Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Ron Paul Questions and Concerns Well
- This topic has 266 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 13 years ago by
scaredyclassic.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 1, 2011 at 1:32 AM #731825November 1, 2011 at 5:39 AM #731830
aldante
Participant[quote=stockstradr]I contributed yesterday to the Ron Paul for President campaign.
I did it to honor the fact that without question he is the only candidate speaking intelligently and honestly about America’s problems and how to best fix them.
Let me guess. Those reading this thread agree with the above, yet you think he cannot win so you withhold support? Then YOU are part of why America’s political system is broken. You create the Catch-22, by withholding support by pre-judging that a decent, honest truth-telling candidate cannot triumph over the evil, corrupting machine that is the American political process.[/quote]
If you read the thread you will see I have gathered two commitments to vote for Ron Paul. I am doing all that I can to represent what I understand about Ron Paul. Including his attitude of decency and fairness during a disagreement. This is one of the reasons I respect him so much: because at times I have failed on this thread to be nice all the time. But he is a great PATRIOT who believes in freedom. I personally contribute every money bomb. I will also pass along to anyone interested his voluteer program. So far I have made about 300 phone calls to New Hampshire for RP. Heck if only two more would join me we could talk to half of the population of that state!
My biggest frustration is the attitude that RP is somehow “unelectable”. WHAT????
Everyone is electable if the get enough votes. He has over One Hundred thousand DONORS to his campaign. This in it self should show people to quit listening to the detractors and ask themselves how can anyone et one-hundred Americans to dole out any cash for nothing in return. It truly is remarkable.November 1, 2011 at 6:49 AM #731834Anonymous
Guest[quote=markmax33]Ask a question and I will show you the constitution works. You can’t just randomly say the constitution is outdated when the topics in it apply universally without the influence of technology. The technology argument is not applicable.[/quote]
What is “welfare?”
What is a “natural born” citizen?
As used in the 2nd Amendment, what is an “arm?”
Given the Commerce Clause, why was it once illegal to transport Coors beer into the state of Georgia?
You get one chance to answer. Provide acceptable answers to all four questions above and I will vote for Ron Paul.
November 1, 2011 at 7:25 AM #731837scaredyclassic
ParticipantWhenever anyone tells you constitutional interpretation is simple, they are either lying to you or they haven’t really looked into it.
Personally I can’t stand politicians who act as if the answer to any constitutional issue is clear if you only read carefully.
November 1, 2011 at 7:26 AM #731838ParticipantGiving soon to be worthless paper dollars to a campaign is unimpressive. Rp should require donations to only be in the form of precious metals.
November 1, 2011 at 7:32 AM #731840SK in CV
Participant[quote=markmax33]Ask a question and I will show you the constitution works. You can’t just randomly say the constitution is outdated when the topics in it apply universally without the influence of technology. The technology argument is not applicable.[/quote]
I got another one for you. The 4th amendment is written in the context of the 18th century. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects…”. Is the hard drive sitting in your laptop computer inside your house an “effect”? (or a paper). How about the email or chat logs you sent or recieved through the yahoo or aol or gmail server where it still resides? How about your daily backups through mozy or some other backup service? And if you have one, how about your uterus?
Please be careful how you answer. There are dangerous people out there.
November 1, 2011 at 8:05 AM #731842ParticipantIt’s difficult for me to believe that a colonial fellow could carry a pistol concealed in his breeches and violate the founders intent for the 2nd am.
November 1, 2011 at 9:01 AM #731847markmax33
Guest[quote=markmax33]Ask a question and I will show you the constitution works. You can’t just randomly say the constitution is outdated when the topics in it apply universally without the influence of technology. The technology argument is not applicable.[/quote]
[quote=pri_dk]
What is “welfare?”
[/quote]He explains it quite well here:
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/ron-paul-on-the-general-welfare-clause/[quote=pri_dk]
What is a “natural born” citizen?
[/quote]I don’t believe or care in the birther part of this but you can hear what they say here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEnaAZrYqQI
[quote=pri_dk]
As used in the 2nd Amendment, what is an “arm?”
[/quote][quote=pri_dk]
Given the Commerce Clause, why was it once illegal to transport Coors beer into the state of Georgia?
[/quote]The 18th amendment changed the original constitution and was later proven to be unpopular and was repealed with another amendment.
[quote=pri_dk]
You get one chance to answer. Provide acceptable answers to all four questions above and I will vote for Ron Paul.[/quote]Easy game. Thanks for your vote!
November 1, 2011 at 9:13 AM #731850Guest[quote=walterwhite]Giving soon to be worthless paper dollars to a campaign is unimpressive. Rp should require donations to only be in the form of precious metals.[/quote]
Under the federal reserve act it is illegal to have a competing currency or exchange gold or silver for goods. There is only one counterfeiter allowed in this country, the Federal Reserve.November 1, 2011 at 9:14 AM #731852Guest[quote=aldante][quote=stockstradr]I contributed yesterday to the Ron Paul for President campaign.
I did it to honor the fact that without question he is the only candidate speaking intelligently and honestly about America’s problems and how to best fix them.
Let me guess. Those reading this thread agree with the above, yet you think he cannot win so you withhold support? Then YOU are part of why America’s political system is broken. You create the Catch-22, by withholding support by pre-judging that a decent, honest truth-telling candidate cannot triumph over the evil, corrupting machine that is the American political process.[/quote]
If you read the thread you will see I have gathered two commitments to vote for Ron Paul. I am doing all that I can to represent what I understand about Ron Paul. Including his attitude of decency and fairness during a disagreement. This is one of the reasons I respect him so much: because at times I have failed on this thread to be nice all the time. But he is a great PATRIOT who believes in freedom. I personally contribute every money bomb. I will also pass along to anyone interested his voluteer program. So far I have made about 300 phone calls to New Hampshire for RP. Heck if only two more would join me we could talk to half of the population of that state!
My biggest frustration is the attitude that RP is somehow “unelectable”. WHAT????
Everyone is electable if the get enough votes. He has over One Hundred thousand DONORS to his campaign. This in it self should show people to quit listening to the detractors and ask themselves how can anyone et one-hundred Americans to dole out any cash for nothing in return. It truly is remarkable.[/quote]I’ve donated over $600 this year as well. Heck it’s tax deductible so it’s only like $300 after all the taxes we pay.
November 1, 2011 at 9:19 AM #731848Guest[quote=markmax33]Ask a question and I will show you the constitution works. You can’t just randomly say the constitution is outdated when the topics in it apply universally without the influence of technology. The technology argument is not applicable.[/quote]
[quote=SK in CV]
I got another one for you. The 4th amendment is written in the context of the 18th century. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects…”. Is the hard drive sitting in your laptop computer inside your house an “effect”? (or a paper). How about the email or chat logs you sent or recieved through the yahoo or aol or gmail server where it still resides? How about your daily backups through mozy or some other backup service? And if you have one, how about your uterus?Please be careful how you answer. There are dangerous people out there.[/quote]
You seem to be questioning the whole point of the constitution. It was to protect our liberties because if you don’t the GOV takes liberties away that you may think shouldn’t be taken away. It was intended to protect the people from the GOV. Yes, people will commit crimes and be brought to justice in a court of law, but the intent was not for the Department of Homeland Security to be taking naked pictures of you at the airport, random stops on the roads for no reasons, etc.
Yes your hard drive is your personal data, yes the information on the wires to ISP is owned by the ISP, yes your ISP servers are owned by the ISP, yes the illegal information you accessing in Holland is owned by their companies. The US has no jurisdiction over any of that without a warrant and shouldn’t be snooping.
The uterus question is odd. The GOV has no jurisdiction over that either. Ron Paul does not support federal jurisdiction over that either. It is a states issue as he has explained numerous times.
[quote=SK in CV]
There are dangerous people out there.
[/quote]And I’m not scared of them. I have a right to bear arms. I grew up in the roughest high school you have ever seen. It was 95% Black , 4% Asian and 1% white. Kids were shot and stabbed at my high school and killed. They were in the drug game. I minded my business, was a sports star and was very successful. I’m not scared of this “random dangerous violence” you seem to imply may hurt America. The random dangerous violence is the GOV getting too much power.
November 1, 2011 at 9:28 AM #731854Guest[quote=markmax33][quote=pri_dk]What is “welfare?[/quote]
He explains it quite well here:
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/ron-paul-on-the-general-welfare-clause/%5B/quote%5DSorry, but that was an attempt to explain what it isn’t. The question was asking what it is.
As for the other videos, the first one scores a “WTF?” and the second one does nothing to tell me whether the 2nd Amendment allows people and/or local militias to “bear” an ICBM.
[quote]The 18th amendment changed the original constitution and was later proven to be unpopular and was repealed with another amendment.[/quote]
A Real American would not have missed the reference to the freedom-luvin’ Bandit.
November 1, 2011 at 9:38 AM #731855Participant[quote=markmax33]
I’ve donated over $600 this year as well. Heck it’s tax deductible so it’s only like $300 after all the taxes we pay.[/quote]No, it’s not tax deductible. And there is no 50% tax bracket anyway. Are taxes constitutional?
November 1, 2011 at 9:53 AM #731857Participant[quote=markmax33]
You seem to be questioning the whole point of the constitution. It was to protect our liberties because if you don’t the GOV takes liberties away that you may think shouldn’t be taken away. It was intended to protect the people from the GOV. Yes, people will commit crimes and be brought to justice in a court of law, but the intent was not for the Department of Homeland Security to be taking naked pictures of you at the airport, random stops on the roads for no reasons, etc.[/quote]Not questioning the point of the constitution at all. Only questioning your assertion that interpretation is easy.
[quote=markmax33]
Yes your hard drive is your personal data, yes the information on the wires to ISP is owned by the ISP, yes your ISP servers are owned by the ISP, yes the illegal information you accessing in Holland is owned by their companies. The US has no jurisdiction over any of that without a warrant and shouldn’t be snooping.[/quote]My question was whether the security against unreasonable search and seizure extends to your property held by another. If the ISP, or google or yahoo turn over info voluntarily, without a warrant, have your rights been violated?
[quote=markmax33]
The uterus question is odd. The GOV has no jurisdiction over that either. Ron Paul does not support federal jurisdiction over that either. It is a states issue as he has explained numerous times. [/quote]So it’s your contention that Ron Paul believes the states have the right to invade the privacy of a woman’s uterus, irrespective of the guarantees provided in the 4th amendment? Does that extend to the rest of the 4th amendment? State and local police are not bound by the unreasonable search and siezure clause? Really?
November 1, 2011 at 9:56 AM #731858Guest[quote]No, it’s not tax deductible.[/quote]
Uh oh. Looks like the IRS is going to be investigating someone’s tax returns.
But how will they know who markmarx33 is?
They can search the Piggington database, of course.
Or would that be an “unreasonable” search?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.