10-28-2007, 04:12 PM | #241 (permalink) | |
Insane
|
Quote:
You don't run a company without a board of directors who oversee operations. You don't use computer programs without an operating system. You don't run a country without a federal government. |
|
10-28-2007, 05:13 PM | #242 (permalink) | |
immoral minority
Location: Back in Ohio
|
There is a difference between having a strong federal government and a weak one.
The federal dept of transportation is pretty small, but they give the money and standards to each state (for interstate highways). Each state as road crews and has the right equipment. What would happen if they made it all a federal government operation? Quote:
|
|
10-28-2007, 06:39 PM | #243 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Indiana
|
Quote:
__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize. |
|
10-28-2007, 06:45 PM | #244 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
Quote:
It is responsible for managing the air traffic control system and the US commercial air space; promulgating air and rail safety standards; regulating the transportation of hazardous materials over air, rail and highways and through pipelines,... Do you want these functions left to the states or the private tranportation industry?
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 10-28-2007 at 06:47 PM.. |
|
10-28-2007, 08:49 PM | #245 (permalink) |
immoral minority
Location: Back in Ohio
|
I never said anything bad about the DOT or anything about what else they do, just that they let the states determine how to spend the highway dollars, instead of trying to manage it all themselves. And the federal government can control the states by not giving them the money if it doesn't get used properly.
|
10-29-2007, 07:15 PM | #246 (permalink) |
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
I was surprised to find this article on reddit today. Kucinich beat Hillary and Barak in a straw poll coming in second behind Edwards.
Frankly, I was starting to lose hope and give in to the idea that the underdog of this election was RP. I guess that's not necessarily the case. Kucinich and Paul are good friends, by my understanding. Ron Paul might make a good Vip. |
10-29-2007, 08:28 PM | #249 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Indiana
|
Quote:
Even though Ron Paul has dominated every other Repub candidate overall in straw polls. Sorry, for the sarcasm, but that's all this thread has been about in regards to RP's achievements. In all honesty, I'd easily vote for Kucinich over any Repub or Dem candidate besides Paul. Nice to see him beat Hillary for sure.
__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize. |
|
10-30-2007, 05:10 AM | #250 (permalink) | ||
Location: Washington DC
|
Quote:
They have no statistical validity and only measure an organization's ability to get its more activist supporters to attend a a meaningless event (often a state/county party fundraiser where participants pay to play). This one cost $25 Quote:
Of course, the bottom tier candidates try harder at these minor events...they have everything to gain by participating. Did the Hillary and Barak teams even bother to encourage their supporters to attend? Who knows? Bottom line - there's not a political consultant around who would put much stock in a straw poll other than to build their contributors lists and potentially give their candidate a short term psychological boost. But if it keeps you involved and engaged in the process, cool
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 10-30-2007 at 06:09 AM.. Reason: added link |
||
10-30-2007, 04:51 PM | #251 (permalink) | |
Insane
|
Here is a reason I do not believe Mr. Paul's ideology. It is from Project Censored:
Quote:
|
|
10-30-2007, 05:13 PM | #252 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Indiana
|
Quote:
Plus, Ron Paul has said numerous times that he is strickly against nation building which is what your quote was about. You want the same government that hands out contracts to corporations in such a poor way, to regulate these corporations.
__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize. |
|
10-30-2007, 08:04 PM | #253 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
Both Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich would lose to Stephen Colbert in a heads up presidential election, according to a new Rasmussen poll.
Colbert beats Ron Paul 36% - 32% and beat Kucinich 37% - 32% Quote:
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 10-30-2007 at 08:06 PM.. |
|
10-31-2007, 04:14 AM | #255 (permalink) |
Location: Washington DC
|
Will....I would definetly vote for Kucinich over Colbert ..but I could never say the same about Ron Paul.
While Kucinich and Paul may share similar views on the unconstitutionality of Bush's war and a few other issues like privacy violations in the guise of national security, they differ substantially on the Constitutional role of the federal government. Kucinich does not have the arrogance to attempt to force his interpretation of the framers' intent above the interpretation of the Supreme Court.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 10-31-2007 at 04:20 AM.. |
10-31-2007, 04:34 PM | #257 (permalink) |
immoral minority
Location: Back in Ohio
|
I saw that last night. Jay's opening remark about how Dr. Paul was the only guy in Washington DC to tell more women to take off their clothes than Bill Clinton was great.
That Rasmussen Report makes no sense though. How could Colbert get the highest percentage? Do this mean that he is the front runner now? Or did they just ask people that were at the Colbert rally who they were voting for? You only have 31% voting for one of the other candidates... As for the foreign aid example up there, that is why he wants to stop wasting the taxpayers money. Maybe the lobbiests said that it would spur the local economy in the US by doing it that way, but it is a mess, and they were able to survive prior to 1913 when America didn't get involved in anything. |
11-05-2007, 09:31 AM | #258 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Indiana
|
Remember, Remember the fifth of November...
The website This November 5th had a sign up to attempt 100,000 donors to the Paul campaign at $100 dollars a donation. Only 18,000 signed up, however his contribution has gone up an amazing $2 million in just 12 hours. This might be the most money raised ever in a 24 hour period (with 12 hours still to go), anyone know? So, if you like the message support him by donating if you can.
__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize. |
11-05-2007, 10:43 AM | #259 (permalink) | ||
Banned
|
I am concerned that Ron Paul's proposals are as unlikely as those of any republican candidates to improve what I perceive to be our most important negative economic trend. Implementing Ron Paul's ideas would be quite the opposite of improving wealth distribution.
Just so you know: Quote:
Quote:
|
||
11-05-2007, 11:01 AM | #260 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
|
What you're forgetting, host, is that ron paul is the only person- besides the subset of the founding fathers whose writings can be interpreted posthumously as being in agreement with ron paul- who is in a position to correctly interpret the constitution. That some of his opinions run completely counter to any number of constitutional law experts only means that the constitutional law experts are wrong. Ron paul is not wrong. Economic stability is unimportant, because ron paul doesn't think that the constitution allows it. Equitable income distribution isn't worthwhile because ron paul doesn't think the constitution allows it.
|
11-05-2007, 11:02 AM | #261 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
wealth redistribution is nothing more than legally organized theft by government. If it was YOUR wealth that was going to be systematically redistributed, i'm guessing you'd have a bit different outlook on the issue.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
11-05-2007, 11:04 AM | #262 (permalink) | |
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Quote:
|
|
11-05-2007, 11:11 AM | #263 (permalink) | |
zomgomgomgomgomgomg
Location: Fauxenix, Azerona
|
Quote:
|
|
11-05-2007, 11:12 AM | #264 (permalink) | ||
Junkie
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
|
Quote:
My wealth is being redistributed, and it isn't just the government that's doing it. My school is pretty good at redistributing my money, as is my landlord, as is the car insurance company, and my grocery store, etc. The economy is a system of wealth redistribution. Sometimes there are situations in which the government might need to step in to keep things running smoothly- see host's post above mine. Free-er markets tend towards radically uneven distributions of wealth. Radically uneven distributions of wealth tend towards a large group of poor and generally unhappy people who tend towards then being slaves to the people who own everything, either that or they tend to towards some sort of revolution- probably not of the libertarian sort. edit: Quote:
It doesn't really seem reasonable to me to be able to expect that you should only have to pay for the services you use, because you depend on people who use services that you don't use. Last edited by filtherton; 11-05-2007 at 11:15 AM.. |
||
11-05-2007, 12:10 PM | #265 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Indiana
|
Quote:
Host, why do you focus on petty issues like welfare, social security and progressive taxing based on wealth? The Federal Reserve is the KEY economic wealth distribution problem. Ron Pauls sollution is to abolish the Federal Reserve. This will fix the problem faster and more effectively than crying about taxes or social programs. Not voting for a candidate who supports ending the Federal Reserve is just contributing to the wealth gap.
__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize. |
|
11-05-2007, 12:43 PM | #266 (permalink) |
Banned
|
samcol, the largest asset of the households in the US, far and away, is the equity hled in the homes that they live in. The equity held is the difference between what the homeowner or mortgagee, would net after a sale, and after proceeds of the sale first pay off all liens on the property and sales and closing expenses.
My understanding of what you and candidate Paul are advocating, is a "reform" which would eliminate fractional reserve banking. Mortgage loans approved to prospective home buyers would come from cash reserves of lenders, in the case of lending banks. from a portion of deposits not reserved to protect a bank from a sudden "run" on it's deposits, a series of numerous, unforseen withdrawals by depositors. Since real estate values correlate directly to liquidity, the ease and availability of mortgage loans, how would ending of fractional reserve banking, even if it was a gradual...say five year process, preserve liquidity, especially since Americans support a negaitve savings rate? Wouldn't it be more likely that ending fractional reserve banking, in addition to pressures from mortgage loan resets and falling housing prices already in progress, would accelerate foreclosures and transfer an impressively large portion of housing assets from current householder/mortgagees....to wealthy investors? Paul's intent is to reverse the quantity money supply. If that is done or even aniticpated, all assets will be worth less. Less government regulation will leave everyone to build on what they already have, or don't have. It offers an enormous headstart for the wealthiest and most connected, to take what is left in the hands of the less wealthy, 90 percent. Call the "Paul movement", what is. It's a group of people in good health with good future income prospects who do not want to pay taxes. Be careful crossing the street, avoid touching your face with your fingers, wash your hands often, avoid crowds and people who sneeze without covering their mouths. If you succeed in electing Ron Paul, you're going to have to stay healthy to earn and keep all that money! |
11-05-2007, 03:14 PM | #267 (permalink) | ||
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
||
11-05-2007, 03:20 PM | #268 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Indiana
|
Quote:
There is no doubt removing the Fed will definetly cause rocky economic times, but how is that worse than a complete crash that seems inevitable? Ron Paul's plan is to remove the Fed gradually as well mandatory participation in social programs. Abrubtly ending both instantly would be nothing more than a government manufactured crash rather than the assured crash that is coming. I don't see how me being able to spend or save more of my money as a bad thing. I can't help it if someone doesn't practice sound personal financing, but if we let the government handle it we are all stuck. I have little faith in them getting us benefits or saving us in a crisis. Social Security has been robbed and FEMA's track record is horrible (New Orleans anyone?). The people running the show have proved time and time again that they cannot handle our money properly.
__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize. |
|
11-05-2007, 04:49 PM | #269 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
|
Quote:
|
|
11-05-2007, 05:06 PM | #270 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Indiana
|
closing in on 4 million with four hours to go....
This is incredible. I thought he'd get a million or so but he's got to be crushing every record by now. Is this really just an internet thing? 3.5 or whatever million? Is he still a 2nd tier candidate?
__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize. |
11-05-2007, 07:47 PM | #271 (permalink) |
Location: Washington DC
|
Its an impressive one day total, but will it move him off his last place flatline:
http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Rep-Pres-Primary.php I think its more likely he will flameout like the last internet candidate, Howard Dean, who set all kinds of internet fundraising records in 04. And Dean also had a very respectable showing in the national polls going into the primaries in 04 Paul's national and state (Iowa, NH, SC) polls numbers are abysmal, indicative of the fact that his internet support still has not extended to the vast majority of likely republican primary voters in any measurable number. And his contributors are overwhelming male (like over 80%)...which also doesnt translate well to general primary voters. Much will also depend on how deep the voters dig beyond his surface appeal now that he is gaining some recognition. Will his basic ad message of "end the war/bring the troops home, shut down the IRS" be enough for the non-internet mom and pops? Or will primary voters want to know more...economic (jobs) poilcy, health care policy, energy and environmental policy..social policy. Do you really think most voters know or care about the Federal Reserve? Do you think there is widespread support to shut down EPA, DOE, Dept of Ed. (Reagan failed because there was not enough public support)? to end social security (Bush failed because there was not enough public support)and medicare? If the other Republican candidates really perceive him as a threat (and they dont at this point), they will be licking their chops at raising the specter of Dr NO.....like his votes against NIH funding for medical research...against funding for Consumer Product Safety Commission to protect our kids from dangerous toys....against federal funding for alternative energy R&D, against federally-backed college loans.... His voting record against so many popular and/or (perceived) essential programs, once more widely known, will be his final death knoll. BTW, Barack Obama is the big internet winner this year, with about 1/3 of his $80+ million from well over 100,000 small internet donors.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 11-05-2007 at 09:01 PM.. Reason: added links to state polls |
11-05-2007, 09:18 PM | #272 (permalink) | |
Insane
|
Quote:
With all the elderly, around 80% of whom vote, your candidate won't win when he talks about getting rid of social security. Also, you're equating an EXECUTIVE issue with a monetary one. FEMA is doing terrible because the President hired someone incompetent to run it. The EPA is too influenced by industry. This is a problem with our leadership. You think letting the states handle these issues would fix the problem? If anything, it would be worse. Then there's the multitude of things we need to fund with the Federal Government which have been listed in this thread many times. The only people behind Ron Paul are idiot techies on the internet who don't really know how to run a government, and people who are unequivocally against the war to the point where it is their central issue. And just because they're spendthrifts when Ron Paul asks for money doesn't mean he's a remotely good candidate. I have respect for him because he sticks to his guns, but I won't be supporting him. Though as far as the Republican candidates go, he's the best on their roster. |
|
11-05-2007, 09:32 PM | #273 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Indiana
|
From the best I can tell he raised $4,332,202.19 in 24 hours. There are mail in donations that might not of been processed. Plus, there's a rumor that credit card companies can only process so many requests an hour, so this total might be higher.
Still impressive none the less.
__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize. |
11-06-2007, 08:27 AM | #274 (permalink) | |
zomgomgomgomgomgomg
Location: Fauxenix, Azerona
|
Quote:
Also, it's not as if the Government will be recieving zero funds at all, he's not abolishing ALL taxes. We get enough revenue through other sources (such as import/export traffic) to raise a significant amount of funds. |
|
11-06-2007, 10:19 AM | #275 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
Quote:
the easy translation for this is 'i'm right, you're wrong, get the fuck over it and shut your mouth.' Frankly, i'm damn sick and tired of hearing this kind of shit from both the right and the left slanted people in this country that it makes me hope the civil war starts sooner rather than later. YOU are one of the main reasons that this country not only stays divided in it's purposes and causes, but will continue to become ever more divisive in nature.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
|
11-06-2007, 10:58 AM | #276 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
Quote:
Get the fuck over it!
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire |
|
11-06-2007, 11:06 AM | #278 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
Quote:
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
|
11-06-2007, 11:25 AM | #279 (permalink) | ||
Banned
|
Quote:
Quote:
Sweden's numbers make the US appear to be a failed economic state. Our government could be directed to make wealth distribution more rational here, to. We have the examples of Sweden, Denmark, and France to study, and we could implement the best of all three, and also, learn from their mistakes. It is not that government does not work, it is that you are not interested in trying to make it work, but you offer not other remedy to mitigate growing wealth inequality. You leave it to reach a critical point. You have the models of Brazil, Venezuela, and Mexico to study, to see what will come from your politics. |
||
11-06-2007, 11:36 AM | #280 (permalink) | |
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Quote:
The problem isn't the "shall not be infringed". That's pretty simple. "A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." speaks very clearly, however, about how "the people" who have "the right" "not to be infringed" must be a part of "a well regulated militia". This is very, very, very simple language. You're not in a well regulated militia, therefore you're not protected. But aside from obvious linguistics, the supreme court has spoken on their interpretation of the Second Amendment, and you disagreeing with them doesn't supersede their constitutionally provided authority to interpret. See, that's the bullshit. You read the constitution, and then ignore all of the constitutionally supported rulings over the next few hundred years. It's not 1776. It's 2007. The 231 years, 3 months, and 7 days between then and now still apply. You can ignore them if you want, but the reality is that legally, they happened. Neither you nor Dr. Ron Paul are supreme court justices. It's not up to you to interpret laws, those interpretations which can be enforced by the executive. You vote. That is your right. |
|
Tags |
learn, paul, ron, step, thread |
|
|