Obama birth certificate finally released

[Limewater]

What we need is a government and economy run by the people.

You post all the time about how stupid everyone is, but you want to put them in charge of the government?

[Hatta]

If by "an ideal president" you mean an accomplished liar, then yes.

[MrPopo]

If by "an ideal president" you mean an accomplished liar, then yes.

If honesty were introduced to politics the whole system would collapse. Look, we know that our leaders are going to lie. Would you rather have someone who lies well or someone who lies poorly?

[deathclaw]

I can't believe they were stupid enough to release it as a lossy JPG. Nothing wrong with TIFF.

And, as I said elsewhere Ron Paul will take away abortion rights. He'd also abolish important regulatory agencies like OSHA. I don't know about you, but I rather value my freedom to work in non-hazardous environments.

What libertarians ignore is that economic power will fill the void left by a shrinking government. It's hard enough standing up to major corporations as it is. If we let them off their leash, we won't have a chance. Chomsky has a relevant quote:

Now why against government? Well, government has a defect. It's not that governments don't do bad things, but that's not what they're worried about. They have a defect. The defect of governments is that they are -- they can be influenced by the public. They're potentially democratic, and that's the unacceptable defect of government. So, you have to demonize government and shift power more and more into the hands of private tyrannies, which are totally unaccountable.

What we have today is a government and economy run by corporations. What Paul would give us is a smaller government, run more efficiently (for their own interests) by corporations. What we need is a government and economy run by the people.

Unfortunately, such a thing is impossible in the US. The last time we had a serious socialist run for president he was imprisoned. These days they wouldn't even have to go that far, it would be impossible for any socialist to raise the kinds of funds needed to run for president without corporate support.

This is another one of many fallacies. If only people read and listened more, not very many people could stand a chance against Ron Paul.

I know labor unions are not the same as government but you see government taking care of you just like the unions try to. So in this sense, it's the same, there would not be much difference if you replaced words "laber unions" by "government" http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=511

Just look at the reality. Where - throughout the entire history - have been people better of, where government was trying to protect them from "greedy" corporations, or where the greedy corporations were relatively free, as long as they they didn't break laws (that were not so rigid).

Freedom looks like tyranny to you. Our communist leaders 22 years ago were telling us the same, The USA was the land of tyranny and there was a huge propaganda against it. Nothing could be farther from truth, ordinary people were way better of there than here, when the goverment was trying to do everything to "protect" us from our own choices.

Just look at the freest countries of today - Hong Kong and Singapore. Do you really think the people there suffer from free labor laws, and so on? On the contrary. Thanks to freedom, these countries made it to rich and prosperous countries from poor third world countries in just one generation. The GDP per capita of Singapore is greater than the GDP of the USA, while the GDP per capita of Hong-Kong is just below the USA.

[YoshiEgg25]

Ron Paul's libertarian views go against everything I stand for as an authoritarian.

Which is why he will be the last person I vote for in an election.

[Hatta]

I know labor unions are not the same as government

Labor unions are actually quite preferable to government, in that they are voluntary associations. Are libertarians against voluntary associations now?

Edit
Isn't collective bargaining kind of part and parcel of the free market? If I get 1000 of my friends together and say to a vendor "We'll buy a ton of stuff from you if you can meet these conditions", that's taking advantage of the supply and demand mechanisms of the market. If I get 1000 of my friends together and say "we won't work for you unless you can meet these conditions", that's taking advantage of the supply and demand mechanisms of the market. How is that a problem?
End Edit

Anyways, your link is complete bunk. Once again libertarians forget that economic power is political power. The labor market is not an ideal free market where you can take your ball and go home if you don't like the terms. If I don't work, I don't eat. That is coercive power unmatched by government. Even if I kill someone, I still get to eat.

Freedom looks like tyranny to you.

I'm willing to accept the tyranny of laws against assault in order to gain the freedom from being punched in the face. Similarly, I'm willing to accept the tyranny of safety regulations in order to gain the freedom to work in a safe environment.

Now, you'd be right to point out here that many regulations do not make us safer. There are bad regulations, and poorly enforced regulations. What we need to do is fix that, not throw our hands up and give up.

Our communist leaders 22 years ago

Sure, authoritarian communism is bad. Worse than what we have in the US for sure. But our corporate oligarchy isn't the ultimate form of government either. There's still a lot of improving to be done.

Just look at the freest countries of today - Hong Kong and Singapore.

Uh, you can't even chew gum in Singapore. Drug trafficking is a capital offense. Are you serious?

[YoshiEgg25]

Just look at the freest countries of today - Hong Kong and Singapore.

Uh, you can't even chew gum in Singapore. Drug trafficking is a capital offense. Are you serious?

I think I remember reading somewhere that littering is a felony there.

[Breetai]

That part still exists in the .pdf file. It is not a jpeg compression issue. However, my question about the pattern in the background has been solved.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default ... g-form.pdf

Actually, the image in the pdf you link to there has been jpeg compressed.

Why would the White House post up a jpg image, translated to pdf? The White House sucks.

Pulling all forces back to the US would be a stupid move. If we do that, then our enemies will come over here to fight us.

This does not logically follow. If we don't get involved in a civil war in Libya, the Libyans will all gang up and invade the United States?

I am having a hard time seeing this.

It may sound rather uncaring towards other nations, but the president should America first. And that's not what Ron Paul would do.

Show a country you care. Invade it.

I've got to agree here. Why would people invade a country that mainly keeps to itself? Yes, it happens, but the US media keeps saying that "Islamic extremists/terrorists" want to destroy American because of what it stands for. What does it stand for? Freedom? Well then why don't they want to invade places like Canada, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, Switzerland, etc.? Perhaps because those countries generally keep to themselves and don't have a habit of invading a few countries every decade. Just a thought.

Really interesting comment. The last terrorist attack here was almost 10 years ago. It was successful in 1 place. New York. And this is a huge country.

The people working at the Pentagon 10 years ago might have something to tell you.

And in my opinion, it's a stupid move to have troops stretched all over the world while not having enough at home. I think having them at your homeland would be really America first.

Exactly. How is America's healthcare and education systems working out? How are the poverty and employment levels? They are all falling. Perhaps spending a lot less on invading other countries and working on your own might be a good idea. That seems to be a large part of Ron Paul is about.

[Breetai]

Uh, you can't even chew gum in Singapore. Drug trafficking is a capital offense. Are you serious?

Not that I'm talking about freedom in Singapore, but those things are good overall. Crime is very low as a result (partially, at least) of extremely harsh drug penalties, and.... have you ever been to Singapore? It's quite possibly the cleanest place in the world. I love that city.

How is the drug-related crime rate in the US? Legalizing Mary Jane wouldn't change it. That's the least of the problems.

[Hatta]

Exactly. How is America's healthcare and education systems working out? How are the poverty and employment levels? They are all falling. Perhaps spending a lot less on invading other countries and working on your own might be a good idea. That seems to be a large part of Ron Paul is about.

Paul is about spending less on invading other countries AND spending less on improving our own country. Look at this. He would close the department of education, force school prayer on unwilling students, fund demonstrably ineffective abstinence only sex-ed,and force tax payers to pay for religious education.

How is the drug-related crime rate in the US?

So far there have been half a million people assaulted by our government because of drugs. Legalization would absolutely change that.