Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Who is Ron Paul?
truenorthbg
Member Posts: 1,453
-----
WoW and fast food = commercial successes.
I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
Comments
Wasn't he in the dictionary in front of "Hype"?
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
I appreciate and in some respects understand your cynicism. I was also cynical myself before doing more research about Ron Paul and the leading contenders for the Presidency of the United States of America.
I reached a conclusion that they are both fundamentally, the Democratic and Republican parties, the same. More to the point, they are really the same on the most important issues: 1) Iraq, 2) Patriot Act, 3) larger government, 4) and satisfying special interests.
If you do not understand special interests, it is rather straightforward. Wealthy institutions, such as the energy lobby, will provide the parties with a lot of money. Microsoft, for example, gives equally (I think, around 250k) to the national Democratic and national Republican parties headquartered in Washington, D.C. The pharmaceutical industry, e.g., wrote the "prescription drug bill" which forbids health care providers from negotiating drug prices (although the Veteran Hospitals legally are allowed to do this). It is why the prescription drug bill is so controversial, ordinarily Americans get - screwed (again). Ron Paul is opposed, and immune from, these special interest groups. More to the point, he is, as far as I can tell, the only pro-liberty candidate.
Taxes.
Most Americans do not fully understand how our tax system works. In fact, many accountants do not either! The government raises debt to give money to the farm industry, the pharmaceutical industry, the military industry, the energy industry, and so-forth. It sells "bonds" to China, Saudi Arabia, etc. However, the interest on the bonds, as more bonds are sold, increase. The only way to pay the interest on the bonds is to raise YOUR (and your family's) taxes. More troubling, the dollar in value DECREASES as the USA government increases more bonds. As it increases more bonds the 1) more taxes need to be raised and 2) the less attractive the bonds become.
When China, Saudi Arabia, et al. stop buying our bonds (*and they have started by focusing more attention on the Euro) ... this false sense of prosperity using debt will not sustain itself. It not only includes government debt but YOUR debt (car loan, student loan, mortgage) as well.
I cannot believe I wrote all that out, considering no one will read it. If you want to discuss this issue more, let me know.
-----
WoW and fast food = commercial successes.
I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
Yeah, I'll agree with you on this point. But there are some Democrats, in my opinion, who are taking a principled stand against the four issues. The DLC center is holding with the Republican Party though.
I appreciate Ron Paul's presence in the Rethuglican party, because, even though he believes in rediculous things like the abolition of the income tax and takes the anti-choice position on abortion, he speaks truth to power on almost every other issue. It's great to hear that Republicans have someone who is waking up.
I read your whole post, by the way.
www.draftgore.com
Gore '08
The income tax gives the corrupt elites excessive POWER. So he is in fact "speaking truth to power" by abolitioning the income tax and putting the power back to the people. It's when people can keep their money that they can become powerful and keep their government in check. When people are taxed to death they:
1. Become poor
2. Rely on the government for everything.
3. They give up their power to the government...they had no choice, it just happens.
Then the government gets bigger and bigger. Then one day some corrupt bastard gets elected into some powerful office, implements martial law at the seat of the big powerful government...and history repeats itself.
He is not anti-choice on abortion. He leaves it up to the states which gives YOU power to implement change in your state. Much easier to resolves problems as a citizen at a state level than a federal level, right? Maybe you could become an activist or something...get involved.
We already got one Ron Paul "asser" here, now we got two.
I know its getting close to elections...but come on, this site is mostly people who arent even eligible to vote, at least a good chunk. Myself, im not even registered to vote. I will not vote until they get rid of the electoral fuck college.
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now."
Boba Fett
The abortion debate is not about "resolving change". That's a silly interpretation of an issue that is about equal protection under the law. If it makes sense for state governments to have more power than the federal government, how come it doesn't make sense for individuals to have jurisdiction over their own bodies? How about, instead of letting state governments decide about abortion issues, you let the women themselves decide? Oh, look at that. That's what we have now.
www.draftgore.com
Gore '08
Yeah, I'll agree with you on this point. But there are some Democrats, in my opinion, who are taking a principled stand against the four issues. The DLC center is holding with the Republican Party though.
I appreciate Ron Paul's presence in the Rethuglican party, because, even though he believes in rediculous things like the abolition of the income tax and takes the anti-choice position on abortion, he speaks truth to power on almost every other issue. It's great to hear that Republicans have someone who is waking up.
I read your whole post, by the way.
Explain to me why you think repealing the forceful thievery we call the income tax is a bad thing.
===============================
The abortion debate is not about "resolving change". That's a silly interpretation of an issue that is about equal protection under the law. If it makes sense for state governments to have more power than the federal government, how come it doesn't make sense for individuals to have jurisdiction over their own bodies? How about, instead of letting state governments decide about abortion issues, you let the women themselves decide? Oh, look at that. That's what we have now.
You saying we need an income tax shows a profound misunderstanding of history.Our country survived more years without an income tax than it has with one. And ever since the income tax has been allowed it has done nothing but harm to this country and it's people.
Our founding fathers put in the Constitution that a direct tax was forbidden. They obviously knew something you refuse to recognize.
===============================
Wha!!!????
===============================
What vice is saying is, Ron Paul is insignificant and meaningless.
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now."
Boba Fett
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
I'm just going to settle the abortion debate with one sentence but i'm going to go on because I have other issues about it. Here is the sentence....are you ready for it? Are you sitting down? Take a deep breath. Annnnnnnd here it is! There is nothing in the Constitution authorizing the federal government to deal with abortion in any way.
Now that we have that settled. Who honestly wants the Federal government to start implementing laws that are not authorized by the Constitution? Doubled edged sword my friend...double edged sword. You may get one thing from the government that you like but not authorized by the Constitution, but at the same time you open up Pandora's box, because the Constitution has no bearing on their decisions anymore.
I believe, along with the Founding Fathers, that every individual has inalienable rights, among which are the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Neither the State, nor any other person, can violate those rights without committing an injustice.
If you support the "right" of a woman to remove an unwanted child from her body (i.e., her property) by killing and then expelling him or her. Then you have concluded, any property owner has the right to kill anyone on his property, for any reason.
"Given the government's record with the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs, we can assume that a War on Abortion would lead within five years to men having abortions." - Harry Browne
Wait a second how do three mmorpg.com forum posters named "frodus", "Spathotan", and "xxvicexx", get off saying Ron Paul is meaningless? How does one who is meaningless able to say someone else is meaningless? Isn't one only able to declare meaning when they themselves have meaning? Even then, does it really matter what one thinks unless you are void of independent thought?
If there were no taxes, where whould the gov get its money?
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
The Constitution of the United States was written in a way that gives the bulk of the governmental powers to the individual states with an emphasis on human rights. The original 13 colonies wouldn't have ratified it any other way. In fact it was actually held up by Rhode Island until the Bill of Rights was added in. This was the type of government our fore fathers had in mind for us. Is this what we have today? Not even close. Some would argue that the changes in this country are due to the progressive nature of government. I say if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I was very skeptical of Ron Paul for a very long time mainly because he seemed to good to be true. Since then I have done some research into some of the so-called "Hype" that he is claiming and found it to all be factual. This guy is for real and the things he stands for are setting this country back on the road our fore fathers set for us. This would not only be good for us in this country but would greatly improve our reputation with other countries around the world as we wouldn't be viewed as "Meddlers" any more.
It's high time that Government is taken back from the politicians and big business and put back in the hands of the people like it was originally intended by the Constitution by our founding fathers. Any candidate that stands for that will get my vote.
Bren
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
That may well be, but Paul is a marginalized candidate. He's been marginalized by his own party. The Neo-con wing of the Repubs won't vote for him. The Christian Coalition sure as hell won't vote for him. That pretty much means he's not going to win the nomination.
He could run as an Independent in the actual election, but who the hell is going to vote for him then? The same handful percentage that voted for Perot, Nader, or any of the other third party candidates?
And even if by some miracle he got into the White House, do any of you realistically think the he will just singlehandedly dismantle the Gov't? Despite the Bush Admins best attempts to create a Unary Executive branch, Paul still couldn't, and wouldn't, get 1/100th of the crap he's talked about done.
Feel free to live the pipe dream, however.
Now this is me saying this entire thread is meaningless.
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now."
Boba Fett
Ross Perot caused the Republican's to lose an election when he spoke about what needed to be done. To say someone is insignificant when they can turn the tide of the election is not seeing the whole picture.
American's are sick of the status quo. It's scary to break away from it however because it leads people into a territory left up to speculation in the past. But we are getting closer and closer to finally doing something about these two parties and their influence on the destruction of our country. If they don't shape up soon then people like Ron Paul are going to do much more than just take away a few votes from one party or the other. They will eventually end up winning.
===============================
And there are different forms of taxation other than a direct tax on income. Read the Neal Boortz book about it.
===============================
Corporate taxes, excise taxes on alcohol, tobacco, firearms, tariffs on trade, military hardware sales, etc.; these would be MORE THAN enough to fund the "constitutionally limited government".
The income tax means the government owns your money and they merely give some of it back to you. If they didn't own your money then that would mean they are stealing it. Which definition do you like better?
Corporate taxes, excise taxes on alcohol, tobacco, firearms, tariffs on trade, military hardware sales, etc.; these would be MORE THAN enough to fund the "constitutionally limited government".
They're stealing it. It's not voluntary, so it's stealing.The income tax means the government owns your money and they merely give some of it back to you. If they didn't own your money then that would mean they are stealing it. Which definition do you like better?
People have to work and they take advantage of that. It's as criminal as anything could be. And it's totally un-American!
===============================
A New Hope for Old Ideas of Life, Liberty, and Happiness....
Do not let a machine Republican or Democratic win this time. Vote in your state primary.
Vote for Ron Paul.
Ron Paul can Win.
www.youtube.com/watch
-----
WoW and fast food = commercial successes.
I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
Things Ron Paul believes:
1. FEMA should be abolished.
2. Abortion should be criminalized.
3. Federal funding of scientific research should be abolished.
4. The Dept. of Education should be abolished.
5. The Dept. of Energy should be abolished.
6. The EPA should be abolished.
7. Medicare should be abolished.
8. Federal welfare should be abolished.
9. Taxation should be regressive.
10. The IRS should be abolished.
The man is an idiot.
Doesn't Paul also want to withdraw America from the United Nations and pull ALL American forces back to the states?
I've heard about him, but not too much seeing as I'm British. What I wanna know is that if he got elected into office and pulled back the entire American military, then what would become of nations that rely completely on the US for military protection such as Iceland.