PEACE, RPF, PEACE PLEASE

[openfire]

Bull$#@!. There is no compelling evidence to suggest that FP will be dramatically changed or the system will implode if any of the major party candidates remaining are elected. Many of the Trumpanzees on this site were never Rand supporters while he was in he race.

There is compelling evidence and your proclamation to the contrary doesn't make it so. Explain this to me, then I might take your position seriously. Or call me a name, your choice.

Your move.

 

[erowe1]

The last I checked, bringing an end to the insane neocon foreign policy that has been foisted upon us by the "establishment", IS a basic tenet of Ron's philosophy. Furthermore, Ron himself said that imploding the system is a GOOD thing, because it gives US a chance to put it back together again.

If Rand or any other liberty candidate were in the race, this would be a moot point.

Everything you say here is an argument against supporting Trump, not for it.

 

[erowe1]

Does one need website guidelines in order to stop themselves from being an asshole?

Would you say that about criticizing Obama and McCain? Trump is the same, if not worse. This website stands for something. You talk like that's a bad thing.

 

[CPUd]

There is compelling evidence and your proclamation to the contrary doesn't make it so. Explain this to me, then I might take your position seriously. Or call me a name, your choice.

Your move.

You assume he's actually going to do what he says once he gets in office. But he rarely gives specifics and is all over the place when he does. He has already shown from the last 2 debates he is willing to walk back his current positions in an attempt to become competitive in a general election.

 

[openfire]

Everything you say here is an argument against supporting Trump, not for it.

Except the evidence suggests otherwise. Explain to me why the neocons have stated that they will support Hillary if Trump is the nominee? To me the obvious answer is that she will continue their foreign policy agenda, not Trump.

The floor is yours.

 

[erowe1]

Except the evidence suggests otherwise. Explain to me why the neocons have stated that they will support Hillary if Trump is the nominee? To me the obvious answer is that she will continue their foreign policy agenda, not Trump.

The floor is yours.

Notice how you have to resort to this enemy of my enemy nonsense.

You can't actually point to anything from Trump himself that indicates that he disagrees with neoconservative foreign policy. Because he doesn't.

And that wouldn't be enough anyway. FDR, Woodrow Wilson, and Abraham Lincoln weren't neoconservatives either. But it's not enough just to be something other than a neoconservative if you're still every bit as much of a war monger and tyrant.

 

[openfire]

Notice how you have to resort to this enemy of my enemy nonsense.

You can't actually point to anything from Trump himself that indicates that he disagrees with neoconservative foreign policy. Because he doesn't.

He wants to ally with Russia. (work with Russia to resolve problems)

 

[erowe1]

He wants to ally with Russia.

And that's supposed to be some kind of a plus?

 

[Ender]

The whole point of having neg-rep is to use it on posts like those that support tyranny.

I think neg reps are used mainly to make the one neg-repping feel good about themselves. My experience has been one of posters trying to take me down instead of trying to convince me to think differently. My love for Ron Paul came because he speaks truth to power; not many are ready to hear it, BUT we will not convince others to change their minds by insulting and making fun of them.

And, BTW, my remarks are not about you, personally- just my POV.

 

[openfire]

And that's supposed to be some kind of a plus?

Is that a serious statement?

 

[erowe1]

Is that a serious statement?

Yes. Of course. Entangling alliances and all that.

 

[openfire]

Yes. Of course. Entangling alliances and all that.

I PM'd you

 

[Cleaner44]

Would you say that about criticizing Obama and McCain? Trump is the same, if not worse. This website stands for something. You talk like that's a bad thing.

I think you are missing my point. I am simply suggesting that we can share ideas and disagree in a polite and courteous manner. We have a much better chance of persuading others if we are not belittling them... even though that can be fun sometimes.

 

[Mach]

I mean that whatever we've done so far has apparently not been effective in making the pro-tyranny crowd understand that they are not friends, but enemies, of this site, and Ron Paul and those who are his allies. So we apparently need to turn up the heat some more to get that point across.

I see nothing wrong with being against the Constitution. But even supposing the Constitution were an altogether good thing, where in the Constitution does it mention national sovereignty?

You seem to do nothing but oppose Ron Pauls viewpoints, but then you sit around here and pretend that you are a loyal Representative of him.

Also, let's be accurate about the neg-rep aspect of this.

I've never gotten so many neg reps on this site as I have gotten in recent months from pro-Trump people who neg-rep me for my pro-Ron and Rand Paul and pro-freedom posts. RonPaulGeorgeAndRingo alone must have given me at least 20.

But shouldn't the rep system reflect positively on those who advance the cause of the website and negatively on those who oppose it, rather than the other way around?

You seem to be more Liberal than anything else and this has nothing to do with the current Presidential Elections.

 

[HVACTech]

You're no fun.

Stir the pot, rock the boat, rattle cages, yank chains, polarize, make waves, etc.. All in all, have a good fun educational time here.

you are here to "educate"? or just be an irritant?

when will you get to the educate part?

 

[erowe1]

You seem to do nothing but oppose Ron Pauls viewpoints, but then you sit around here and pretend that you are a loyal Representative of him.

I agree with Ron Paul on pretty much everything. I can't think of any view of his I have opposed here. I'm not sure what the relevance of that video was. Were you under the impression that something Ron Paul said there went against something I said?

You seem to be more Liberal than anything else and this has nothing to do with the current Presidential Elections.

You couldn't be more wrong, unless you mean in the classical liberal sense. In the modern American usage of the word it's Trump and his supporters who are liberal. I'm one of the most traditional conservative people here.

 

[erowe1]

He wants to ally with Russia. (work with Russia to resolve problems)

And that's supposed to be some kind of a plus?

Is that a serious statement?

Yes. Of course. Entangling alliances and all that.

Still waiting for an explanation for why we noninterventionists should support an alliance with Russia.

 

[HVACTech]

I think neg reps are used mainly to make the one neg-repping feel good about themselves. My experience has been one of posters trying to take me down instead of trying to convince me to think differently. My love for Ron Paul came because he speaks truth to power; not many are ready to hear it, BUT we will not convince others to change their minds by insulting and making fun of them.

And, BTW, my remarks are not about you, personally- just my POV.

[MENTION=9064]Ender[/MENTION]. "My love for Ron Paul came because he speaks truth to power"

what "truth" was that "Ender"?

Ronin Truth?

 

[HVACTech]

Still waiting for an explanation for why we noninterventionists should support an alliance with Russia.

your statement sir, presupposes that an "alliance" mandates "intervention"
it does not.

 

[Mach]

I agree with Ron Paul on pretty much everything. I can't think of any view of his I have opposed here. I'm not sure what the relevance of that video was. Were you under the impression that something Ron Paul said there went against something I said?

He openly mentions, wholeheartedly, the Constitution and National Sovereignty, did you miss those?



"Did you get the memo?"