Ron Paul 08 (thread 2)

lt.milo

lt.milo

Active member
last thread went to hell. Lets start this one fresh. Ron Paul is in my opinion one of the last hopes for keeping America the country intended by the founding fathers of our nation. Discuss.
 
heres the deal the guy is cool and if any republican were to win i would want him but i dont agree with his socail policys so i cant support him
 
I don't agree with every single thing Ron Paul stands for. But, when you look at the bigger picture, he is the obvious best candidate.

Also I just read an article about the possibility that Ron Paul may actually become a front runner in the short future. I don't think many people consider it, but he really could be our next president. If that happened, just imagine America. The home of the free again!
 
If we can get Ron Pauls message spread to every single person in the USA, I guarantee he will be our next president. People of America want freedom and that is why this country was founded in the first place. In my opinion, Ron Paul has become a front runner already. If he wins the Texas Straw poll on sept 1, that is going to send a BIG message.

As Big Black would say, We need to DO WORK!!

Donate 25$ to his campaign whenever you can, it all adds up. Money talks.

And that other thread is fine as long as ktwo and skiierman stay the fuck out. But hey, the more the merrier!!!
 
yeah taxes RULE. do you have any comprehension of what the income tax can do to a salary? you clearly dont know his stance on abortion. its not the governments job to wipe your fucking ass so go vote for an ultra liberal socialist tool and see how that works out, this country will go bankrupt, the dollar is already losing power, electing a lib who would utterly destroy the free market seems like a great thing to doesnt it? lets all just go buy shotguns and put them in our mouths! another splendid idea. yes i know im bringing hate back into this fucking discussion but i promise it will be the last fucking time
 
are you kidding? we dont need taxes? why do you think we went through all of the trouble to make the 16 amendment. sure there is a shitload of goverment waste but ending taxes is not the answer. the answer is fedrally funded campiagns.
 
no matter how paul does in any straw poll he will not win the presidency, i know im going to catch shit for this but HES POLLING AT 3% you can never get around that NEVER.
 
1. i didint say that

2. you know nothing about Ron Paul

3. what thy fuck are federally funded campaigns and how would they help our budget?
 
Federal funded campiagns means that politicians no longer have to ask for money from people, so they dont have to promise companies millions in kick backs, in return for money for them to get elected.

I admit i do not know very much about ron paul, I have read sevral articles on him, but thats it. i just cant support him because i differ from him on too many things. I do think he is right on alot of things though, like i said he is the best republican but not the best candidate.
 
i really like edwards but he wont win either, therefore obama is the best candidate.

btw i hate hillary she sucks and would be horrible liked her husband but i hate her.
 
I am so sick of our prevailing two party system. As the great Dr Savage would say "its like going to a drink machine and being only able to choose from red soda and blue soda but Americans dont want soda they want orange juice or milk..."

its time for a new party to throw off the two party system or at least for a large party realignment
 
if we kicked all of the illegal immigrants out the country would stop.

if you have read the book freakonomics you would know this.

In wisconson (dont remember exact place) the fbi was called in to deport all illegal immigrants but soon the state wanted them to leave the reason. To many businesses coudnt stay open because to many things coudnt be done. Illegal immigrants work in shit jobs americans woudnt do! dont kick them out, legalize them make them pay taxes!
 
how would all of the fruit be picked? farmers woudnt get the fruit picked and it would rot, they wcoudnt afford shit and would go on welfare. them not being able to afford stuff like tractors would mean less tractors being sold which would put more people out of work which would put more people on welfare.

how would it not stop the economy.

every action has consquences, think about it
 
no you dont. wait, you might because your a total fucking moron and only a total fucking moron would think any liberal would help out any farmer or any farm community.
 
no, I'm fine with it. this guy is smarter than you and a lot more humble than all you haters.

i think youre fucked up because you have no compassion for your fellow man.
 
you have some ok ideas, but you are really misinformed on things. Every consquence has actions and you just dont realize that.

i bet you wanted the war in iraq in the begining and thought saddam supported al queda. because you cant figure things out for your self, someone told you about ron paul so you read up on him. and he sounded really good, but you never stopped to think for your self, and relize the truth
 
Whooooah chill out.

no need to attack liberals in general. Liberal and conservative are really general terms. One can be liberal but still have a few conservative views.

If you're smart, you'll understand that there needs to be a balance. Stop being such a biased neanderthal.
 
But yes, illegal immigration SUCKS. I'm missing the voting age limit by a little more than a half of a year only...fuck. I'd definitely vote for Mr. Paul.

plus having a first name for both first and last name is awesome.
 
I have one quick question.

Without the I.R.S. how the fuck would the government get ANY revenue? Wouldn't that mean that the government would basically just wither and die?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but thats the way I perseive (sp?) it.
 
thats exactly what i meant when i said i didnt like him because he was against taxes. how would we have anything? does he want anarchy?
 
You are a fucking idiot, he will never win, no matter what. If he ran as a democrat or independent no one would care, but he ran as a repub and everyone gets their panties in a bunch. If he ran as an independent he would get less than 2% of the vote. The gold standard, are fucking joking me? Seriously? That alone should make you not vote for him. Libertarians are fine, but they will never rule the most powerful country in the world, the two are mutally exclusive. In summation, he is not a breath of fresh air, he is just going repub to seem contrarian and get votes, since he wouldn't if he was independent or demo.
 
his stance on the iraq stuff i support wholly. however, the monetary stuff is just insane. abolishing the IRS and federal income tax would leave the government with no source of revenue, and would leave all government positions as solely volunteer positions, or the government would just seize up entirely. and the gold standard? where the hell are we going to get enough gold to back every single dollar in circulation right now? i'm pretty sure the gold standard got kicked because it just wasnt practical for such a large scale economy as ours. people say he doesn't flip flop on issues, huh? granted this is taken from wikipedia so its not exactly a scholarly article but, he's opposed to abortion and capital punishment, but then in the last part of the sentence, it says he believes that both issues should be reserved for the states to decide upon? sure he may say he's against it, but really, policy-wise, he's indifferent because he feels the states should have their own say under states rights. dude's all sorts of confused.
 
Dude, if he doesn't do extremely well in the Texas straw poll, it will send a big message. He's FROM Texas so if he doesn't win, then he should just say fuck it and pack it up. And a thread will stay legit as long as you don't act like a fucking jackass insulting everyone with the slightest difference from what you believe. Eleven has proved that you can have a legit thread of political, and even conspiracy value and have it stay on topic. So keep your immature personal attacks out and it should do fine.
 
With that said, Ron Paul will be fun to watch campaign and to see what happens. I'm still thinking he won't get the Republican seat, but hey, he could do well.
 
I think it will be because he is from Texas, and that they supposidly loved him down there. So if he has no support from people who know how he works, then what chance does he have of gaining support of people that don't? It'll be like, "oh well if he didn't do well with people that know him, then he cannot be that great afterall." You get what I'm saying?

And this was brought up in the other thread about his enviormental policies. Apparently he is opposed the the Kyoto Protocal, which in my mind is alright for now, but with the general public, it isn't. On top of that, he's also opposed to putting regulations on the auto industry to improve the gas mileage on vehicles, among other things that oppose to a majority of the general public in the green view of things.

But then again, it may not hurt him that much because enviormental policies have hardly, if ever, came up as an issue. It's been so far circulating around the war, immigration, taxes.... same old song.
 
Its

not like those policies matter. Spending

huge amounts of money on stopping Global Warming is in my opinion a damn

joke. Even to people who study Global

warming, these policies are not set up right and are just hurting the

economy.

Also,

lets not start this into an argument, I just thought I would show my side of

this.
 
It's called debating, chill out.

Anyways, that's why I said the general public. It doesn't matter what you and me think, it's what the majority of the public wants to hear. The Kyoto Protocal is something we do not need now, that's why Bush didn't join it. He pretty much said that we need to start at our own pace, and within our economy. BUT that's just turned into another thing that has worked the people against the administration, as well as other countries view of us. Again, I do not feel we need to join the Kyoto now.
 
Forget all that, this is what was followed up...

no, what's he's opposed to is the government FORCING those kinds of environmental regulations.

"there's a video somewhere where he talks about his views on the environmental issues and basically says that it should be up to the private sector to regulate. he talks about the cleaning up of the hudson river (in the 70s i think) that was accomplished with virtually no governmental involvement. instead, private citizens organized and filed lawsuits against companies that were polluting and thus potentially damaging everyone's health.

look at this way, ron paul doesn't believe in legislating environmentalism because he doesn't believe the executive branch should have the kind of power necessary to enforce such legislation. he thinks that the protection of the environment should be handled by the judicial branch acting on behalf of the private sector."

So apparently, a kid got all twisted up. He does support enviormental issues, but he doesn't want the government to regulate it. Makes more sense now.
 
i hate how people think the kyoto protocol is just a generally good thing for the environment for everyone, and anyone opposed to it just wants to destroy the earth.

the problem with the kyoto protocol - and the reason the US won't ratify it - is that it imposes NO RESTRICTIONS on some of the world's biggest polluters (China and India) and tons of restrictions on the US. it's not a fair treaty. really, it's an effort to restructure the world economy, (cleverly) disguised as an effort to save the environment. if the kyoto protocol was really about saving the environment, it would do something about, for example, the fact that a quarter of los angeles' air pollution comes from china.

 
Thank you. Look at the other countries who allow illegal immigrations. They have formed their own groups, who are devoted to gang activities. Some are even formed local terrorist groups. Not to mention the obvious which is that they do not contribute ANYTHING to our society. The only thing you could say is the cheap labor, but honestly that fails in comparison to all the negatives they cause. Kick all illegals out, fuck the corporations that actually have to pay the minimum wage now. They can afford it.
 
Well, I think taxes are alright. If my house is burning, I would like to have firemen come and put it out. Libertarians believe that privatization will help things... but I can't really see the benefits of comparing prices and deciding which private service I want when my house is burning around me. Privatization works to a point, and there are some areas of the government that do need it in order to inspire competition and better results.

However, its not bringing down the dollar. Europe is bringing it down. They finally got their shit organized and are out competing us since small independently run countries can self manage better than one huge superpower. The EU just harnesses them all without managing every step, unlike how the US government prefers to work. Basically, we're dropping because other countries are more efficient than us, not because of privatization. While privatization would help, it would not overcome the big issue here. To do that, we'd need to restructure our government in its entirety.
 
you are making his position seem a fucking lot more radical then it really is. firemen? cmon you can do better then that. also it is nice to think that europe is to blame but they are not the problem, we are trillions of dollars in debt, the fed pours money into the economy whenever shit gets a tad bit unstable and we are creating money more then ever before, kinda makes you think what the elite in charge know, it makes sense if you think about it. if the few that are in charge know when something big will happen, like a nuke or another war, or something that could greatly damage or destroy our country they might not give a fuck about us borrowing billions from china or creating money and creating inflation. who gains from the hundreds of billions we are spending on iraq? the military industrial complex thats fucking who... our currency is losing value
 
Ok, take any federal funded program. While I concede that healthcare is a sector where privatization could help, Police? I'm kinda glad our taxes fund those guys, they show up when I need them. Education? Take away state funding and you make college student fees skyrocket to the level of private colleges. All the money that people would essentially be 'saving' would just sit there and not help out our country. Sure, some of the average poor persons salary goes to funding a local state college their kids will never attend. But its the college that produces good people that will go and improve the quality of life for those poor people and make it so their kids have a chance to get a education. If you leave some things up to people, they will never fund it themselves.

Take for example the Seattle viaduct. Its crumbling. Our state needs to rebuild it. Seattle wants it built. However, instead of letting government analysts and all come in and decide what was the best way of doing things, our state left it to a vote for everyone in the county. 50% of the county doesnt even know where the fucking thing is, let alone drive on it. So of course, nobody voted to replace it. They wouldnt dare choose to pay for something they wont use. That, in essence, is why you need federal taxes. Sure, not everyone gets the benefits of the projects and services their taxes pay for. I luckily havent needed police to come and chase down an arsonist. But I still pay for them, because I do want them when I need them. I dont use a viaduct every day, or even every month. But I still want it built because it will make our city better and increase the standard of living, benefiting everyone in the county and state. Do other people see it my way? Hell no. And those people wont pay taxes unless they're forced to. You need taxes, because people are fucking selfish when it comes to their money.

Now, I know Ron Paul is not extreme, so please dont force words into my mouth.

As for the economy bit, yes, the dollar is falling for many reasons, not just one. Nowhere did I say it was strictly the EU to blame. Fuck, maybe its just time our country ceases to be a superpower. Yes, the military and war are costing us a lot, but they always have. The US has had an incredible budget for its military, and gains economic power from having it overseeing other countries. I think the state of the economy is more based in the past decisions of our president and not our economic output... but I'm not an economist, so I really cannot say for sure. It would be an outrageous claim however to assure people that one specific candidate could do more for the countries economy instead of another. You really have no way of telling what policies a candidate will enact versus what they say to get elected. Remember the "Bush on Mars" stuff? Yeah....
 
I respect ron paul for having the balls to actually take a position on something in a national forum such as the republican debate that he was in. However, its easy to stand there and say fuck taxes i hate paying them, but you have to look at the fact that 50 million out of 300 million americans have no health insurance because they cannot afford it. These people barely pay taxes anyway, so while everyone making a million dollars a year now gets 1.6 million and are dancing around stoked, people that make 15 thousand a year get the shaft because president paul doesn't think the government needs to be wiping their ass for them.
 
do you think Ron Paul would privatize the military? he wants a free market, where in that do you see privatized police or firemen?
 
riiiiiiiiiiiight because if they are failures the goverment need to step in and throw them money. this isnt fucking 1962 russia asshole. if they make 15g's they shouldnt have fucking kids, spend outside there means, get a fucking education etc.
 
this is a good point. while ron paul support privatization of many things and is a strong proponent of the free market, he wouldn't give EVERYTHING over to the private sector. the military is, of course, a good example of one area he would certainly keep under governmental control. i don't know what his stance on police/firemen privatization.

also, remember that paul is primarily opposed to FEDERAL beauracracy. he thinks many things should be given over to the states. and things like fire and police departments are already receive mostly state and local funding (although they also get a lot of federal subsidization).

everyone freaks out about stuff like his plan to abolish the IRS. people need to realize he's not saying we should completely get rid of taxes. in a ron paul presidency, you could probably expect a very sharp rise in STATE taxes, and (eventually) the abolition of most federal taxes. the idea is that beauracracy can be more efficient and effective on a smaller scale. so instead of paying lots of money to the federal government and having the federal government bully states into policies (like a 21 year old drinking age) to get that money, you would instead pay those taxes directly to the state or local authorities and eliminate tens of thousands of middlemen and probably billions of dollars of waste.

 
For the love of christ, I KNOW HE DOESNT WANT TO DO THAT. I'm against the IDEA of libertarianism however because people who promote it in its truest sense want that shit. Ron Paul isnt a true libertarian, but he embodies some of the ideas. A free market would be great, but theres a price to pay for everything. PLEASE stop trying to twist my words, I was responding to two of your questions, the first of which why a privatization of public services would be utter shit.
 
Its a good question. I would LOVE to see things get down more to a state level, with some exceptions, but theres a question of how pliable our government is in giving states more rights with its current system. Its certainly more efficient in some areas, but also means a weaker head and less money for projects and systems that benefit the entire country.
 
i think he was just showing an example of why your hypothesis of privatization isn't quite realistic. i don't know if paul wants to privatize fire and police departments. what i'm pretty sure he would support, however, is giving such public services entirely over to state and local governments - for the most part, that's where they already are, so ron paul's libertarian restructuring of the federal beauracracy probably wouldn't cause a huge change in those areas.

you're both raising good points though.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top