Ignore Ron Paul are the new marching orders?

[an]

[quote=jpinpb][quote=AN]”Ron Paul believes that the ninth and tenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution do not grant the federal government any authority to legalize or ban abortion. Instead, it is up to the individual states to prohibit/allow abortion.”
[/quote]

His personal position on abortion is very clear.[/quote]
Yes, and his view of the federal government’s role on abortion is very clear as well. Since you like to pick one word to emphasize, I’ll fix that for you. Glass half empty vs glass half full.

[aldante]

Arraya,
I not know how to box your quotes then refute them.
I welcome any real debate on Ron Paul but really it is a waste of time for me to respond to people who simply want to relive their High School debate team days and simply try and score points.Not that you are doing that. I honestly think that this country is in more danger of losing its identity then at any other time since the civil war.
I find your that the biggest difference we have is that I believe that given more liberty people will do much better and our system will be improved. I see this as a crisis of education. I see that our media is perpetuating this whole charade. From reading your post it sounds like you think the whole thing should be chucked.
1. You did not address my point. While it is debatable how many people saw the collapse coming there is no debate on the fact that Ron Paul is the only candidate running for President who not only saw it coming took the risk of stating this in public.

This is an example of leadership unlike any other candidate or our current President in my opinion.

He may have got it right because he was an “old kooky man with old ideas” and got lucky. On the other hand he may have a method (Austrian Economics) that is predictive and deserves (based on its successful predictive analysis) to be utilized when making public policy decisions.

2. François Quesnay, Bernard Mandeville, wrote 200 years before Bastiat. Bastiat actually undermines the bee hive analogy. I guess that you did not that or you chose not to add that to your post. Go to http://www.campaignforliberty.org if you want reference material. Ron Paul’s book “END THE FED” is a very quick read as well which brings into the 21st century what liberty means. It explains how war plays a central part in keeping this regime (both dems and republicans)in power.

3. You resort to saying that the whole system is completely broken and needs to be tossed out. Ok….I am not that far gone. I do believe in liberty and defending that liberty.

4. I find it depressing that your analysis of Romer, Goolsby,Krugman, Paulson, Geithner, et al., is “Well they were really trying to do good but it is a flawed system”. I think that they did one hell of a lot to perpetuate this flawed system . I prefer to believe that if we get the right people with the right thought processes they will start to make the system more correct.

So just to reiterate. Ron Paul is the only person (running) that I can see who has wanted to pull the cover off our corrupt crony system. I believe in the Republic.

[aldante]

Arraya,
I not know how to box your quotes then refute them.
I welcome any real debate on Ron Paul but really it is a waste of time for me to respond to people who simply want to relive their High School debate team days and simply try and score points.Not that you are doing that. I honestly think that this country is in more danger of losing its identity then at any other time since the civil war.
I find your that the biggest difference we have is that I believe that given more liberty people will do much better and our system will be improved. I see this as a crisis of education. I see that our media is perpetuating this whole charade. From reading your post it sounds like you think the whole thing should be chucked.
1. You did not address my point. While it is debatable how many people saw the collapse coming there is no debate on the fact that Ron Paul is the only candidate running for President who not only saw it coming took the risk of stating this in public.

This is an example of leadership unlike any other candidate or our current President in my opinion.

He may have got it right because he was an “old kooky man with old ideas” and got lucky. On the other hand he may have a method (Austrian Economics) that is predictive and deserves (based on its successful predictive analysis) to be utilized when making public policy decisions.

2. François Quesnay, Bernard Mandeville, wrote 200 years before Bastiat. Bastiat actually undermines the bee hive analogy. I guess that you did not that or you chose not to add that to your post. Go to http://www.campaignforliberty.org if you want reference material. Ron Paul’s book “END THE FED” is a very quick read as well which brings into the 21st century what liberty means. It explains how war plays a central part in keeping this regime (both dems and republicans)in power.

3. You resort to saying that the whole system is completely broken and needs to be tossed out. Ok….I am not that far gone. I do believe in liberty and defending that liberty.

4. I find it depressing that your analysis of Romer, Goolsby,Krugman, Paulson, Geithner, et al., is “Well they were really trying to do good but it is a flawed system”. I think that they did one hell of a lot to perpetuate this flawed system . I prefer to believe that if we get the right people with the right thought processes they will start to make the system more correct.

So just to reiterate. Ron Paul is the only person (running) that I can see who has wanted to pull the cover off our corrupt crony system. I believe in the Republic.

[aldante]

Arraya,
I not know how to box your quotes then refute them.
I welcome any real debate on Ron Paul but really it is a waste of time for me to respond to people who simply want to relive their High School debate team days and simply try and score points.Not that you are doing that. I honestly think that this country is in more danger of losing its identity then at any other time since the civil war.
I find your that the biggest difference we have is that I believe that given more liberty people will do much better and our system will be improved. I see this as a crisis of education. I see that our media is perpetuating this whole charade. From reading your post it sounds like you think the whole thing should be chucked.
1. You did not address my point. While it is debatable how many people saw the collapse coming there is no debate on the fact that Ron Paul is the only candidate running for President who not only saw it coming took the risk of stating this in public.

This is an example of leadership unlike any other candidate or our current President in my opinion.

He may have got it right because he was an “old kooky man with old ideas” and got lucky. On the other hand he may have a method (Austrian Economics) that is predictive and deserves (based on its successful predictive analysis) to be utilized when making public policy decisions.

2. François Quesnay, Bernard Mandeville, wrote 200 years before Bastiat. Bastiat actually undermines the bee hive analogy. I guess that you did not that or you chose not to add that to your post. Go to http://www.campaignforliberty.org if you want reference material. Ron Paul’s book “END THE FED” is a very quick read as well which brings into the 21st century what liberty means. It explains how war plays a central part in keeping this regime (both dems and republicans)in power.

3. You resort to saying that the whole system is completely broken and needs to be tossed out. Ok….I am not that far gone. I do believe in liberty and defending that liberty.

4. I find it depressing that your analysis of Romer, Goolsby,Krugman, Paulson, Geithner, et al., is “Well they were really trying to do good but it is a flawed system”. I think that they did one hell of a lot to perpetuate this flawed system . I prefer to believe that if we get the right people with the right thought processes they will start to make the system more correct.

So just to reiterate. Ron Paul is the only person (running) that I can see who has wanted to pull the cover off our corrupt crony system. I believe in the Republic.

[aldante]

Arraya,
I not know how to box your quotes then refute them.
I welcome any real debate on Ron Paul but really it is a waste of time for me to respond to people who simply want to relive their High School debate team days and simply try and score points.Not that you are doing that. I honestly think that this country is in more danger of losing its identity then at any other time since the civil war.
I find your that the biggest difference we have is that I believe that given more liberty people will do much better and our system will be improved. I see this as a crisis of education. I see that our media is perpetuating this whole charade. From reading your post it sounds like you think the whole thing should be chucked.
1. You did not address my point. While it is debatable how many people saw the collapse coming there is no debate on the fact that Ron Paul is the only candidate running for President who not only saw it coming took the risk of stating this in public.

This is an example of leadership unlike any other candidate or our current President in my opinion.

He may have got it right because he was an “old kooky man with old ideas” and got lucky. On the other hand he may have a method (Austrian Economics) that is predictive and deserves (based on its successful predictive analysis) to be utilized when making public policy decisions.

2. François Quesnay, Bernard Mandeville, wrote 200 years before Bastiat. Bastiat actually undermines the bee hive analogy. I guess that you did not that or you chose not to add that to your post. Go to http://www.campaignforliberty.org if you want reference material. Ron Paul’s book “END THE FED” is a very quick read as well which brings into the 21st century what liberty means. It explains how war plays a central part in keeping this regime (both dems and republicans)in power.

3. You resort to saying that the whole system is completely broken and needs to be tossed out. Ok….I am not that far gone. I do believe in liberty and defending that liberty.

4. I find it depressing that your analysis of Romer, Goolsby,Krugman, Paulson, Geithner, et al., is “Well they were really trying to do good but it is a flawed system”. I think that they did one hell of a lot to perpetuate this flawed system . I prefer to believe that if we get the right people with the right thought processes they will start to make the system more correct.

So just to reiterate. Ron Paul is the only person (running) that I can see who has wanted to pull the cover off our corrupt crony system. I believe in the Republic.

[aldante]

Arraya,
I not know how to box your quotes then refute them.
I welcome any real debate on Ron Paul but really it is a waste of time for me to respond to people who simply want to relive their High School debate team days and simply try and score points.Not that you are doing that. I honestly think that this country is in more danger of losing its identity then at any other time since the civil war.
I find your that the biggest difference we have is that I believe that given more liberty people will do much better and our system will be improved. I see this as a crisis of education. I see that our media is perpetuating this whole charade. From reading your post it sounds like you think the whole thing should be chucked.
1. You did not address my point. While it is debatable how many people saw the collapse coming there is no debate on the fact that Ron Paul is the only candidate running for President who not only saw it coming took the risk of stating this in public.

This is an example of leadership unlike any other candidate or our current President in my opinion.

He may have got it right because he was an “old kooky man with old ideas” and got lucky. On the other hand he may have a method (Austrian Economics) that is predictive and deserves (based on its successful predictive analysis) to be utilized when making public policy decisions.

2. François Quesnay, Bernard Mandeville, wrote 200 years before Bastiat. Bastiat actually undermines the bee hive analogy. I guess that you did not that or you chose not to add that to your post. Go to http://www.campaignforliberty.org if you want reference material. Ron Paul’s book “END THE FED” is a very quick read as well which brings into the 21st century what liberty means. It explains how war plays a central part in keeping this regime (both dems and republicans)in power.

3. You resort to saying that the whole system is completely broken and needs to be tossed out. Ok….I am not that far gone. I do believe in liberty and defending that liberty.

4. I find it depressing that your analysis of Romer, Goolsby,Krugman, Paulson, Geithner, et al., is “Well they were really trying to do good but it is a flawed system”. I think that they did one hell of a lot to perpetuate this flawed system . I prefer to believe that if we get the right people with the right thought processes they will start to make the system more correct.

So just to reiterate. Ron Paul is the only person (running) that I can see who has wanted to pull the cover off our corrupt crony system. I believe in the Republic.

[UCGal]

AN – I think it’s beyond a stretch to say Paul is ok on Gay Marriage. Specifically, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which is a federal law that effects the recognition of same-sex marriage at the federal level.

He’s backed the DOMA – which bans gay marriage recognition at the federal level.
Some quotes:

Speaking to the group Family Leader in Pella, Paul said of DOMA, “I see that as an act that was prohibiting the move to nationalize [same-sex marriage] and force Iowa to accept the rules of Massachusetts or whatever,” The Des Moines Register reports. DOMA, which President Obama and the Justice Department said they will no longer defend in court, allows states to deny recognition to same-sex marriages performed in other states, and also prevents federal recognition of such unions.

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/03/07/Ron_Paul_Supports_DOMA/

If I were in Congress in 1996, I would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’s constitutional authority to define what official state documents other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a “same sex” marriage license issued in another state. This Congress, I was an original cosponsor of the Marriage Protection Act, HR 3313, that removes challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act from federal courts’ jurisdiction. If I were a member of the Texas legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html

He’s only for states rights to RESTRICT same sex marriage, not to ALLOW same sex marriage.

Not exactly libertarian on this issue.

[UCGal]

AN – I think it’s beyond a stretch to say Paul is ok on Gay Marriage. Specifically, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which is a federal law that effects the recognition of same-sex marriage at the federal level.

He’s backed the DOMA – which bans gay marriage recognition at the federal level.
Some quotes:

Speaking to the group Family Leader in Pella, Paul said of DOMA, “I see that as an act that was prohibiting the move to nationalize [same-sex marriage] and force Iowa to accept the rules of Massachusetts or whatever,” The Des Moines Register reports. DOMA, which President Obama and the Justice Department said they will no longer defend in court, allows states to deny recognition to same-sex marriages performed in other states, and also prevents federal recognition of such unions.

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/03/07/Ron_Paul_Supports_DOMA/

If I were in Congress in 1996, I would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’s constitutional authority to define what official state documents other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a “same sex” marriage license issued in another state. This Congress, I was an original cosponsor of the Marriage Protection Act, HR 3313, that removes challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act from federal courts’ jurisdiction. If I were a member of the Texas legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html

He’s only for states rights to RESTRICT same sex marriage, not to ALLOW same sex marriage.

Not exactly libertarian on this issue.

[UCGal]

AN – I think it’s beyond a stretch to say Paul is ok on Gay Marriage. Specifically, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which is a federal law that effects the recognition of same-sex marriage at the federal level.

He’s backed the DOMA – which bans gay marriage recognition at the federal level.
Some quotes:

Speaking to the group Family Leader in Pella, Paul said of DOMA, “I see that as an act that was prohibiting the move to nationalize [same-sex marriage] and force Iowa to accept the rules of Massachusetts or whatever,” The Des Moines Register reports. DOMA, which President Obama and the Justice Department said they will no longer defend in court, allows states to deny recognition to same-sex marriages performed in other states, and also prevents federal recognition of such unions.

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/03/07/Ron_Paul_Supports_DOMA/

If I were in Congress in 1996, I would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’s constitutional authority to define what official state documents other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a “same sex” marriage license issued in another state. This Congress, I was an original cosponsor of the Marriage Protection Act, HR 3313, that removes challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act from federal courts’ jurisdiction. If I were a member of the Texas legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html

He’s only for states rights to RESTRICT same sex marriage, not to ALLOW same sex marriage.

Not exactly libertarian on this issue.

[UCGal]

AN – I think it’s beyond a stretch to say Paul is ok on Gay Marriage. Specifically, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which is a federal law that effects the recognition of same-sex marriage at the federal level.

He’s backed the DOMA – which bans gay marriage recognition at the federal level.
Some quotes:

Speaking to the group Family Leader in Pella, Paul said of DOMA, “I see that as an act that was prohibiting the move to nationalize [same-sex marriage] and force Iowa to accept the rules of Massachusetts or whatever,” The Des Moines Register reports. DOMA, which President Obama and the Justice Department said they will no longer defend in court, allows states to deny recognition to same-sex marriages performed in other states, and also prevents federal recognition of such unions.

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/03/07/Ron_Paul_Supports_DOMA/

If I were in Congress in 1996, I would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’s constitutional authority to define what official state documents other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a “same sex” marriage license issued in another state. This Congress, I was an original cosponsor of the Marriage Protection Act, HR 3313, that removes challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act from federal courts’ jurisdiction. If I were a member of the Texas legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html

He’s only for states rights to RESTRICT same sex marriage, not to ALLOW same sex marriage.

Not exactly libertarian on this issue.

[UCGal]

AN – I think it’s beyond a stretch to say Paul is ok on Gay Marriage. Specifically, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which is a federal law that effects the recognition of same-sex marriage at the federal level.

He’s backed the DOMA – which bans gay marriage recognition at the federal level.
Some quotes:

Speaking to the group Family Leader in Pella, Paul said of DOMA, “I see that as an act that was prohibiting the move to nationalize [same-sex marriage] and force Iowa to accept the rules of Massachusetts or whatever,” The Des Moines Register reports. DOMA, which President Obama and the Justice Department said they will no longer defend in court, allows states to deny recognition to same-sex marriages performed in other states, and also prevents federal recognition of such unions.

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/03/07/Ron_Paul_Supports_DOMA/

If I were in Congress in 1996, I would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’s constitutional authority to define what official state documents other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a “same sex” marriage license issued in another state. This Congress, I was an original cosponsor of the Marriage Protection Act, HR 3313, that removes challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act from federal courts’ jurisdiction. If I were a member of the Texas legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html

He’s only for states rights to RESTRICT same sex marriage, not to ALLOW same sex marriage.

Not exactly libertarian on this issue.

[blahblahblah]

Hahahahahaha I love it! Multiple wars with no end in sight, the largest debt accumulated in the history of the earth, infrastructure rotting across the country, record unemployment, jobs flying overseas faster than ever, a drug war raging out of control on the border, a healthcare system that is broken beyond repair, and probably about 1000 other things that I can’t be bothered to name here.

And what are we talking about? Divisive “values issues” like abortion, gay marriage, “don’t-ask-don’t tell” etc…, just like we were talking about in 2007, just like we were talking about in 2003, in 1999, in 1995, in 1991, in 1986…

[blahblahblah]

Hahahahahaha I love it! Multiple wars with no end in sight, the largest debt accumulated in the history of the earth, infrastructure rotting across the country, record unemployment, jobs flying overseas faster than ever, a drug war raging out of control on the border, a healthcare system that is broken beyond repair, and probably about 1000 other things that I can’t be bothered to name here.

And what are we talking about? Divisive “values issues” like abortion, gay marriage, “don’t-ask-don’t tell” etc…, just like we were talking about in 2007, just like we were talking about in 2003, in 1999, in 1995, in 1991, in 1986…

[blahblahblah]

Hahahahahaha I love it! Multiple wars with no end in sight, the largest debt accumulated in the history of the earth, infrastructure rotting across the country, record unemployment, jobs flying overseas faster than ever, a drug war raging out of control on the border, a healthcare system that is broken beyond repair, and probably about 1000 other things that I can’t be bothered to name here.

And what are we talking about? Divisive “values issues” like abortion, gay marriage, “don’t-ask-don’t tell” etc…, just like we were talking about in 2007, just like we were talking about in 2003, in 1999, in 1995, in 1991, in 1986…

[blahblahblah]

Hahahahahaha I love it! Multiple wars with no end in sight, the largest debt accumulated in the history of the earth, infrastructure rotting across the country, record unemployment, jobs flying overseas faster than ever, a drug war raging out of control on the border, a healthcare system that is broken beyond repair, and probably about 1000 other things that I can’t be bothered to name here.

And what are we talking about? Divisive “values issues” like abortion, gay marriage, “don’t-ask-don’t tell” etc…, just like we were talking about in 2007, just like we were talking about in 2003, in 1999, in 1995, in 1991, in 1986…

[Author]

Posts