| |
  
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||
The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul or his Presidential Committee. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original poster, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site IMMEDIATELY. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2011 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul. | General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advertise here
Video Link
Link:
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObj...
You can find the video in the thumbnail menu below.
- kipload
idealogs.blogspot.com
Thanks for the link. I
Thanks for the link. I thought the questions were a little leading, as if the Barr campaign wanted to be asked those questions. However, just based on his answers I did not see anything wrong with what he said.
I have a philosophical question
Say someone was a neocon their whole life, but they saw Ron Paul and woke up and now they want to be elected again, should we vote for them?
Now say someone was a neocon their whole life, but then they discovered liberalism, should a liberal vote for them? Or not trust them and vote for someone else?
----------
"We will never give up. We will never give in." - Dr. Ron Paul
----------
"We will never give up. We will never give in." - Dr. Ron Paul
Good question.
The greater chance they have of being elected, the more concern you should have about that. If it's someone like Barr or Baldwin, who of course have almost no chance of being elected (even less than Dr. Paul had at the start of his race), that becomes not so important. All we're really concerned about is getting the message of liberty and non-interventionism out. Both Barr and Baldwin have that message. So all we're trying to do is get Barr up to 15% polling so he can get in the debates and in the news delivering the same basic message as Dr. Paul (Baldwin's probabilities of getting that high of polling are too remote). If we don't support him, that message will be absent from the debates and news during the general election. So the course is pretty clear what we should be doing.
***************
Bob Barr Money Bombs July 2: www.BarrBomb.com and July 4 www.BobBarrMoneyBomb.com Help continue propagating the Revolutionary message of liberty. (9/11 "Truthers": Please don't support Barr. You'll hurt his public image and cost him support and votes, like you did to Dr. Paul).
I would question their sincerity
As we welcome in more and more people, whether neocons or liberals, it is important to measure their sincerity, especially if they are running for office.
youtube yet?
youtube yet?
If any of you reacted the way I did
to what he had to say....he won't be getting our votes, or money. He appears to think he will get millions from Ron Paul supporters. Assume nothing....it was an obvious ploy to make it look like that is what Ron Paul supporters shoudl do.
IT'S DOABLE
Alpacas - IT'S DOABLE
He's going to get a lot
of support and votes from Paul supporters. It makes perfect sense to expect that. He's carrying Dr. Paul's message in the general election. He's our only real hope at getting that message in the debates and in the news during the general election cycle. I question anyone's dedication to Dr. Paul's goal of propagating the message of liberty, if they don't support Barr. Dr. Paul himself said he was "encouraging" Barr (see the interview on the Situation Room from yesterday).
*************
Bob Barr Money Bombs July 2: www.BarrBomb.com and July 4 www.BobBarrMoneyBomb.com Help continue propagating the Revolutionary message of liberty. (9/11 "Truthers": Please don't support Barr. You'll hurt his public image and cost him support and votes, like you did to Dr. Paul).
Trolling for Barr as usual
You can question my dedication all you want, but I question yours as you and a few others appear to be spending so much time talking about other candidates and advertising the heck out of Bob Barr and Money Bombs. If Dr. Paul was endorsing someone at this time, we would know. What part of Dr. Paul not having released his delegates don't you understand?
What part of there still be events planned ahead, aren't you preparing for? Actually, Dr. Paul seems more of a friend of Chuck Baldwin and they are more in line with each other and have been for years. But that's a whole other story which doesn't need telling now. Now, I have work to do. Do not question my dedication.
IT'S DOABLE
Alpacas - IT'S DOABLE
I question you
I question you for trolling every single Barr post and being as negative as humanly possible. How about making a positive post about your P.O.V. or your candidate, and maybe others will be inclined to listen. You won't find me there trashing you.
- kipload
idealogs.blogspot.com
Has Barr changed his stance on drugs yet?
That is, does he want to repeal all the government's laws that prohibit drugs for medical and recreational use?
Yes
He's the same as Paul on drugs. No federal laws or war on drugs. Leave it to the states to decide.
Here is something written by him, about coming to his senses: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-barr/i-was-wrong-about-the...
**************
Bob Barr Money Bombs July 2: www.BarrBomb.com and July 4 www.BobBarrMoneyBomb.com Help continue propagating the Revolutionary message of liberty. (9/11 "Truthers": Please don't support Barr. You'll hurt his public image and cost him support and votes, like you did to Dr. Paul).
That's still the same stance...
Sorry you might be using a different reference point. The point that I am thinking of is his interview on Hannity + Colmes.
He gave the usual lame line about "leaving it to the states." But, he also admitted that he is opposed to the repeal of the laws on crack and heroin (at the state level I assume).
What else do you want
What else do you want. Constitutionally it would be left to the states, and the federal government would have nothing to say about it either way. I don't know how much more clear that could be.
- kipload
idealogs.blogspot.com
At the state level it is a still a violation of a person's
rights!!
That 's what I want.
but that is not the decision
but that is not the decision for a federal official to make. it is a state issue.
So whatever a state does is fine as long as it's ....
in a Constitution (federal or state)?
Is that what you are implying?
And yes, of course the federal gov't cannot rightly make laws on drugs.
Yes.
If the people of a state have ratified a state constitution that outlaws drug use, then yes, it would be just fine. (I am sure there is no states that have that in their constitution.) And it would not be the place of any other state or the federal govt to tell them they are wrong.
Whoa, that is a criminal act.
It is a violation of someone's natural rights to kidnap (ie. put in jail) someone for possessing drugs, or to steal his property (the drugs).
Dude, you subscribe to the democratic moral code: "whatever the majority of the people want is what is good."
The video on his website
of the interview with CSPAN, he talks a bit about it. He says the Federal government should stay out of it. I don't remember the details, but check it out.
************
Bob Barr Money Bombs July 2: www.BarrBomb.com and July 4 www.BobBarrMoneyBomb.com Help continue propagating the Revolutionary message of liberty. (9/11 "Truthers": Please don't support Barr. You'll hurt his public image and cost him support and votes, like you did to Dr. Paul).
Ok, I might check it out, but it's still the same stance!!
And re: his HuffPo article, why didn't he mention how drug criminalization is a violation of rights?
He didn't even use the word once...
I noticed that too
Instead he talked about that the war on drugs didn't work. Even if it did work, it would be a violation of individual liberty.
But also I think you have to keep in mind that he's trying to sound good to the mainstream, and that's one of the reasons the LP picked him, instead of just throwing libertarianism all at once in someone's face which can scare them away.
***************
Bob Barr Money Bombs July 2: www.BarrBomb.com and July 4 www.BobBarrMoneyBomb.com Help continue propagating the Revolutionary message of liberty. (9/11 "Truthers": Please don't support Barr. You'll hurt his public image and cost him support and votes, like you did to Dr. Paul).
That's a good point
Even the partial libertarians, like Barr, have a role in spreading the philosophy.