US Republican Tim Pawlenty drops bid for 2012 race - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Zeke129;31737465]The reason I don't like Ron Paul is because he's using the big issues like war and the Fed where he DOES have a libertarian viewpoint to mask all the less popular issues (to most Americans) like gay rights, race relations, the environment, and church and state seperation where he holds a traditional ignorant Republican view. [/QUOTE] Would you prefer Bachmann?

[QUOTE=Zeke129;31737465]The reason I don't like Ron Paul is because he's using the big issues like war and the Fed where he DOES have a libertarian viewpoint to mask all the less popular issues (to most Americans) like gay rights, race relations, the environment, and church and state seperation where he holds a traditional ignorant Republican view. [/QUOTE] I've never seen him try to "mask" his beliefs in any spectrum. He's always said exactly what he thinks and believes and refuses to apologize for it.

Ron Paul: Might as well. Ron Paul: Honestly, who else on the GOP side is there really? Ron Paul: Eh... Ron Paul: Whatever dude.

[QUOTE=thisispain;31738641]Ron Paul: Might as well. Ron Paul: Honestly, who else on the GOP side is there really? Ron Paul: Eh... Ron Paul: Whatever dude.[/QUOTE] I'm afraid I don't follow.

Ron Paul: marginally better then those obamunists Ron Paul: substandard substitute for who we really want

[QUOTE=Lambeth;31739537]Ron Paul: marginally better then those obamunists Ron Paul: substandard substitute for who we really want[/QUOTE] Ron Paul: Not as awful as most, but still relatively awful.

So I take it there is a high likelihood of the republicans getting in

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31741344]So I take it there is a high likelihood of the republicans getting in[/QUOTE] Can't really say until they've nominated someone. Basically won't know until a year from now, just about.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;31739609]Ron Paul: Not as awful as most, but still relatively awful.[/QUOTE] I think you killed the joke

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31741344]So I take it there is a high likelihood of the republicans getting in[/QUOTE] No, not really. [editline]15th August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Lambeth;31746175]I think you killed the joke[/QUOTE] My bad.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;31735185]States couldn't make the right call on slavery, and they can't make the right call on gay rights either. Make it federal. Saying that he doesn't see race means turning a blind eye to racism. He's part of the problem, whether he directly wrote those articles or not. That's the 2003 one. In 1997 he introduced an amendment allowing states to ban flag desecration if they wanted to. Basically, he supported the state's right to violate the constitution if it felt that was the best course of action. Not a real rigid constitutionalist, now is he?[/QUOTE] Ya, look what happened when we tried pushing a federal decision on slavery, millions of people were killed in a bloody war. YOU are part of the problem. YOU are recognizing that race exists. Racism won't come to an end if we all play along with the notion that race exists. You do realize that the constitution applies to the federal body of government, not the state governments, right?

[QUOTE=HeadshotDCS;31732024]Because common sense tells us to not vote for someone who's - Not been bought [B]Has served in the Military[/B] Is a licensed Doctor [B]Has served in the Government over several decades[/B] Is a constitutionalist Wants out of other county's business Believes in peace through trade Wants to end corporatism Believes the government should stay out of marriage Predicted the economic collapse(the housing bubble) Is against bailouts on failed banks that acted irresponsibly Understands cause and effect in terms of America's actions on foreign nations(Iran 1954) Will use the full power of the president to bring the troops home(all of them) etc, etc.... Fuck man, I'm done listing. I guess common sense is not so common between people.[/QUOTE] So did Nixon. I don't really think military service has anything to do with being a good president.

[QUOTE=Derubermensch;31748961]Ya, look what happened when we tried pushing a federal decision on slavery, millions of people were killed in a bloody war. YOU are part of the problem. YOU are recognizing that race exists. Racism won't come to an end if we all play along with the notion that race exists. You do realize that the constitution applies to the federal body of government, not the state governments, right?[/QUOTE] You do realize that ignoring race in our society isn't going to change anything unless every single person does it. Acting like racism doesn't exist won't make it go away. And yeah, the states were so hell-bent on keeping slavery they started a war over it. Would it have been more acceptable if we let them continue doing so for 40, 50, however many years it would have taken?

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;31749031]You do realize that ignoring race in our society isn't going to change anything unless every single person does it. Acting like racism doesn't exist won't make it go away. And yeah, the states were so hell-bent on keeping slavery they started a war over it. Would it have been more acceptable if we let them continue doing so for 40, 50, however many years it would have taken?[/QUOTE] People are entitled to their opinions. Racism would die out if the government didn't recognize the existence of race. Would you rather have had another 10-15 years of slavery, or a destructive war that scarred the country for decades afterwards?

[QUOTE=Derubermensch;31749114]Racism would die out if the government didn't recognize the existence of race.[/QUOTE] it's almost surreal how random and wrong this is. fyi, you're wrong racism is actually by the martians beaming hate beams into our solar plexuses

[QUOTE=Derubermensch;31748961]Ya, look what happened when we tried pushing a federal decision on slavery, millions of people were killed in a bloody war. YOU are part of the problem. YOU are recognizing that race exists. Racism won't come to an end if we all play along with the notion that race exists. [/QUOTE] lmao!

[QUOTE=Derubermensch;31748961]Ya, look what happened when we tried pushing a federal decision on slavery, millions of people were killed in a bloody war. YOU are part of the problem. YOU are recognizing that race exists. Racism won't come to an end if we all play along with the notion that race exists. You do realize that the constitution applies to the federal body of government, not the state governments, right?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Derubermensch;31749114]People are entitled to their opinions. Racism would die out if the government didn't recognize the existence of race. Would you rather have had another 10-15 years of slavery, or a destructive war that scarred the country for decades afterwards?[/QUOTE] to be frank it sounds like you're saying freeing the slaves was a bad thing

[QUOTE=Zeke129;31754854]lmao![/QUOTE] Perhaps not the best response.

[QUOTE=thispieiscold;31754952]to be frank it sounds like you're saying freeing the slaves was a bad thing[/QUOTE] Mind elaborating?

[QUOTE=Derubermensch;31756447]Mind elaborating?[/QUOTE] sure [QUOTE=Derubermensch;31749114] Would you rather have had another 10-15 years of slavery, or a destructive war that scarred the country for decades afterwards?[/QUOTE] what it seems like you're saying here is that you'd rather have a generation of people being enslaved because of their race than a war that lasted 4 years [QUOTE=Derubermensch;31748961]Ya, look what happened when we tried pushing a federal decision on slavery, millions of people were killed in a bloody war. [/QUOTE] here it simply sounds like you're saying America would be better off if the government never attepted to free the slaves to avoid a civil war

Thank you. Don't get me wrong, slavery was a moral stain on the south for the entirety of slavery's existence. I think the best way to achieve abolition would have been to just let slavery die out. It probably would have only taken another 10-15 years, perhaps less if you take into account the reaction factor of threatening to end it. The continuing spread of industrialized, and very soon, mechanized agriculture would have negated the need for slaves and the practice would have ended due to a lack of necessity. Not to mention that some of the largest abolitionist organizations were in fact based within the south. As a Libertarian, I stick to the principal that harming another human being is objectively immoral, so I DEFINITELY do not think we needed to lose 620,000 American lives in order to end slavery. That doesn't go without saying how much you can endanger social progress by making these kind of decisions at a federal level.

[QUOTE=Derubermensch;31756779]Thank you. Don't get me wrong, slavery was a moral stain on the south for the entirety of slavery's existence. I think the best way to achieve abolition would have been to just let slavery die out. It probably would have only taken another 10-15 years, perhaps less if you take into account the reaction factor of threatening to end it. The continuing spread of industrialized, and very soon, mechanized agriculture would have negated the need for slaves and the practice would have ended due to a lack of necessity. Not to mention that some of the largest abolitionist organizations were in fact based within the south. As a Libertarian, I stick to the principal that harming another human being is objectively immoral, so I DEFINITELY do not think we needed to lose 620,000 American lives in order to end slavery. That doesn't go without saying how much you can endanger social progress by making these kind of decisions at a federal level.[/QUOTE] that's fair enough, but judging by how resilient the confederates were to keep slavery in place (i.e going to war over it) you can't be too sure that it would've only taken 10-15 years then again i dont know too much about the civil war so you're probably right