Ron Paul seems to be cool!

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Paul is an isolationist? I thought isolationists opposed free trade... Does the fact most of the countries in the world dont go around invading each other make them "isolationists"? He doesn't believe the US military exists to police the world, we have his opponents to thank for 9/11

using isolationist as a smear

Out of NATO. Out of the UN. Out of the WTO. Out of NAFTA.

What do you call him? A home body?

[Berzerker]

Isolationists dont support free trade, one of your labels aint even logical. You're trying to avoid that reality by telling us we have to belong to the laughably corrupt UN which we do alot of bleeding for or suffer your label of isolationist. **** the UN. NAFTA aint free trade and the WTO does infringe upon national sovereignty and federalism. According to your logic, avoiding the label of isolationist requires violating the oath to uphold the Constitution and participation in stupid deals with other nations. If I come up with a really stupid deal for Canadians, are they isolationists for rejecting it?

[notyoueither]

And he doesn't in any real sense besides lip service either.

You can say you want free trade and good relations all you want, but when you are against all trade agreements and international bodies for cooperation you're selling your face.

And if you think it's all stacked against the US, you're pretty foolish.

Cattle. Lumber. Wheat. Immigration.

What ****ing free trade?!

The US requires assured access to our resources to allow us to have an illusion of free trade. Meanwhile, your Congress and administration do whatever the **** they please regardless.

Get a ****ing grip, dude. Have a look at something outside the vacinity of your own sphincter sometime.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Berzerker
If I come up with a really stupid deal for Canadians, are they isolationists for rejecting it?

Your guys did come up with what turned out to be a really stupid deal for Canada and our morons did sign it.

Looking forward to the US releasing us from the provisions of the arrangement that assure access to resources.

Pipelines to the Pacific and Atlantic are all of a sudden very real, and large projects.

[Berzerker]

I'll let you argue with yourself

You can say you want free trade and good relations all you want, but when you are against all trade agreements and international bodies for cooperation you're selling your face.

What ****ing free trade?!

The US requires assured access to our resources to allow us to have an illusion of free trade. Meanwhile, your Congress and administration do whatever the **** they please regardless.

Get a ****ing grip, dude. Have a look at something outside the vacinity of your own sphincter sometime.

So these agreements aren't free trade, and thats why he opposes them. Here you are whining about how Canada is treated under these deals and you call him an isolationist for opposing the same deals. Spare me the hypocrisy and juvenile insults

Your guys did come up with what turned out to be a really stupid deal for Canada and our morons did sign it.

You didn't answer my question: are they isolationists if they rejected the stupid deal?

[RGBVideo]

Originally posted by Berzerker
So these agreements aren't free trade, and thats why he opposes them. Here you are whining about how Canada is treated under these deals and you call him an isolationist for opposing the same deals. Spare me the hypocrisy and juvenile insults

Congratulations, you've just encountered notyoueither's primary debate tactic. For some unknown reason, he has decided that Paul is TEH SUXXORS. Since he doesn't want to disclose this, he's coming up with alternative (and obviously blatantly false) reasons for his suckiness. It doesn't really matter that they're false -- he'll just continue repeating the arguments along with yelling and cursing until they become true.

I've had the unfortunate opportunity to encounter this stonewalling debate tactic twice before. It's really frustrating because the motive for the seemingly irrational hatred is kept unknown.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by VJ
Congratulations, you've just encountered notyoueither's primary debate tactic. For some unknown reason, he has decided that Paul is TEH SUXXORS. Since he doesn't want to disclose this, he's coming up with alternative (and obviously blatantly false) reasons for his suckiness. It doesn't really matter that they're false -- he'll just continue repeating the arguments along with yelling and cursing until they become true.

I've had the unfortunate opportunity to encounter this stonewalling debate tactic twice before. It's really frustrating because the motive for the seemingly irrational hatred is kept unknown.

I already gave a perfectly good reason to oppose Ron Paul.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Paul is an isolationist? I thought isolationists opposed free trade...

Not always no.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Isolationists dont support free trade, one of your labels aint even logical. You're trying to avoid that reality by telling us we have to belong to the laughably corrupt UN which we do alot of bleeding for or suffer your label of isolationist. **** the UN. NAFTA aint free trade and the WTO does infringe upon national sovereignty and federalism. According to your logic, avoiding the label of isolationist requires violating the oath to uphold the Constitution and participation in stupid deals with other nations. If I come up with a really stupid deal for Canadians, are they isolationists for rejecting it?

If I say I agree to certain wars in principle, but in practice I oppose EVERY one, on one ground or another, can I be called a pacifist? If I say I support govt regulation in principle, but in practice I oppose every govt regulation thats ever proposed, can I be called a libertarian?

Its meaningless that Ron Paul is not in principle opposed to all US alliances or participation in international organizations. That he is opposed to the organizations through which the US has expressed its international involvement since 1946, IE the UN, NATO, and the Bretton Woods organizations and the orgs that flowed from them, makes him EFFECTIVELY an isolationist in US terms.

[Imran Siddiqui]

makes him EFFECTIVELY an isolationist in US terms.

Yep... you don't have to be against free trade to be an isolationist. In American terms, a PROTECTIONIST is someone against Free Trade, not an isolationist.

[Berzerker]

Protectionism is isolationism, the former refers to a major component of isolationism - how isolationists view trade with other nations. Free traders are by definition non-isolationists because they welcome trade with all and oppose government
interference. Isolationists need government interference because people buy foreign goods and tariffs and quotas are politically do-able reactions to "convince" people to buy domestic. If free traders are going to get slammed by isolationists as globalists, its illogical for globalists to then accuse free traders of isolationism.

I've had the unfortunate opportunity to encounter this stonewalling debate tactic twice before. It's really frustrating because the motive for the seemingly irrational hatred is kept unknown.

Its just really funny to see NYE griping about Paul opposing trade deals NYE opposes too.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by VJ

Congratulations, you've just encountered notyoueither's primary debate tactic. For some unknown reason, he has decided that Paul is TEH SUXXORS. Since he doesn't want to disclose this, he's coming up with alternative (and obviously blatantly false) reasons for his suckiness. It doesn't really matter that they're false -- he'll just continue repeating the arguments along with yelling and cursing until they become true.

I've had the unfortunate opportunity to encounter this stonewalling debate tactic twice before. It's really frustrating because the motive for the seemingly irrational hatred is kept unknown.

No. I was venting.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Berzerker

I've had the unfortunate opportunity to encounter this stonewalling debate tactic twice before. It's really frustrating because the motive for the seemingly irrational hatred is kept unknown.

Its just really funny to see NYE griping about Paul opposing trade deals NYE opposes too.

You might get a little bit annoyed with someone who says it isn't good enough when his side of a deal has bent your side of the deal over and is driving.

And I've said what I don't like about him. He is an isolationist. He doesn't say that, but that is what his proposed policies would amount to.

[Slade Wilson]

Thats not isolationism. Its getting out of corrupt and worthless organizations that do nothing and are infiltrated by dictators. NATO no longer has any use and should be shut down anyway. Its rather provocative to maintain it in russia's face. Its not pulling out from the international scene.

Too bad ron paul has ZERO chance of being elected.

[SlowwHand]

I lean to the position of more isolated.