Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

I'll look into it too. At this point i'm trying to find things Ron Paul voted for that i would disagree with and I've only found one bill that seems to be a problematic attempt to correct a thorny problem (activist Supreme Court decisions that extend beyond their constitutional bounds).

While we're at it, lets see what Mr Giuliani has to say about freedom...

http://i9.tinypic.com/4uyiu8l.png

...A little mash-up I did in the gimp today. :)

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

You should've probably do one for ron paul, man.
he is not better than guiliani.
talks a good game.
Think the american people had enough of the republican party for a while.

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

You got it! :D

http://i19.tinypic.com/4mt689k.png

(edit) I just had to post this comment from a NYT reader.

Dr. Paul’s record in congress shows that he is a man of principle.I live in Arizona but have often contacted Ron Paul’s office when concerned about liberty stealing legislation like the “Patriot Act”. My own representative won’t listen-he’s a neocon. Ron Paul is a true statesman. He can’t be bought by special interests and he won’t be corrupted. He is more interested in destroying the “ring of power” than wearing it.

— Posted by Dianne Golubski

New York Times - Ron Paul's Web of Support

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

Yeah, I'd like to say I was shocked when I first read Guiliani's comment, but after Bush's "there ought to be limits to freedom" was met with little reaction (and some defense!) by the American public, I realized we decided at some point to welcome Big Brother with open arms. :/

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

Somehow I'm missing the irony in that second one. :cool:

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

There was never a time in American history when government interference was absent, and there never will be. It's a balancing act. The main people to fear are people with nice simple ideological solutions. As with the Bush administration, or the Communists, those solutions never work. What does work is taking a pretty good system and shaping it to make it better.

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

Absolutely agreed. But here in America we've decided to accept a gradual dumbing down of the general populace, which has no problem now accepting the notion of standardized testing as a cure to public educational ills, not to mention an impatience with realistic solutions. So people bought all the insanely simplistic Bushisms as solutions until they were beat over the head with failures long enough to realize that THOSE soundbites didn't translate into anything workable. They'll just look for different soundbites now. I'm not trying to sound elitist, but I encounter so much of this personally and see the results in pendulum-swinging polls to know it has to be pervasive.

/soapbox

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

Yes, I hope someone will come along.who can sell reallism to the American people. Ross Perot did for awhile.

It is a mistake, though, to pick the "perfect" poliitician and back him no matter how low he is in the polls. One of the attributes of perfection is the ability to win elections.

Disclosure: I've been a Hillary supporter for a long time.

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

Thing is, there IS a way to distill even complex issues down to simple sentences, but that takes an effective speaker, not some jingoistic blowhard looking for immediate gratification. Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton all had that gift. Perot did too to an extent-- I voted for him the first time just because I'm an iconoclast. Problem is, Perot scared the parties so much that they sealed up the "gaps" that allowed independents and third parties to have that good of a shot at the process. Bastards.

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

Well put. If we had range voting, third parties might win a few seats in congress. But we need the MSM viewership to collapse completely and the kids who mainly use the internet grow up and dominate the demos.

For me it's Dr. Paul so hands-down. But then again, I can parse sentences with big words. I love how anti-politician he sounds - just like a grandfather explaining to a kid how things work.

Here's him eviscerating the NeoCons. 51 minutes.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...74553630131591

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

Breakin news! WOOHOOOOO!
----------------------------------------------------

Press Release: Ron Paul Wins Big

Ron Paul Wins Big in First New Hampshire Straw Poll

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 7, 2007

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – Presidential candidate Ron Paul today won the Coalition for New Hampshire Taxpayers (CNHT) straw poll at their annual picnic in Hopkinton, New Hampshire. Dr. Paul received 182 of 294 votes cast, or 65 percent. In second place was Rudy Giuliani with 24 votes, or 8 percent.

"Today's strong victory is further proof that Dr. Paul's message is resonating throughout New Hampshire," said campaign manager Lew Moore. "Dr. Paul is the only candidate in this race truly dedicated to smaller government and lower taxes for all Americans."

CNHT is a statewide, grassroots organization dedicated to reducing the size of government at all levels, stopping judicial activism, providing students and parents with a choice of educational opportunities, expanding job markets, and protecting property rights.

(edit)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Someone was asking for a video that shows Ron Paul's consistency? Here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn4n0TXCR80

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

The "stopping judicial activism" and "expanding job markets" phrases are the ones that cause me concern.

What some deride as "judicial activism" I call judges doing their job, and executing judgment.

And I don't think markets should be expanded to any country that refuses to engage in fair and equitable trade on a level playing field. I'm no isolationist, but IMO the other extreme of sweatshops and zero regulations is harmful. I wish we'd craft policy that disallowed the sort of abuses employed by, say, China.

I also diverge from Libertarians on the subject of The Commons, which gets into property rights, but I'll spare you all the stump speech. :D

Re: Offtopic: Freedom politics for free software junkies.
 

You get right to the meaty issues! Nice to chat with someone who doesn't divert into frivolous diversions.

But federal court judgement is meant to be on the constitutionality of laws, and the interpretation of valid laws. "Legislative jurisprudence" is a good google term to learn about how the courts have begun to overstep their constitutional mandate. I won't get into cases here.

Many argue that modern times require a byzantine growth of regulation and judicial decisionmaking tantamount to legislation. While I won't argue the philosophical flaws of that standpoint, i'll just point out that a growing number of Americans who consider these issues carefully are coming to the conclusion that it represents a serious trend towards unconstitutional government leading to an incremental abrogation of our natural and constitutional rights.

Ron Paul's advocacy of 'limited constitutional government' reflects the founding principles of this nation - distrust of government. It is truer to the law than those who promote incremental growth in central state power to regulate and rule our lives.

Re: Harms of 'Free Trade'. Unfortunately we've had about 150 years of 'international free market trade' enforced at the barrel of a gun; for e.g. the entire south american continent in the 19th century and much of the world in the second half of the 20th. This is not free trade, but mercantilism. It is the cronyish collusion of corporations with government to subjugate other nations. So we haven't really *tried* free trade yet.

Re: Free Trade with oppressive regimes. I'll agree that there are legitimate concerns involved with trading with oppressive regimes. Regimes that do not allow petition of grievances against government. worker organizations and that do not allow the injured to sue for redress are a real problem. Fact is, we have a lot of work to do ourselves in this department.

The alternative to trading is to engage in isolationism (as we do vs N. Korea or Iran). Ron Paul is against this (putting the lie to those that call him isolationist). The real isolationists are those who want to use economic embargos to force policies upon other nations. The harms these isolationist policies cause can be vast. Think of the 500,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis who died of disease and malnutrition under 8 years of US-led sanctions (Thanks to Bush Sr, Clinton, Albright).

Abuses by US corporations in poor countries (sweatshops etc) do need to be addressed, but we must acknowledge first that it was government granted charters that enabled them to grow without boundaries, and without personal liability. (See the film 'The Corporation'). This is an area where i think most libertarian-oriented people have a big blind spot. The thing i tell them is that corporations have government granted priveleges - not natural ones - and that we as a society have every right to re-engineer corporate law to amend their legal status.

Just one radical idea: Should corporate law allow for the manufacturing and capital assets of a corporation chartered under US law to exist outside of US borders? It only takes a shift in assumptions to find favor with the idea that the operations of a US corporation be limited to regions under US law.

(I'm arguing this idea with some big-L Libertarians right now)

Yeah, "Tragedy of the Commons". Huge topic.