ABC: Always Be Campaigning
publicity tart ron paul’s kicked it into a new gear. could i loathe this screamy hypocrite fuck any more than i do now? i’ll leave some room (for LRC, if not RP). this is exactly the sort of claptrap, “gradualist” whore material that running to the state for liberty always brings. prepare for more gimmicky illegal PR stunts from the floor of the congress, as ron paul wipes his ass with his oath to support the constitution.
How a President Can Really Liberate People
Posted by Lew Rockwell at September 27, 2007 08:11 AM
Not with bombs and machineguns, but with liberty. Ron Paul has proposed legislation to free the tipped, that is, to make all tips earned by waitresses, cabdrivers, hairdressers, and others–now an excuse for spying and theft–tax free. As he said yesterday:
“Madam Speaker, I rise to help millions of working Americans by introducing the Tax Free Tips Act. As the title suggests, this legislation makes tips exempt from federal income and payroll taxes. Tips often compose a substantial portion of the earnings of waiters, waitresses, and other service-sector employees. However, unlike regular wages, a service-sector employee usually has no guarantee of, or legal right to, a tip. Instead, the amount of a tip usually depends on how well an employee satisfies a client. Since the amount of taxes one pays increases along with the size of tip, taxing tips punishes workers for doing a superior job!
“Many service-sector employers are young people trying to make money to pay for their education, or single parents struggling to provide for their children. Oftentimes, these workers work two jobs in hopes of making a better life for themselves and their families. The Tax Free Tips Act gives these hard-working Americans an immediate pay raise. People may use this pay raise to devote more resources to their children’s, or their own, education, or to save for a home, retirement, or to start their own businesses.
“Helping Americans improve themselves by reducing their taxes will make our country stronger. I, therefore, hope all my colleagues will join me in cosponsoring the Tax Free Tips Act.”
one of you astoundingly ignorant RP lunatics want to explain to me where in the US constitution RP finds the “delegated” power to favor one class of workers over another? this bastardized bullshit masquerading as “liberty” is not only illegal (see, as usual, the tenth amendment), but pure socialism. somebody please point me to the part of the US constitution allowing this putrid stunt. go ahead, fuckers. i’ll wait right here. oh, and explain to me how the disincentive against tipped workers is fundamentally different from that of any other tax victim fighting the standard IRS penalty for success. i fucking retired from IT consulting at 40, against my will, because i was getting raped by fedgoons, and i’m going to listen to dipshit ron “what a guy” paul preen over waiters as if they’re an exclusively tortured class? somebody please tell me it’s an onion article. can’t take much more of this bizarro world bullshit.
when ron paul wants to make up his mind that he’s going to follow the constitution, instead of blathering lip service dreck about it at every campaign stop, i’ll pull back a stop or two of my loathing for him (but not for his insane/stupid supporters prancing about as pristine saviors of the universe). what’s next — a “law” releasing women from all tax liability? “oh, they work so hard!” fucking social engineer puke.
goddamn, but i hate ron paul. eat me, you full of shit poser. you too, publicity whore lew rockwell. cannot fucking believe how low these dog and pony showbirds have sunk. never would have predicted it. sucker was i.
September 27th, 2007 at 16:56
I had thoughts along similar if somewhat less vitriolic lines when I read that. I was definitely disappointed: I really thought (you would say hoped against evidence) that RP was a man of more consistent principle than that. He really exposes himself as a politician with that move, and lest there be any doubt, that is not meant as a compliment.
Even so, he towers over the rest of the candidates, and even with this obvious bit of BS (you’ve absolutely called it for what it is) the gap between him and everybody else has hardly narrowed.
One thing it should do, though, is put everybody on heightened alert. If he’s willing to stoop to something like this, I’m sure we can think of plenty more “tactics” that might win him a few votes from some quarters even as he loses a few of his principled supporters. (Actually, the political calculus behind such moves is probably correct: among those of his principled supporters who are likely to vote, who else could they possibly favor that is currently running? But isn’t that the way common politicians think?)
On a more hopeful note, maybe this will cause some of his supporters to see him in a more realistic light and adjust their expectations accordingly. Otherwise, they’re setting themselves up for major disillusionment if they’re expecting strict adherence to a coherent set of principles.
But notwithstanding his faults, do you doubt he would or even could be worse than the current administration or anybody else currently in the race? (And believe me, I agree with you that the best solution would be no state. But a smaller, less powerful, and less intrusive state would be an improvement over the present, and I think that’s the hope, flawed though the reality may be, that RP brings.)
September 27th, 2007 at 22:06
a more realistic light
preferably not halo shaped.
But notwithstanding his faults, do you doubt he would or even could be worse than the current administration or anybody else currently in the race?
this is the wall of depleted uranium i’m regularly butting my head into when discussing ron paul with his fans. US politics are hardly so simple as the premise upon which the vaunted RP presidency rests. sadly, i may have already written about this as fluently as i’m able. not that it matters. just pisses me off to see such addled naivete in denial of history and obvious human tendencies. ron paul is just one guy, and many of the miniscule group supporting him are socialists. how many truly support what ron paul says he stands for? easily less than 1% of the people in the US. that sure as fuck does not a political movement make. mass support drives politics; not the reverse.
i see no chance that a ron paul presidency would be anything but disastrous for liberty. not that i care that much, frankly, because i consider this piece of shit joint wrecked thoroughly already. he will not, however, be able to accomplish a damned thing that won’t end in even stronger backlash. assuming he does even a tenth of what he says he’ll do (fantastic lunacy when it does reach beyond word games tantamount to nothingness), the socialists/fascists will ensure that his administration goes down in history as an embarrassment, which will be chalked up as “liberty failure”. if they do not, you can be sure he didn’t rock the boat worth a shit.
either way, and i’ve said it many times elsewhere, there’s sound logic and history behind the proposition that a hillary clinton presidency (scarily, one becoming less abhorrent to the neocon set) would do more to slow the totalitarian onslaught than RP. here, i must pause to allow any dumbshits reading this to collect themselves, as i remind them that the constitutional US presidency is not a vacuum or dictatorship, and that there’s not much RP would be allowed to accomplish, whether he’s constitutional. how is it that bill clinton, supreme socialist asshole, lorded an 8-year reign that was, beyond the rhetoric, ultimately far more conducive to liberty than that of the supposed “conservative” guy george w. dumbass bush? not that it matters beyond intellectually, but RP fanatics had better pull their heads out of their asses and recognize that US politics are interactive, and rarely anything but opposite of campaign rhetoric. RP is not an exception to this disgustingly obvious truth; he’s probably the one it applies to the most right now.
if RP dipshits are serious about slowing the encroachment of the state via the state (ha!), they’ll shift their aim to electing a rabid socialist lunatic (e.g., obama) as president and a rabid RINO congress. there are many complexities to consider (if anyone cares) — including the likelihood that a demosplat president would overcompensate militarily so he doesn’t look like a pussy to the nimrod american public mass — but i see nothing in favor of assuming an RP presidency would deliver on his rhetorical claims. until the RP doiks deal with that reality, they are swimming in the lowest pool of the multi-tiered lagoon of embarrassing, unthinking sludge.
September 29th, 2007 at 15:20
MF’er doesn’t read his own website.
December 27th, 2007 at 02:27
Is the saltypig dipshit serious about slowing the encroachment of the state via this blog (ha!)?
December 27th, 2007 at 02:59
quote. copy and paste.