and wants to end the wars because those are the number 1 issues that are causing our country to suffer. Ron Paul said he would have ended the wars and the political corruption and all of the regulatory agencies that hurt our businesses before taking money away from the poor that they had become dependent on. That is why I am here. I am all for ending the welfare state.. eventually, it is a very noble goal. People should understand the difference between forced welfarism and true giving. But I don't want to vote for somebody who wants to continue the wars and take away money from poor people that have become dependent on the money because the establishment steals so much from us to fund our war machine. That's why there are so many poor people.

"I want to bring back the draft to end the war." Yes, because a infusion of slave-troops tends to end wars.

He's referring to Vietnam, the protests did have a lot more gusto and probably did affect the withdrawl timetable somewhat. I don't agree with the argument, but I'll defend his take on it and I'm not going to throw him under the bus for it either. Because if he is right, and enslaving American kids will result in a net gain of several tens of thousands of lives in Afghanistan who would have been murdered otherwise and it actually ends the war, then you can make the moral judgement that exercising one type of tyranny has a less drastic effect on the most amount of people's freedoms than another type of tyranny and at least give a preference for the lesser tyranny, that is not supporting tyranny, it is merely choosing the lesser of one tyranny over another.

If you had a choice between living in a country where you had all of your freedoms, but the government made you wear white socks, no black socks or purple socks allowed, and another country that let you wear whatever color socks you want but stole most of your income and had a huge military empire and was bordering on fascism, which would you choose?

 

[Fredom101]

Did you miss Rand's Senate campaign in 2010? Rand always said he would support the GOP nominee. Listen to Jack Hunter, his prediction of Obama winning and Rand being the front runner for the 2016 nomination is beginning to pan out. The game is chess, not checkers.

I don't doubt Rand was honest about what he would do but supporting Romney is unacceptable to me.

 

[dannno]

I don't doubt Rand was honest about what he would do but supporting Romney is unacceptable to me.

What if some total establishment candidate that none of us here support, let's say also that they are a Democrat maybe like a Biden kinda guy but younger and newer to the scene, ends up getting elected President in 2016 and then on their first day says, "Hah, surprise!! I'm actually a libertarian and I'm going to bring all of our troops home and close all of our overseas bases. I'm going to end the war on drugs and pardon all non-violent drug offenders. I'm going to abolish most of the alphabet agencies and severely reform the rest. I'm going to cut the budget by 80%. I'm going to end the income tax. I'm going to end the federal reserve monopoly and allow competing currencies, I will not enforce the legal tender laws." Then everything gets better and we all live in peace and harmony in a free society. Could you forgive them for 'supporting' Obama in 2012?

 

[bolil]

The thing is, I'm not a single issue voter. Have you read my signature by any chance? I personally believe in NAP, but i will vote for a politician who understands the political corruption happening and wants to end the wars because those are the number 1 issues that are causing our country to suffer. Ron Paul said he would have ended the wars and the political corruption and all of the regulatory agencies that hurt our businesses before taking money away from the poor that they had become dependent on. That is why I am here. I am all for ending the welfare state.. eventually, it is a very noble goal. People should understand the difference between forced welfarism and true giving. But I don't want to vote for somebody who wants to continue the wars and take away money from poor people that have become dependent on the money because the establishment steals so much from us to fund our war machine. That's why there are so many poor people.




He's referring to Vietnam, the protests did have a lot more gusto and probably did affect the withdrawl timetable somewhat. I don't agree with the argument, but I'll defend his take on it and I'm not going to throw him under the bus for it either. Because if he is right, and enslaving American kids will result in a net gain of several tens of thousands of lives in Afghanistan who would have been murdered otherwise and it actually ends the war, then you can make the moral judgement that exercising one type of tyranny has a less drastic effect on the most amount of people's freedoms than another type of tyranny and at least give a preference for the lesser tyranny, that is not supporting tyranny, it is merely choosing the lesser of one tyranny over another.

If you had a choice between living in a country where you had all of your freedoms, but the government made you wear white socks, no black socks or purple socks allowed, and another country that let you wear whatever color socks you want but stole most of your income and had a huge military empire and was bordering on fascism, which would you choose?

And you know what? I think all of the draftees that died in the jungle over there would agree with you. It is good to know that you would abide by slavery so long as there was an upside. Even if that upside is purely theoretical. Maybe slavery is the way that everyone that SHOULD get free healthcare, CAN get free healthcare. The upside outweighs the down. So, enslave the doctors! Jesse Ventura, the shameless book plugging wanna be paul for president!

You would enslave people so long as it served a theoretical greater good? You ain't alone in that sentiment, that is for sure.

As for the sock metaphor, it is puerile. It presents a false dichotomy that either people: accept a benevolent tyranny or a malicious one. Crock of shit.

How about the tyranny of liberty? Where you can wear any sock you like, or no socks at all and NOT subsidize an empire.

 

[fr33]

There he is supporting Obamacare on October 4th 2013 and griping about the govt shutdown.

"It's the law. How can these guys defy the law?"

 

[Christian Liberty]

I don't have time to watch the video yet, but I do see a huge difference between a rhetorical "Maybe if there was a draft people would think about what we're doing" and actually supporting a draft.

 

[enoch150]

...it's really a rhetorical argument. If you put the ballot in front of him with the option to bring back the draft, I do not think for a second he would actually cast the vote for it.

1. Ventura's support for the draft was not a rhetorical argument. He explained that he changed his position from opposing a draft in decades past to supporting one now.

Here's the quote:

We need an immediate Congress to pass a war tax, because you know what? We're involved in two wars now and this country is feeling no pain. Well, I got news for you. When you're involved in war, everyone should feel a little bit of pain. We need to pass a war tax to pay for this war.

And I'll tell you something else. It's time to bring back the draft. These guys are on their fifth or sixth tours over there. I used to be advocate for a professional military. I'm not anymore. It's too easy for these people to take our young men and women to war and not account for it.

And let's pass one more law, Larry. The next time the government votes to go to war, I think every congressman and senator should be required to pr predesignate someone in their family begins immediate military service. I'm tired for these people voting to go to war and then they have no dog in the fight.

... if he is right, and enslaving American kids will result in a net gain of several tens of thousands of lives in Afghanistan who would have been murdered otherwise and it actually ends the war, then you can make the moral judgement that exercising one type of tyranny has a less drastic effect on the most amount of people's freedoms than another type of tyranny and at least give a preference for the lesser tyranny, that is not supporting tyranny, it is merely choosing the lesser of one tyranny over another.

2. It is incredibly immoral to collectively punish people. Ventura supports the indiscriminate punishment of people, even if they oppose the war. In the absence of a draft, only those who volunteer are risking their lives.

3. A draft does not end war. A Ventura presidency would end the wars, with or without the draft. But what happens when Ventura is out of office and we're stuck with Bush 3.0 + a draft? Bush 3.0 with a draft ensures a greater amount of blood in a shorter period of time, before the public has time to digest the magnitude of death and turn against the war. Worse, what about another Wilson, Truman, or FDR? With modern weaponry, such a President with a draft could potentially get us sucked so deep into a global war that we don't have the option of just packing up and going home. In that scenario, when we weren't just attacking 2nd and 3rd world countries, people would be forced to support the wars because there actually could be a chance of enemy armies following us home if we weren't victorious on a foreign battlefield.

Rather than punishing people with war taxes and a draft, what Ventura should support is giving military personnel the ability to quit and taxpayers the ability to withhold taxes.

 

[dannno]

And you know what? I think all of the draftees that died in the jungle over there would agree with you. It is good to know that you would abide by slavery so long as there was an upside. Even if that upside is purely theoretical. Maybe slavery is the way that everyone that SHOULD get free healthcare, CAN get free healthcare. The upside outweighs the down. So, enslave the doctors! Jesse Ventura, the shameless book plugging wanna be paul for president!

You would enslave people so long as it served a theoretical greater good? You ain't alone in that sentiment, that is for sure.

As for the sock metaphor, it is puerile. It presents a false dichotomy that either people: accept a benevolent tyranny or a malicious one. Crock of shit.

How about the tyranny of liberty? Where you can wear any sock you like, or no socks at all and NOT subsidize an empire.

Why don't you read my post instead of ignoring it?

I said I don't support the argument myself, essentially because the gains would be theoretical and it is still slavery - however - IF you had the KNOWLEDGE, not the THEORY, that by enslaving some Americans it would stop the war and ultimately save tens of thousands of lives, you are simply giving a preference to a lighter version of tyranny rather than a more harsh version of tyranny that results in permanent death rather than a temporary slavery for a few.

I'm sorry that I don't see your ideology of American people as any more valuable than middle eastern people.

 

[dannno]

As for the sock metaphor, it is puerile. It presents a false dichotomy that either people: accept a benevolent tyranny or a malicious one. Crock of shit.

I never said sock tyranny should be acceptable, I said that most would prefer it to hard tyranny where most of their shit is stolen every year. I'm not making an argument that in order to live in a free society, we need to accept sock tyranny, I'm saying that realistically if you had a choice between the two you, everything else equal, you would choose the soft tyranny over the hard tyranny. That's all he is doing.

 

[libertariantexas]

Anti-establishment.

It would be great to watch a debate between Ventura, Rand and Hillary.

I can see it now. Hillary would say something to piss Ventura off. Ventura would choke-slam Hillary.

Finally, a Presidential debate that wouldn't be a snooze-a-thon!

 

[Fredom101]

What if some total establishment candidate that none of us here support, let's say also that they are a Democrat maybe like a Biden kinda guy but younger and newer to the scene, ends up getting elected President in 2016 and then on their first day says, "Hah, surprise!! I'm actually a libertarian and I'm going to bring all of our troops home and close all of our overseas bases. I'm going to end the war on drugs and pardon all non-violent drug offenders. I'm going to abolish most of the alphabet agencies and severely reform the rest. I'm going to cut the budget by 80%. I'm going to end the income tax. I'm going to end the federal reserve monopoly and allow competing currencies, I will not enforce the legal tender laws." Then everything gets better and we all live in peace and harmony in a free society. Could you forgive them for 'supporting' Obama in 2012?

Ha! Then, unicorns flew out of Dick Cheney's ass...