Republican nominations - Page 252

On January 11 2012 03:07 kwizach wrote:

Ron Paul offers simplistic solutions to complex issues. His solutions would not work, but that doesn't prevent them from sounding appealing to people not familiar enough with the problems.

On January 11 2012 03:08 kwizach wrote:

Could you please provide a link to that interview? I'd like to read/see it.

Ron Paul also proposes to introduce into the economy a dose of non-cash currency, pegged to the value of raw materials. "It's a huge step backwards. It is up to the debates of the seventeenth century", criticizes Céline Antonin. "Commodities are very volatile and would be a constant source of economic uncertainty," she worried. A proposal all the more surprising, she says, that "the dollar is the most stable currency the world."

On January 11 2012 03:10 bOneSeven wrote:


Come on dude, the complexity of our problems were done by intelligent design from the people in power or the lackeys of the people in power ... Or so I believe to say the least . It strikes my as extreemly odd how economics is a huge and complex field , same goes for politics . It shouldn't be like that .... imo ..

On January 11 2012 03:15 Biff The Understudy wrote:

I'm afraid it's in french:

http://www.lemonde.fr/elections-americaines/article/2011/12/22/le-programme-anti-systeme-de-ron-paul-seduit-les-americains_1621656_829254.html

Most important French newspaper. It's in penultimate paragraph. My translation:

On January 11 2012 03:10 bOneSeven wrote:


Come on dude, the complexity of our problems were done by intelligent design from the people in power or the lackeys of the people in power ... Or so I believe to say the least . It strikes my as extreemly odd how economics is a huge and complex field , same goes for politics . It shouldn't be like that .... imo ..

On January 11 2012 03:25 aksfjh wrote:

Yea, and math should be all straight arithmetic. Oh, and books should always just get straight to the end, none of that metaphor nonsense! While we're at it, every game of BW and SC2 should just be worker rushes. All this complicated nonsense doesn't make sense, everything ought to be simple!

Seriously, though, economics is the study of psychology, sociology, mathematics, biology, history, and many more subjects. It's all rolled into a single subject to determine how people live and survive without directly creating/finding the materials to do so. If it were as simple as you suspect it to be, monkeys, dolphins, and whales would all be bartering with us.

On January 11 2012 03:35 bOneSeven wrote:
Punctuation ... really ? I'm not writing an essay for school here... Skip my posts anyways if you are "more" annoyed , make your life better , stop picking on such things ..

On January 11 2012 03:07 frogrubdown wrote:


There is no distinction between truth in math and logic and truth in science. Tarski's semantic conception of truth works well enough for both. The fields do have different methods for justifying truths, but that's a different thing entirely.

I didn't say what you are implying in your first paragraphs. Macroeconomics and politics in manner of running huge states should be pretty simple imo , I don't see any reason to complexify it , again I say , it's my opinion that it has been made really complex so the common man wouldn't get in such topics , and so , they would have no influence in what goes on.

On January 11 2012 04:02 xDaunt wrote:
I wonder how many times that the evolution debate has shit up this thread since it was started? I'll put the over/under at 4.5 times.

Seeing Newt's new ads and lines of attack against Romney is rather disheartening. I don't think that a socialist democrat could have done a better job.

On January 11 2012 04:04 Biff The Understudy wrote:

Maybe you got used to it, for for a European, the simple idea that someone who believes in fairy tales and claims it can run for the presidency of a major super power is really something extraordinary. Someone who would say he believes the Genesis is to be taken literally would be laughed at by 12 years old in my country. So imagine the president.

Ron Paul has a lot of racist supporters, including white supremacist website Stormfront, conspiracy theorist group the John Birch Society and neo-Confederates who believe that the South was right during the civil war. And the support is mutual. While Paul would like you to believe that his connection to racism ended with his newsletters, he has continued to address this group well into the 21st century. Take a look at Ron Paul’s top 10 most-racist supporters.


10. Willis Carto

Willis Carto is a holocaust denier, Hitler admirer and a white supremacist. A former campaigner for segregationist candidate George Wallace, Carto founded the National Alliance with William Pierce, the author of the “Turner Diaries,” which is credited for inspiring Timothy McVeigh. Carto founded the Populist Party in 1984 and ran David Duke as a presidential candidate. Carto also founded the American Free Press, which is labeled as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), where Paul’s column runs. Paul has not sued Carto for running his column or explained how it wound up in a white supremacist publication. The New York Times writes that Paul used the subscription list to a white supremacist publication of Carto’s to solicit donations.


9. Chuck Baldwin

Chuck Baldwin is a neo-Confederate New World Order conspiracy theorist who praises the confederacy and its leaders, Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, and calls the Civil War the “War of Northern Aggression.” Baldwin writes a weekly column on the white supremacist site Vdare and is a proud supporter of American militia movements. Baldwin is also an Islamaphobe and homophobe.

Not only did Baldwin endorse Paul for president in 2007, but Paul returned the favor, endorsing Baldwin, who he calls his “friend,” for president in 2008. While Paul was quick to criticize Michele Bachmann for her Islamaphobia, he has said nothing about Baldwin’s, the man he endorsed for president. Here are some choice quotes from Baldwin:

"I believe homosexuality is moral perversion and deserves no special consideration under the law.
I believe the South was right in the War Between the States, and I am not a racist.
I believe there is a conspiracy by elitists within government and big business to steal America’s independence.
The Muslim religion has been a bloody, murderous religion since its inception."


8. Don Black

Don Black is a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, a current member of the American Nazi Party, and the owner and operator of the white supremacist site Stormfront. Black regularly organizes “money bombs” for Ron and Rand Paul and has even taken a picture with Ron Paul, who refused to return donations from Black and Stormfront even with the political tradition of not accepting donations from people who seem unfit. Black, who was sentenced to three years in jail for trying to overthrow the Caribbean country of Dominica in 1981, supports Paul through his Twitter account and on message boards for Stormfront.

Black told the New York Times that it was Paul’s newsletters that inspired him to be a supporter:

That was a big part of his constituency, the paleoconservatives who think there are race problems in this country.


7. Lew Rockwell

Lew Rockwell is a close friend and adviser of Paul’s who served as his congressional chief of staff between 1978 and 1982, worked as a paid consultant for Paul for more than 20 years, and was an editor and alleged ghost writer for his racist newsletters. Rockwell formed the Ludwig Von Mises Institute, which Paul still has a close working relationship with.

The Ludwig Von Mises Institute is listed by the SPLC as a neo-Confederate organization. They also add that Rockwell said that the Civil War “transformed the American regime from a federalist system based on freedom to a centralized state that circumscribed liberty in the name of public order” and that the Civil Rights Movement was the “involuntary servitude” of (presumably white) business owners. Rockwell was listed as one of the racist League of the South’s founding members but denies membership. Rockwell regularly posts articles on his website, attacking a New World Order conspiracy.



6. David Duke

David Duke is a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan and candidate for Governor of Louisiana. Duke is also a New World Order conspiracy theorist who believes that Jews control the Federal Reserve. On his website, Duke proudly boasts about the endorsements and kind words that Paul gave him in his newsletters and in turn endorses Paul for president:

Duke’s platform called for tax cuts, no quotas, no affirmative action, no welfare, and no busing…
To many voters, this seems like just plain good sense. Duke carried baggage from his past, the voters were willing to overlook that. If he had been afforded the forgiveness an ex-communist gets, he might have won.
…David Broder, also of the Post and equally liberal, writing on an entirely different subject, had it right: ‘No one wants to talk about race publicly, but if you ask any campaign consultant or pollster privately, the sad reality that a great many working-class and middle class white Americans are far less hostile to the rich and their tax breaks than they are to the poor and minorities with their welfare and affirmative action programs.”
Liberals are notoriously blind to the sociological effects of their own programs. David Duke was hurt by his past. How many more Dukes are waiting in the wings without such a taint?
“Duke lost the election,” it said, “but he scared the blazes out of the Establishment.” In 1991, a newsletter asked, “Is David Duke’s new prominence, despite his losing the gubernatorial election, good for anti-big government forces?” The conclusion was that “our priority should be to take the anti-government, anti-tax, anti-crime, anti-welfare loafers, anti-race privilege, anti-foreign meddling message of Duke, and enclose it in a more consistent package of freedom.”
Duke also gave advice to Paul on his website, saying:

What must Paul do to have any real chance of winning or making a bigger impact? I think he should do exactly what I did in Louisiana, and for Ron Paul to follow exactly the same advice Ron Paul gave in his newsletters for others, take up my campaign issues with passion and purpose.

Could it be that Paul is taking Duke’s advice by hiding the racist “baggage from his past” in a more consistent package of “freedom?”



5. Thomas DiLorenzo

Thomas DiLorenzo is another neo-Confederate who believes the South was right in the the civil war and that Abraham Lincoln was a wicked man who destroyed states’ rights. DiLorenzo is listed as an affiliated scholar with the racist League of the South, which promotes segregation and a new southern secession. Paul invited DiLorenzo to testify before congress about the Federal Reserve and is close friends with Paul and works for the Ludwig Von Mises Instiute. Paul cited DiLorezno’s book when telling Tim Russert that the North should not have fought the Civil War.



4. James Von Brunn

James Von Brunn was a white supremacist and anti-Semite who opened fired at the Holocaust museum, killing an African-American security guard. Von Brunn was an avid Paul supporter who posted a message on the Ron Paul Yahoo Group, saying, “HITLER’S WORST MISTAKE: HE DIDN’T GAS THE JEWS.” In 1983, Von Brunn was convicted of kidnapping members of the Federal Reserve Board, a common target of Paul’s, and was sentenced to six years in prison.Von Brunn died while awaiting sentencing for his crime.



3. William Alexander “Bill” White

Bill White is a neo-Nazi who is a former member of of the neo-Nazi group the National Socialist Movement and founder of his own Nazi group, the National Socialist Worker’s Movement. He has called for the lynching of the Jena 6 and the assassination of NAACP leaders. White previously campaigned for Pat Buchanan and the Reform party. This year, White was convicted of threatening a juror but then freed by a judge who called the threats free speech. White is a former Ron Paul supporter who became disenfranchised with Paul, when a Paul spokesman called white supremacy “a small ideology.” Here is what White wrote about Paul on a popular white supremacist website:

I have kept quiet about the Ron Paul campaign for a while, because I didn’t see any need to say anything that would cause any trouble. However, reading the latest release from his campaign spokesman, I am compelled to tell the truth about Ron Paul’s extensive involvement in white nationalism.
Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review, and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, usually on Wednesdays. This is part of a dinner that was originally organized by Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis and Joe Sobran, and has since been mostly taken over by the Council of Conservative Citizens.
I have attended these dinners, seen Paul and his aides there, and been invited to his offices in Washington to discuss policy.
For his spokesman to call white racialism a “small ideology” and claim white activists are “wasting their money” trying to influence Paul is ridiculous. Paul is a white nationalist of the Stormfront type who has always kept his racial views and his views about world Judaism quiet because of his political position.
I don’t know that it is necessarily good for Paul to “expose” this. However, he really is someone with extensive ties to white nationalism and for him to deny that in the belief he will be more respectable by denying it is outrageous – and I hate seeing people in the press who denounce racialism merely because they think it is not fashionable
Bill White, Commander
American National Socialist Workers Party

Ron Paul has not sued White for libel, which would be in his rights to do if White’s statement’s were lies. White is out of jail and has not lost credibility in the white supremacist world, writing for the neo-Nazi website the American Free Press and the same paper that used to carry Paul’s column.



2. Richard Poplawski

Richard Poplawski is a neo-Nazi from Pittsburgh who regularly posted on the neo-Nazi website Stormfront. Poplawski would post videos of Ron Paul talking about FEMA camp conspiracy theories with Glenn Beck.

Polawski was afraid of a government conspiracy to take away people’s guns and wound up killing three police officers who came to his house after his mother made a domestic dispute call.



1. Jules Manson

Jules Manson was a failed politician from Carson, Calif. Mason was also a big Paul supporter who would write, “I may be an athiest, but Ron Paul is my God,” on Paul’s website. Manson would also write, “Assassinate that n*gger and his family of monkeys,” of President Barack Obama.

This is not guilty by association. Ron Paul has spread white supremacy on conspiracy theories for years in his newsletters. The racism and conspiracy theories have driven some people to violence. Not only have Ron Paul’s racist supporters endorsed him and his views, he has endorsed them through his positions on the Civil War and the Civil Rights movement, without disavowing the support he gets from racists. This is guilt by racism.

On January 11 2012 03:39 GGTeMpLaR wrote:


Most of scientific "truth" is reliant on inductive reasoning, which never guarantees absolute certainty. Confirmation after confirmation of a certain law just gives an increasingly stronger probability of it's truth. There isn't much deductive reasoning in science, aside from making directly observable facts* (using Carnap's definition of facts), which makes it a different ball game from math and logic (in the deductive sense).

On January 11 2012 04:22 frogrubdown wrote:


That is largely just a restatement of what I said. It is the same thing for a scientific theory and a mathematical theorem to be true, but there are different methods for discovering those truths. Your citation of Carnap maybe indicates that you disagree with even this (maybe you think mathematical truths are based on meaning alone [are analytic] whereas as scientific truths are not). I don't agree with that, but yes that is a different view.

In any case, although the methods are different I don't think it amounts to very much when it comes to certainty. People make mistakes in math and logic all the time, just as they do in empirical matters. I know quite a lot of math and logic, but if certainty is something that absolutely and necessarily eludes all of science, then I am also not certain about any math and logic.

To summarize my view:

A) Truth is the same thing in math/logic and science.

B) Science typically uses different methods than math/logic to get at the truths in its domain.

C) There is no in principal difference in the certainty with which we can know the truths that follow from the different methods.

On January 11 2012 04:13 xDaunt wrote:


Well, yeah ... of course Europeans are going to have a difference perspective on religion given that their extensive history of butchering each other over religion. America has just a slightly different historical experience -- being founded as a refuge from the religious wars and intolerance in Europe.

On January 11 2012 04:26 Krikkitone wrote:


A "True" scientific theory can be false. a "True" mathematical theorem cannot.