Yeah, I would have LOVED to have seen the USA under the stewardship of Ron Paul
He is a Christian. But it is less intimate, generally, with one's presidential choice, than with one's girlfriend.
Democracy or Dictatorship
- Thread starter Michael
- Start date
He is a Christian. But it is less intimate, generally, with one's presidential choice, than with one's girlfriend.
He may be a Xian but that isn't the platform he runs on. He doesn't run as a Xian. If it's a plank, its a small one. His thing is the proper implementation of the US Constitution as a contract between the government with the People.
But, more than anything, I'd just like to see what would happen. Because it could be radical change if Ron Paul had his way. The first thing dismantled with be the Federal Reserve. I'm not sure how the USD would be valued either, as he seems to like to adhere to the gold standard. Which may or may not be a good thing?
Anyway, it'd make politics interesting that's for sure
But, more than anything, I'd just like to see what would happen. Because it could be radical change if Ron Paul had his way. The first thing dismantled with be the Federal Reserve. I'm not sure how the USD would be valued either, as he seems to like to adhere to the gold standard. Which may or may not be a good thing?
Anyway, it'd make politics interesting that's for sure
Staunchly Anti-Abortion.
Staunchly Anti-Gun Control.
Staunchly Anti Gay Rights.
Against ALL trade agreements and the whole concept of trade sanctions.
Let's not.
One word Cuba
Ron Paul can think what ever he wants. His job isn't to implement what he wants but what WE want. His platform isn't anti-abortion, anti-gun control, anti-gay rights. Those are his personal opinions. And if you listen to him he specifically says those issues should be resolved at the local level. That the government should but the f8ck out those issues. People in Detroit MI do not need to make laws to govern people in Miami Florida.
So, it's OK that he has different opinions than me.
His platform is to bring the republic back to the ideas of the founding fathers including removing the federal reserve. I think why not? As it stand now 0.5% control 80% of the wealth. How much worse can it get? Limiting centralized Government power and hence their power is one of Ron Paul's biggest planks. I say I'm willing to give it a try.
Michael
Note: Just because I'm not a big gun fan doesn't mean I think that my way of thinking is good for my neighbor.
I agree with returning to the state's rights model on almost all issues.
I believe that states should decide for themselves whether or not to allow their citizens to carry guns - with the exception that nobody has any reason to own an assault rifle.
He, however, took a stand against the DC gun ban. That is not the stance of someone who wants laws to be handled locally.
I believe that states should decide for themselves whether or not to allow their citizens to carry guns - with the exception that nobody has any reason to own an assault rifle.
He, however, took a stand against the DC gun ban. That is not the stance of someone who wants laws to be handled locally.
I actually find Ron Paul rather interesting, but I do have a problem with the above. If the citizens of a certain state want to make a law banning abortion, the poor who want abortions may have a hard time or impossible time getting them, but the rich will not. I like some federal intervention. Unless we plan to eliminate the Union. that would be interesting.
As a first reaction, I agree. What constitutes a human rights issue will probably be a tricky issue, but that doesn't mean it's a poor criterion.
"Ron Paul can think what ever he wants. His job isn't to implement what he wants but what WE want"-Michael
No. We elect individuals who say they have agendas which most closely resemble our own. An individual can believe we need "stronger defense", for example. What that means to them and to you or to the public in general are different things.
Sorry, one of the things that has brought the US to it's current illustrious position is the electorate not knowing what they are really doing. People voting for D or R or L or whatever, instead of who the individual is and what they will do as a representative of those who vote for them.
While I have decried the current Administration, I recognize it for what it is. An example of the overall failure of the basic functioning of the American government brought on by an uninformed public. I really don't think it would have been any more messed up had someone else been elected.
The Federal government needs to be taken apart and reexamined. The ability of the uninformed to make a wise decision may need to be considered, as well. Perhaps the idea of someone or something putting "our" wishes into effect needs to be examined, perhaps with concepts being elected, powerless functionaries or faceless bureaucracy enacting these concepts.
Wishful thinking, I guess.
No. We elect individuals who say they have agendas which most closely resemble our own. An individual can believe we need "stronger defense", for example. What that means to them and to you or to the public in general are different things.
Sorry, one of the things that has brought the US to it's current illustrious position is the electorate not knowing what they are really doing. People voting for D or R or L or whatever, instead of who the individual is and what they will do as a representative of those who vote for them.
While I have decried the current Administration, I recognize it for what it is. An example of the overall failure of the basic functioning of the American government brought on by an uninformed public. I really don't think it would have been any more messed up had someone else been elected.
The Federal government needs to be taken apart and reexamined. The ability of the uninformed to make a wise decision may need to be considered, as well. Perhaps the idea of someone or something putting "our" wishes into effect needs to be examined, perhaps with concepts being elected, powerless functionaries or faceless bureaucracy enacting these concepts.
Wishful thinking, I guess.
WillNever
Valued Senior Member
Why what?
Why should states be allowed to determine whether their citizens should be allowed to carry guns, or whay should assault weapons be banned across the board or why do I support state's rights?
I don't mind a real change. I'm tired of D and R. Two sides of the same coin. I'd like to try something new. Will it work? Maybe not. But, who'd have thought that the Union itself would have worked - when it was proposed everyone predicted it would fail.
I'd like to see the Internet used to make more and more voting decisions that affect local areas. It would be interesting to see how that would workout.
Maybe there could be a selection pool of every Citizen with a certain IQ and passes a certain set of personalities tests. Of these people one is randomly selected and this person rules as a Dictator for 5 years? Maybe they can only be removed with a 75% agreement of the general public. Local laws are made locally via the internet. There's all sorts of ways to make governments....
I'd like to see the Internet used to make more and more voting decisions that affect local areas. It would be interesting to see how that would workout.
Maybe there could be a selection pool of every Citizen with a certain IQ and passes a certain set of personalities tests. Of these people one is randomly selected and this person rules as a Dictator for 5 years? Maybe they can only be removed with a 75% agreement of the general public. Local laws are made locally via the internet. There's all sorts of ways to make governments....
Because we all know gay people arent human *yes that was in fact sarcasm*
WillNever
Valued Senior Member
I'm curious as to why one would support having different (and often, conflicting) laws within the same country, especially concerning lethal weapons. Don't you think one state permitting the sale of say, assault rifles undermines the laws of neighboring states which prohibit that, with our open border policy between states? I do. I think gun laws are one of the clearest examples of a need for federal law.
RFK is my avatar.
Last edited:
One word, "Hackers".
Someone could just at the click of a button get rid of the dictator, and I thought we want to end corruption?