Ron Paul - Help Wanted
POSTED BY: SevenPercent
UPDATED: Friday, August 31, 2007 20:14
VIEWED: 12322
PAGE 4 of 11
Quote:
Originally posted by SevenPercent:
But part of the reason I'm unsure is because of who on this board supports him. The "Ron Paul Quotes" thread really made me nervous. The only people coming out in favor of the guy were three of the biggest loons on this board: PN, Kaneman, and Antimason. Frankly, I think one's nuts, one's a trolling douchebag, and one's an idiot (place those tags where you think they most apply - even mix-and-match if you'd like).
I didn't make this list?
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Jack, just scrolled thru the list; no where have you posted that you support RP; thus it would be silly for him to put you on that particular list. So, do you or don't you?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by leadb:
Jack, just scrolled thru the list; no where have you posted that you support RP; thus it would be silly for him to put you on that particular list. So, do you or don't you?
Just so this is perfectly clear, again (and thanks leadb for the assist here), when I posted this thread, the last time I had checked the "RP Quotes" thread Kaneman had posted 4 or 5 times, Antimason twice, and PN once. Only when Sarge pointed out that he had posted did I see that a couple others had added their names to that thread, because after that initial list of names I didnt go back to check it again. If you support RP and werent't in that trainwreck of a thread, I'd like to hear your opinion.
------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V
Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
I didn't make this list?
Do you really want to?
------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V
Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I dunno, maybe you missed the original thread, Seven - but it was me, who originally started trumpeting the fact that RP signed for a presidential exploratory.
And a lotta folk threw in right after, imma see if I can necromance the thread for ya.
And Six ? he didn't say "Asshole" and "Wackjob", so I figure you and I weren't included. 
I'm a bad, bad little man, yes.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
EDIT - Actually it was CTS who posted the original topic, stand by for necromancy!
MOLARAM, SALARAM, HUH, HUH!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
[
Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
First and most central to me is his seeming disconnect that assumes there is any difference between intrusive Federal Governments running people's lives or state governments doing so, or corporations for that matter.
I partially agree and so does Paul. he doesn't want state governments running our lives any more than the feds, but when he talks about the federal and state questions he's looking at it from a constitutional stance. The good thing about federalism is that people can live in a state that fits more to their view of the world. For example, if you hate guns you can live in a state that has strict gun control etc. But you must realize that everyone doesn't feel the same way you do so why force all 50 states to follow the same exact rules. But Paul doesn't want the states to run our lives he just believes, and the constitution backs him up, that a large number of decisions should be left to the states. But these decisions still can't violate the constitution particularly section 5 of the 14th amendment which the Sup. Ct. has ruled guarantees the same basic rights as under the Federal constitution.
Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
Could any libertarian please step up and explain to me how Ron Paul's solution to some ailing Government programs is that they should be privatized is in-fact a good solution?
This is hard because it takes a certain mindset to agree to it, and one that I don't think you have.
Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
Haven't we been seeing way too much of that? Isn't there example enough of unregulated companies doing what they want when they want and giving us the bill? That's the problem I see right here. If he thinks our lives will be meddled with less in an unregulated world, he's forgotten shanty towns and black-lists, and now private contractors used in both Iraq and Katrina who are not regulated by any military code of justice.
first you need to understand that Paul wants to get rid of corporate welfare. our country has merged corporations with the state in a way that approaches the fascist model. No better example of this can be found than Enron and Haliburton. The NSA gave Enron almost half a billion dollars to build a power plant in India. The plant failed because the cheap oil that was expected to be flowing from the Caspian sea region couldn't get there due to the instability in Afghanistan through which the pipeline was to be built (this was pre-911, during the Clinton years). This pipeline was so important to Enron, Haliburton and Union Oil of California that they tried to get the US to back the Taliban in the civil war to bring stability to the region. it almost worked to. (Bill Richardson even met with the Taliban, something that was technically illegal) That is way too much influence for corporations to have, and that’s the type of "evil corporations" that the left is always screaming about. So it seems that the corporations run our lives now. But Paul wants the corporations out of bed with the government, and does not want them running our lives. When the government stops giving money to corporations and stops no-bid contracts etc. the corporations will actually shrink and their influence will be less, not more. One example he likes to talk about is currency regulation. The Federal Reserve (Fed) prints more money causing inflation. then the banks that run the Fed. invest the money before it has been devalued. By the time we get the money it has been devalued. The Fed is private, and Paul wants to get rid of it, so he is not wanting corporations to run our lives as you seem to think. When he talks about privatizing he wants the market to work certain things out, like wages for example. There is also issues with programs that have no business belonging to the Federal government, such as education. And you have to realize that if the feds didn’t tax us so much to pay for everything under the sun then the states could g
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
Unfortunately I'm not sure that the Constitution strictly interpreted in a 200 year old context would actually work very well. There are a lot of "actors" in place that simply didn't exist in the 1780's including multinational corporations, companies treated as people and changes to the rules of usary that could infringe on practical personal liberty in the absence of a strong government.
Then amend the constitution. Thats exactly why the framers made amendments possible. But if you don't follow the constitution then there is no reason to have one.
www.RonPaul2008.com
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"But remember that Paul wants to bring the power of the Presidency back down to fit with the constitution. Meaning he realizes that he can’t pass a law without Congress."
Another reason he is getting my vote....Oh, Seven 
Love always kaneman
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by leadb:
Jack, just scrolled thru the list; no where have you posted that you support RP; thus it would be silly for him to put you on that particular list. So, do you or don't you?
Not on this thread, but here is evidence of Jack's support for RP.
http://www.fireflyfan.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=28565
It's amazing how much panic one honest man can spread among a multitude of hypocrites
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
I dunno, maybe you missed the original thread, Seven - but it was me, who originally started trumpeting the fact that RP signed for a presidential exploratory.
And a lotta folk threw in right after, imma see if I can necromance the thread for ya.
I did miss that; please do the necromancy that you do so well.
Thanks in advance,
7%
------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V
Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME