I don't hate him, but I think a lot of his ideas are just good on paper. I'm not exactly for everything being open game, especially economic issues. The government needs to be involved in the market or else we'd all sink. You got to spend money to make money.
I do respect him for being a genuine guy, though and sticking to his guns.
still no one offers any reasons why they hate ron paul, they are nothing more than pawns of the establishment
Because the concept of abolishing the fed, his main appeal to the population, is something I disagree with. Simple as that.
I also will never vote for a politician in favor of abolishing abortion.
so the fed printing trillions of dollars, giving it to whomever they please with no oversight or accountability is ok? Them leading the US's own currency to the government with intrest is just fine and dandy.
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
The issue is less with the Fed and more than with the general psyche of the country around money, funding, and taxes.
Arguers like you are frustrating, because you take my simple statement of disagreeing with ending the fed and make it into me totally advocating everything the fed does, which is far from the truth. I am not a supporter of Bernanke.
actually there is a bunch of things Paul could do to fulfill his promises that don't require congressional approval. being the commander in cheif he has the authority to order the pentagon to shut down hundreds of our overseas bases. while it would take a while to make that logistically happen in full he could get the process started almost immediately. he can use executive order to repeal a lot of what obama has done with his. he has the authority to reduce the size of the executive branch and some of its monstrosity's like the dept of homeland security.
i do expect a brutal battle in congress over everything else however.
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
edited September 2011
The way the Fed and the IRS was created was the most treasonous act any president has done in our nation's history.
And fractional reserve banking is what has destroyed the value of the dollar and crippled our nation
Really? Most treasonous act that any president has ever done in the history of the nation? Even over Andrew Johnson's deliberate attempts to cease Southern Reconstruction after the war? How about the deliberate attempts at treason by Richard Nixon?
Come on. Ron Paul is just a hip candidate, who is interesting in theory but nothing more. If you think that the Fed's "violation" of the constitution is the biggest violation of the constitution in the nation's history, you've either got some fucking nerve or you just straight up don't know what this country has done. I'll take the Fed over snaking through declaration of war, abolition of freedom of the press, suspension of habeas corpus, and a dozen other atrocities that this country has committed since its inception.
actually there is a bunch of things Paul could do to fulfill his promises that don't require congressional approval. being the commander in cheif he has the authority to order the pentagon to shut down hundreds of our overseas bases. while it would take a while to make that logistically happen in full he could get the process started almost immediately. he can use executive order to repeal a lot of what obama has done with his. he has the authority to reduce the size of the executive branch and some of its monstrosity's like the dept of homeland security.
i do expect a brutal battle in congress over everything else however.
There's a reason why presidents don't do everything they are in support of, such as shutting down hundreds of our overseas bases. He would alienate himself from his base, y'know, the people who got him there and would get him re-elected. No politician would do anything to harm his re-election campaign. The constant campaign is arguably the largest unknown aspect of American politics.
It's very difficult to be a politician in America and operate under your own agenda, even harder if you're on the fringe like Paul. The Republican party is too organized in its agenda to allow any of its members to operate under their own.
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
you damn right i got some fucking nerve **==
America needs people with nerve now
You've got nerve in the way we don't need it right now. You've got nerve in the way that harms this country, you've got nerve in the way that makes people make the wrong decisions. Seriously, you don't know your country if you think the Fed is its biggest abomination.
You've got nerve in the way we don't need it right now. You've got nerve in the way that harms this country, you've got nerve in the way that makes people make the wrong decisions. Seriously, you don't know your country if you think the Fed is its biggest abomination.
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
i meant candidates for president
Obama
I'd probably vote for most of the other republican candidates, even though all of them fail at least one of my two litmus tests, which are abortion and gay marriage policies.
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
Ron Paul only looks good on paper. what he wants to do cannot and should not be done.
we shouldn't invade and occupy other countries?
OMG ATTACKS ON SOVEREIGNTY ARE TOTALLY FINE
No. There's a process for invasion and occupation for a reason, and the US has always avoided it. In fact, only 5 wars have ever been declared by congress. Invasion and occupation should be on the furthest extreme, and should only be done as a coalition effort, with exit as the primary goal.
Ron Paul only looks good on paper. what he wants to do cannot and should not be done.
we shouldn't invade and occupy other countries?
OMG ATTACKS ON SOVEREIGNTY ARE TOTALLY FINE
No. There's a process for invasion and occupation for a reason, and the US has always avoided it. In fact, only 5 wars have ever been declared by congress. Invasion and occupation should be on the furthest extreme, and should only be done as a coalition effort, with exit as the primary goal.
i think you misunderstood me wine, i completely agree with you. we need to stop acting like we have a right to police the world
Comments
**==
I do respect him for being a genuine guy, though and sticking to his guns.
I also will never vote for a politician in favor of abolishing abortion.
Arguers like you are frustrating, because you take my simple statement of disagreeing with ending the fed and make it into me totally advocating everything the fed does, which is far from the truth. I am not a supporter of Bernanke.
And fractional reserve banking is what has destroyed the value of the dollar and crippled our nation
i do expect a brutal battle in congress over everything else however.
Come on. Ron Paul is just a hip candidate, who is interesting in theory but nothing more. If you think that the Fed's "violation" of the constitution is the biggest violation of the constitution in the nation's history, you've either got some fucking nerve or you just straight up don't know what this country has done. I'll take the Fed over snaking through declaration of war, abolition of freedom of the press, suspension of habeas corpus, and a dozen other atrocities that this country has committed since its inception. There's a reason why presidents don't do everything they are in support of, such as shutting down hundreds of our overseas bases. He would alienate himself from his base, y'know, the people who got him there and would get him re-elected. No politician would do anything to harm his re-election campaign. The constant campaign is arguably the largest unknown aspect of American politics.
It's very difficult to be a politician in America and operate under your own agenda, even harder if you're on the fringe like Paul. The Republican party is too organized in its agenda to allow any of its members to operate under their own.
America needs people with nerve now
Because I can name a ton of social issues right now that I consider worse, and a few international, and a lot of political.
I'd probably vote for most of the other republican candidates, even though all of them fail at least one of my two litmus tests, which are abortion and gay marriage policies.
No. There's a process for invasion and occupation for a reason, and the US has always avoided it. In fact, only 5 wars have ever been declared by congress. Invasion and occupation should be on the furthest extreme, and should only be done as a coalition effort, with exit as the primary goal.