God Rick Perry is a fucktard.

I also really wish we just let the financial sector crumble to pieces instead of dumping a bunch of money into them. At least the loans to the automakers seem to be at least an attempt to invest the public money in a good investment. They make an actual product at least.

The financial institutions in our country are fucking despicable, rampant speculation with little fear of failure being punished. An obscene fixation on stock prices instead of actual ability for a a company to produce a useful product or services. Bleh.

The "regulations" in the bankruptcy market do not prohibit entities facing bankruptcy to accept offers of bail-outs. Whether the entities offering the bail-outs are entitled to do so is covered by other areas of law, not bankruptcy.

As for Perry and that obscene cheer that came up when talking about how many people Texas has executed:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann

Seriously fuck that douche, he should be in jail.

Ron Paul is indeed a total nut. However, most of the time he is consistent and as much as I hate to admit he is the only candidate that stands for what the Tea Party claims are their values. I will also point out that Paul came in a very close 2nd in Iowa and sold about 30% fewer tickets than Bachman and the media basically ignored him. I am also not sure how he would get anything done being so unwilling to compromise. Obama can't get anything done giving 80% to the republicans; does Paul think he is going to get something done giving 0% to the dems? If the US were to adopt even half of the policies Paul proposed, it would still represent the most dramatic shift in US policy in a single presidency ever. Not saying good or bad, just huge.

Ironically, one of the things he proposes that he probably could do, is recall troops stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan, a policy supported by more democrats than republicans.

I just worry about anyone who wants to rebuild our government on objectivist principles.

I'm not sure how you can call Ron Paul a total nut; but I agree with the rest of what you said.

Skrum; I think the point that Ron was making is that the bail outs should not exist so that the bankruptcy laws can work properly.

Also the current bankruptcy laws are not uniform or consistent. I believe that even during the Lehman bankruptcy the government played favorites and f'ed over the senior debt. Or maybe it was GM but either way this has been done.

If Ron Paul is arguing that bailouts should not exist, he is inconsistent with a true libertarian position, which is not to interfere if a second party wants to help a third party.

Well I'm strictly speaking of government bailouts. Private bailouts are fine.

If Ron Paul is a constitutionalist, he should have no objection to government-initiated bailouts if they arise from an enumerated power, such as coining money and regulating its value.