Comments on: Ron Paul: Libertarianism’s Latest Love Affair with Insanity

By: DC

DC — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 23:38:06 +0000

Isolationism can never be the answer.
The world is too small for that anyway.
The reason for the distrust of the US has been the way this present presidency and the previous congress dealt with the rest of the world, not the concept of living in and dealing with the world.
You go back into your shells now the rancor will continue with no counter examples of US goodness and openness showing the world who you really are.
After 911 the world cried with you, when the taliban was toppled the world applauded. All the loss of good will, your money and a huge part of the next generation of US and Iraqi citizens occurred because of bad decisions made for the wrong reasons.
The devastation of Iraq and to the members of your armed forces are consequences you will have to come to terms with, but those effects will be multiplied if you do not engage with others on an honest bridge building basis.
The next administration has a glorious opportunity to make an immediate impression for the rest of the world. This opportunity will be lost just like that one was lost after 911 if you try and stick your head in the sand and pretend you’re not here.

By: loopyloo350

loopyloo350 — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 19:10:31 +0000

Perhaps the smell is so bad that it triggers a psycological reaction. Or maybe it triggers an inflamation that cuts off blood flow to the brain and prevents a person from reacting sanely in the situation. Or perhaps some people simply believe that you have to be insane to put yourself in the situation where you are surrounded or covered by it.

By: Angry Political Optimist

Angry Political Optimist — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:34:06 +0000

I am always fascinated by terms used in common language. “The whole nine yards” for example. Who knows that a cement truck carries a ’short load’ and a ‘full load’ and that a short load is seven cubic yards of concrete and a full load is nine cubic yards.

There is always a story involved when such terms or phrases are used so I was wondering if “bat shit insane” was a reference to rabies conveyed by exposure to bat feces with consequential mental incapacity?

The Urban Dictionary has the references http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=batshit+insane) but doesn’t go into the etymology. (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=batshit+insane&searchmode=none )

Apparently I am not the only one… http://ask.metafilter.com/34797/Holy-Shit-Batman . Along with the biological roots, we have http://www.cavetexas.org/information/rabies.html which states that no cases of aerosol transmission of rabies have been identified, whereas http://www.batcon.org/home/index.asp?idPage=91&idSubPage=62 states that two cases have been identified.

Histoplasmosis, http://www.idph.state.il.us/public/hb/hbb&bdrp.htm , doesn’t seem to affect cognitive ability.

Anyone have an idea?

By: Angry Midwesterner

Angry Midwesterner — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:40:54 +0000

He gives hope, his ideas are sound, he has principles, he is respected by his colleagues, his voting record is par excellence.

While Mr. Paul does have some good ideas (such as increased state rights, and the only consistent pro-life platform, i.e. anti-war, anti-death penalty, anti-abortion), he is also, as my New Mexican friend puts it, bat shit insane.

While I would gladly vote for Mr. Paul over Hillary, and in fact many of the “Conservative” candidates, ANM is correct in that Mr. Paul has less than an elementary school understanding of economics.

I don’t let this bother me, because unlike Ron “DON’T TOUCH MY STUFF” Paul, I understand that the President is not the monarch and thus does not have supreme power to bend the country and constitution to his will. We’d have to elect a lot more crazies than just him to let his really weird ideas have a chance.

I would invite you to itemize the “half-truths” you claim to see in the above article. Your failure to do so only serves to prove to us that you:

1) Have no idea what you are talking about.
2) Are too afraid to pony up and make a substantial argument.
3) Are blissfully ignorant of the fact that only arguing with ad hominem makes you look stupid for utterly failing to defend your own point.
4) Doubtlessly have lost your real manhood, and so are desperately trying to fashion an internet penis of sufficient size to soothe your wounded conscience.

But please, prove me wrong. Discredit the above article with FACTS, if you dare.

By: mildlypiquedacademician

mildlypiquedacademician — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:38:48 +0000

Terri said:

###Okay, my turn. [snip]###

Cool! A rant!

By: Terri

Terri — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 11:01:39 +0000

Okay, my turn. I’m resisting itemizing your chickenshit misinformation, half-truths, and outright non-historical bullshit…it would serve no purpose at all to suggest you do some research. This is typical ‘cut and paste’ yellow journalistic drivel from a pack of ‘12 good-old-boy redneck’s’ at a tractor pull. “Wet themselves” and “meatspace”? It might improve your credibility if you dispensed with the O’Reilly school of entertainment terrorism, quit your Bush cuteness and Hannity jock impersonations. You’ve done a hatchet-job on the truth and repackaged what been said before. Yawn! Take a stab at creating an original thought. Ron Paul has done that very thing. He gives hope, his ideas are sound, he has principles, he is respected by his colleagues, his voting record is par excellence. How about targeting Hitlery and her supporters…there’s so much filth in ‘meatspace’ on her you’d ‘wet yourself’. Check out the suicide victim who shot himself in the back. Wish I could hear your screams if one of those fascists inherit Bush’s black-op mission.

By: TRM

TRM — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 13:44:07 +0000

Nice post, I have never paid any attention to him soley because of the words and actions of his supporters, some of them worry me to say the least….

By: Angry Midwesterner

Angry Midwesterner — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:50:07 +0000

and abolishing basically every form of federal tax (which would allow us to pay for our military, how exactly?).

Now here is one I can get behind. As a Christian I can’t support the fact that my tax dollars go towards killing folks.

By: loopyloo350

loopyloo350 — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:40:08 +0000

I don’t know which person I will support this time, am really listening and reading. But I will tell you this, the way our current leaders have used and abused the military, maybe we would be better off with four or eight years of someone who is an isolationist.