The Next President
butterjam
Posts: 215
Please sign this so we can get an honest and intelligent politician in the White House. Thank you.
http://www.ronpaul2012.net/
http://www.ronpaul2012.net/
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
just one question first
what is his stance on people being denied membership to a private club or organization based soley on the color of their skin?
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
Honest? Sure.
Intelligent? Relatively.
Delusional? Definitely.
People will never accept his libertarian concept of government, and there's good reason for it. Mainly, it's because people are not very honest or intelligent. Heh.
It's just too hopeful or too romantic to think society could function the way he envisions it, which he would admit is influenced by the ideals of Ayn Rand. Libertarians have too much faith in individualism, just as communists have too much faith in collectivism.
I'm not him, but this is how I think he would answer, seeing as how I follow this guy closely and read a lot of what he writes, and agree with almost all of it.
He, like many of the rest of us finds discrimination abominable. However, private enterpise is private enterprise. He feels that truly public places, as in those owned by the people collectively (government buildings, roads, sidewalks), are not to be discriminatory to anyone. However, if you didn't want someone in your home or place of business whatever your beliefs, that is your right as a property owner. There are common sense applications of this-- you wouldn't want James Gandolfini in a Miss Black Teen America Pageant, and there are prejudiced applications as well-- a card-carrying KKK member who owns a Diner might not want Jewish people in his establishment and has a sign stating so. Let's face it, bigots are bigots, and legislation isn't going to save the Jewish guy from getting his burger spit in by a anti-semetic Diner owner-- the Jewish customer might rather the sign read "No Jews Allowed" than have a sandwich with extra loogie. Some people feel places of business are "public," he sees them as private.
Would he spend a single ounce of his energy reversing any laws currently in place, including the portions of the Civil Rights Act that do legislate how private businesses handle discrimination? Absolutely not. There are thousands of bigger fish to fry, and if president, this guy is certainly going to pick his battles, and this won't be one of them.
What he would focus on is bringing the troops home, cutting the debt and deficits, bringing transparency to the Fed, and work with Congress to establish a competing precious-metal backed currency to the Federal Reserve note. He would NOT get rid of the Federal Reserve in his first term of presidency, and maybe not even the second-- establishing the competing currency to the FR Note is his idea for transition out of the central banking system, slowly and steadily, that is, if the system itself does not completely collapse first.
I do think that repealing the legislation that prohibits us from using marijuana as well as industrial hemp would be high on his list as well, as well as decreasing subsidies for all major cartels who receive them from insurance, to defense contractors, to oil, to corn, etc...
He is influenced partially by Rand, but he takes issue with quite a bit of her writings too. At the heart of it she completely lacks compassion for people who have not "earned" it. The good Doctor sees it differently-- he and most of the rest of us would be less choosy of whom are worthy of love, help, and charity, although reserving the right to do things the Ayn Rand-tough love way. Most of us believe in some form of redemption for ourselves and others after receiving aid-- I don't know that she did.
As for accepting a libertarian concept of government-- don't all of us everywhere want to be free? How hard is it really? Why not use government to simply protect life, liberty, and property instead of constantly convoluting it and bloating it to the point where the laws are no longer even descipherable and the people become completely devoid of prosperity?
How do you think he is delusional?
I would also say he is one of the more intelligent people in Congress. I would take him in a debate over any other politician on any topic.
And what's wrong with being hopeful? Isn't that what Obama ran a campaign on?
I think history has shown that collectivism, for the most part, does not work. When has individualism failed?
I'm not saying we need to detach ourselves entirely from government. It does have a purpose and there are things that it does better than the free market. I'm supporting Dr. Paul, because I think our government has taken more and more power from the people than the past 100+ years.
He understands that we cannot simply end the Welfare/Warfare state and that it will require a gradual phase out. Why are we spending nearly a $1,000,000,000,000 every year on our military? What has Obama done to end our Warfare state? Wasn't he going to bring our troops home? Where is the cry of the anti-war left?