Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-04-2008, 03:00 PM   #61
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,323
Bill Maher's show on cable does nothing but discuss political issues, and he claims to be a Libertarian. He scoffs Hillary, really makes fun of McCain, but never says anything hardly about Ron Paul. And he promotes Obama nightly. Wonder how he really feels about Ron Paul? Anybody else notice this?
__________________

__________________
Orchidflower is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 03-04-2008, 03:12 PM   #62
Recycles dryer sheets
Abreutime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 323
So do you think that PR's public finances would have more or less waste if the government expanded from 10% of GDP to 30% of GDP. hint: more

Edit: Smaller governments don't necessarily cause less waste on a percentage basis, but I can say with confidence that they simply have less of my money to waste. Are you arguing that governments are a great example of economies of scale, and the bigger the better?
__________________

__________________
Abreutime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2008, 03:30 PM   #63
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
brewer12345's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 16,391
I am suggesting that devolving into a ragtag band of semi-independent state gummints is perhaps unlikely to be the panacea that RuPaul seems to suggest it would be. But then again, it would be fun watching California's large and technologically advanced military invade Texas and force the conquered population onto a sustainable diet of tofu, brown rice, and bean sprouts.
__________________
"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."



- Will Rogers
brewer12345 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2008, 03:46 PM   #64
Recycles dryer sheets
Abreutime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by brewer12345 View Post
I am suggesting that devolving into a ragtag band of semi-independent state gummints is perhaps unlikely to be the panacea that RuPaul seems to suggest it would be. But then again, it would be fun watching California's large and technologically advanced military invade Texas and force the conquered population onto a sustainable diet of tofu, brown rice, and bean sprouts.
Why are you trolling instead of discussing? Bleh, I guess I had slightly higher expectations. I hope you enjoyed your trip to PR.
__________________
Abreutime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2008, 03:51 PM   #65
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
brewer12345's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 16,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abreutime View Post
Why are you trolling instead of discussing? Bleh, I guess I had slightly higher expectations.
People who live in glass houses...
__________________
"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."



- Will Rogers
brewer12345 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2008, 04:08 PM   #66
Recycles dryer sheets
Abreutime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abreutime View Post
I consider myself more of a state's rightist for a few reasons. First, it is consistent with the founding principles, in that the Constitution details certain duties that are carried out federally, with the remainder handled by the states. I view the federal government as the body that overlooks the overreaching issues, such as national security, international agreements on trade and coalition building, etc. Why do you believe that the states should have less "power" than the federal government?

Second, and this is an angle that I've looked at through the lens of gay marriage, is that states have the ability to set laws that reflect the will of the people. The whole idea was the states would have different laws, different budgets, and were run independently. If you don't like some of the laws in your state, you can move! It's ridiculous (in my mind) that the federal government tries to enforce one policy on all the states on every minute issue. Why should the federal government have a say in speed limits, drinking age, marriage, etc? These seem to be state issues (lacking a clear directive otherwise). If a state government wants to allow 2 men to form a marriage, the state should be able to. If another state wishes to not marry 2 men, that's fine too. If another state decides on a definition of common law marriage that includes long-term roommates (co-ed or single sex), that's fine too!
To get back on topic, Brewer, what do you consider to be the role of the federal government, and what do you consider to be the role of state government? Is there anything you would change about it currently?
__________________
Abreutime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2008, 04:23 PM   #67
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
brewer12345's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 16,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abreutime View Post
To get back on topic, Brewer, what do you consider to be the role of the federal government, and what do you consider to be the role of state government? Is there anything you would change about it currently?
Sure, there are things I would change. But we might as well discuss what we would like to change about the tax code, the laws of physics, etc. My choices appear to be staying home on election night or voting for one or two candidates.
__________________
"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."



- Will Rogers
brewer12345 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2008, 07:50 PM   #68
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Texarkandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abreutime View Post
To get back on topic, ......
Actually, to get back on topic the question was:

"What's Wrong with Ron Paul" -
-not-
"Why is socialism superior to capitalism"

As the OP I kind of meant the question in a personal sense - what is it about Ron Paul that turns "you", personally, off. Guess I wasn't clear enough about what I was attempting to learn from folks.

I already knew what liberal socialist Democrats think is wrong with Ron Paul (& every other Republican & Libertarian) Seems some on here could have saved themselves a lot of blather by simply saying - "He's not a liberal Democrat socialist"

But what the hey, it's been an interesting thread thus far. (As a newbie here, I have been surprised by the political inclinations of some - not what I expected - I suppose I was suspecting a more "Republican" group for some reason)
__________________
Retired 2009!
Texarkandy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2008, 12:57 AM   #69
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
clifp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texarkandy View Post
Actually, to get back on topic the question was:

"What's Wrong with Ron Paul" -
-not-
"Why is socialism superior to capitalism"

As the OP I kind of meant the question in a personal sense - what is it about Ron Paul that turns "you", personally, off. Guess I wasn't clear enough about what I was attempting to learn from folks.
As a person or a presidential candidate?

As person he seems like a kindly old doctor. As I congressmen appreciate that he is willing to take unpopular stands. He is probably one of handful of members of Congress (including McCain) who I actually believe is serious about controlling spending.

As Presidential candidate I think he is horrible. Not only is older than McCain (72) but he acts much older. I look at him I think doddering.
His orator skills make McCain/Hillary look like Obama, and while he isn't horrible in debates, he isn't very good. Note this isn't about what his says. This simply is debate skills, judging from my days on the high school debate team LOL.
(FWIW, I think Romney and Hillary are the best at debate, which I think partly explains why they lost, and why the debate team members at high school never dated the hot chicks/cute guys.)

I completely disagree with him on Foreign Policy, the concept of non-intervention etc. Like or not America is the world police, and I think it is the USA economic self interest to actively engage the rest of world and when facing tyrants we sometimes have to be willing to swing the big stick.

He is almost as protectionist as Pat Buchannan urging the withdrawal and/or opposing virtually every free trade agreement. The obession with the super NAFTA highway, return to the gold standard, and televising the Fed meetings is just plain nuts.


I think is both impossible and unwise to make the level of cuts of government spending that he is proposing. Although I applaud the thought.

On social issue I mostly agree. Although ironically on the one issue where Ron Paul is a orthodox Republican abortion, I am a moderate so we disagree. I think he underestimates the threat Islamic jihadist pose to this country and so his opposition to things like FISA, the Patriot ACT etc is dangerous.

On Iraq his proposal to bring the troops home NOW, would be humanitarian disaster to the long suffering people of Iraq, a big victory for Al Qaeda at Islamic Jihadist, and would set a terrible precedent for a generation on the reliability of America.

But other than that how did you like the play Mrs Lincoln?
__________________
clifp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2008, 06:25 AM   #70
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Texarkandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by clifp View Post
As a person or a presidential candidate?
As a presidential candidate

- and I appreciate the specific & direct thoughts in your post re: policy differences - doesn't change my mind about RP, but I understand where you are coming from in your positions. A few comments though, if I may:

What I'm hearing from a lot of folks is that they think RP proposes to do all these economic things "overnight" (reduction in size of govt, currency reform, etc) - As I understand it RP is well aware many of these cuts cannot be done overnight (some can) & he knows all he could do as Pres is get us on the road toward that happier day. Perhaps he did not get that out there in his message early in the campaign and so was painted with a broad libertarian brush (given his past).

It's interesting that you can applaud the thought of making large cuts in the size of the Fed Govt on the one hand, and yet say it's impossible & unwise on the other.

As to non-interventionism, policing the world, FISA, Patriot etc, - I suppose one is either for that type govt or they're not. Personally I wonder that being the world's policeman is truly in our interest. We could have left Iraq the day we finished our inspections & captured Sadaam. If not for having so many troops vulnerable in Iraq, we could set back Iran's nuclear program by years with a few well-placed surprise missile strikes with no loss of American life & it would be quite inexpensive. I don't see why we have to have all these expensive and unpopular "boots on the ground" activities to do what we need to do if a country's activities are truly a threat to the world.

I don't see RP as orthodox Republican on abortion. He is personally opposed to abortion, but as a political matter he thinks it should be decided state-by-state by the people - and not by the courts.
__________________
Retired 2009!
Texarkandy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2008, 07:47 AM   #71
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texarkandy View Post
I don't see RP as orthodox Republican on abortion. He is personally opposed to abortion, but as a political matter he thinks it should be decided state-by-state by the people - and not by the courts.
Yep. Plus, I think it's also possible to be politically pro-choice yet believe Roe v. Wade was judicial activism at the federal level. (I'm one of them.)
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2008, 10:41 AM   #72
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ladelfina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,713
Quote:
as a political matter he thinks it should be decided state-by-state by the people - and not by the courts.
How about "person-by-person" by the people: even better. (Just sayin', from a libertarian pov...) The courts are your friend when they protect individuals FROM government. The whole point of the Constitution is to circumscribe government.. not to circumscribe people, nor to leave them at the mercy of states who might have their own "less-free" ideas about speech, religion, privacy, etc.

Brewer's invasion scenario cracks me up.

"Judicial activism" too often is shorthand for "a decision leading to an outcome I don't like". (present company excepted, ziggy29).
__________________
ladelfina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2008, 12:14 PM   #73
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Texarkandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladelfina View Post
How about "person-by-person" by the people: even better. (Just sayin', from a libertarian pov...) The courts are your friend when they protect individuals FROM government. The whole point of the Constitution is to circumscribe government.. not to circumscribe people, nor to leave them at the mercy of states who might have their own "less-free" ideas about speech, religion, privacy, etc.

Brewer's invasion scenario cracks me up.

"Judicial activism" too often is shorthand for "a decision leading to an outcome I don't like". (present company excepted, ziggy29).
I think the RP position on abortion is that it's not clearly a specific constitutionally protected right/privilege. The fed govt therefore doesn't have a dog in the fight (unless it happens to occur on Federal jurisdiction property).

There are those who allege abortion is the same as, or akin to, murder or wrongful death (not saying I'm one of those) - the Federal govt does not have jurisdiction over murder/wrongful death except on federal property.

Criminal Statutes re: murder / wrongful death are generally controlled by the States as should be abortion statutes.
__________________
Retired 2009!
Texarkandy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2008, 08:26 PM   #74
Confused about dryer sheets
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1
What's wrong with Ron Paul? Not a damn thing...

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

If you really believe that the explanations that most politicians at the top give for our country's economic woes are accurate, you deserve what's coming within the next ten years. Ron Paul is the only candidate, Democrat or Republican, who has the humility and guts to tell the truth.

McCain, Billary, Obama...we're screwed six ways till Sunday.
__________________
Joe_Derp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2008, 04:57 PM   #75
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martha View Post
I did read what he said carefully and objectively and that is why I saw mush. The state does not give inheritance rights to the unborn--you have to be born alive to inherit. States differ on penalties regarding injury to a woman and her fetus. There is no federal crime. In any event, you have to draw lines and the line is not drawn at conception. Embryos are thrown away, are naturally expelled by women, and I am not aware of any place in the US where it is a crime to dispose of an embryo or to cause the death of an embryo.

Yes, he does not want federal involvement in the abortion question but he supports a state's right to criminalize abortion with the criminals being the "abortionists" as he calls them. He is old enough to remember the days before Roe v. Wade when abortions existed, they have always existed, but were not safe and not legal. I guess he doesn't care.

Sorry though for bringing up abortion. This topic is one that should be on the list of forbidden moderator topics, but I got pulled in.

I don't understand why Ron Paul, and others like him are such advocates of state's rights. I thought the Libertarian position was one of individual rights. But many of these guys, including Paul, seem to hold the philosophy that the federal government has little power but the states have tremendous power that the federal government cannot limit. For example, Clarence Thomas is an extremely strong state's rights advocate. Under his construction of the constitution the federal government could not bar a state from enacting a state religion. That would be up to the states. No individual freedom there.
Ron Paul is a Republican, he is also a Senator, he calls for our Constitution to be followed and I think he is the best of this awful bunch that is running. I plan on writing him in..Unless another party evolves.

There is another it is called the Constitution Party, I think it is The Constituition Party.com with a Charles Baldwin Running, and the Libertarian Party has another person running his name escapes me right now, and the Independant Party has... Ralph Nader running

My only objection to Ron Paul and Mr Baldwin is that they don't believe in "Choice" and I do and I believe in the seperation of Church and State and not too sure of the belief there either.....but if it comes down to getting our Country back from these Pandering,Puppets that we call Democrats and Rebuplicans I will vote for or write in one of them. The good thing is there is still time to check all of them out...

Kathyet

P.S.

You can Google the Libertarian Party to find out that persons name who is running...
__________________

__________________
kathyet is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ron Paul Hydroman Health and Early Retirement 21 08-12-2007 01:03 AM
Ronco's Ron Popeil retires at 70. Nords Other topics 8 10-03-2005 08:55 PM
Paul Strauss WCRTdotORG Hi, I am... 12 08-06-2005 12:40 AM
Hi... I'm Paul piranha Hi, I am... 1 03-06-2005 06:41 PM
Ron Paul on Greenspan Mountain_Mike Other topics 0 02-24-2005 08:42 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:08 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.