Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I will be voting for Ron Paul for POTUS, again. I have voted for him each time he has been on the ballot.
I will vote Libertarian when this primary election is over.
I suspect no RP supporter expects him to win anything. I don't think the American public could survive without some authoritarian big daddy telling them what to do.
RP says the Federal war on drugs should be stopped. If the states want to do something, that is up to the states.
Local control in Texas is certainly not more effective. It is as corrupt as any place on the planet.
my suggestion watch more youtube videos about the past debates.
on the war on drugs.
yep its a loser like the prohibition you cannot prevent/ban people from harming themselves. look at junkfood and soda, you can discourage it of course.
Ron Paul said that war on drugs should be ended of course hopely all states would stop it as well.
BUT if they really want to ban alcohol they also have the right to but since it is localized the people in the area get to choose if they want that law or not.
it would be easier to deal with it than on the federal level which applies to everyone then.
but he mostly favors ending it completely and would encourage states to do so but by no means FORCE them to do so.
thus its up to the states not the federal government.
So btw some states have legalized weed for medical uses and legalized growing weed. So what are the feds going to do about it eh?
as you can see some states are rebelling against government tyranny already.
you cannot enact a law you cannot enforce after all.
NO LAWS should be passed that cannot be enforced it means it is a meaningless law and only to meant to punish those that they wish to put in jail
aka encouraging selective jailing: racism by the police
thus the drug wars and laws are in fact racism
the 0% interest are also selective bailouts and prejudice vs middle class and poor because they cannot borrow at 0% now can they?
So casper you are in fact partially wrong on this but partially correct.
but i have also said old people are stubborn and wont admit they are wrong when they are wrong so i doubt any old people will admit it.
loveshiscountry explained it better than you already though. just delivered it a bit more demeaning than you would like hence you wont admit it.
You need to distinguish between personal views. While I think Paul has no desire to continue a "war on drugs". It's the Fed govt that has been declaring all these silly wars anyway.
Like the guy in the MJ doc said "I wish the Govt would declare war on hot chicks then there would be one on every corner".
He realizes that it isn't up to the Fed govt, they in fact are a problem, and that better control of such craziness can be accomplished at individual and state levels, just like everything else.
You are partially correct. In that, Paul wants the Federal government out of it, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he _wants_ the state governments to do it. He maintains the position that he is not going to force the state governments either way. The state can do it if they want.
In reality, it's only the federal government who is obsessed with the War on Drugs, and not the states. Most states lean towards legalizing it (CA, CO, NC etc.), but is currently hamstrung by federal bullying. It was never meant to be this way, and this is upending the Constitution. The federal government is not supposed to override state laws on matters which are not relegated to them in Article 1, Section 8. If the states have balls, they can nullify bad federal laws. (There is a movement on to do just this. Check Tenth Amendment Center.)
So, take the federal government out of this, and most states will move towards decriminalizing drugs. If deeply conservative states do want to ban drugs, that's their wish. Paul or I are not going to worry about it. But at least people now have more options on where to live.
thank you. Spoken directly and very eloquently, as usual!
I am interested in getting feedback on this from Ron Paul supporters please let me know what you think.
In the interest of full disclosure I am a Democrat who will vote for Obama. With that said...
I think I understand the folks who say they will write in Paul on election day. At first I thought that was kind of odd since it is highly unlikely Paul will win the general election that way, and that vote could possibly be a spoiler, but then it started making sense. The main argument to vote for a Republican, or perhaps a Democrat as a Paul supporter is to back the "lesser of two evils." However if you are a person who truly subscribes to Paul's views about eliminating a big federal government then that seems to be a misnomer. Really you would be voting for the different of "two evils." Paul's anti-big government message is indeed about reducing/eliminating entitlements and lowering taxes like the other GOP candidates, but equally important to Paul's anti-big government message is about ending the war on drugs/eliminating morality laws, and abandoning the neo-conservative foreign policy agenda. These are things Democrats and Liberals tend to favor, or at least are more open to.
So basically for someone who is honestly very close to Paul ideologically asking them to vote for the major parties is like asking them to decide what kind of big government they would rather have. Thus it makes sense to me why a Paul supporter would say none of the above.
Does this sound right?
Basically. The fact is for me, it's Ron Paul or nothing at all. I really don't care for any other candidate- what a bunch of puppets.
Ron Paul is the only choice for me......This country, though just doesn't get it. So I won't be surprised if they do vote for more of the same.
Maybe it's time for me to explore a whole different country
I will be voting for Ron Paul for POTUS, again. I have voted for him each time he has been on the ballot.
I will vote Libertarian when this primary election is over.
I suspect no RP supporter expects him to win anything. I don't think the American public could survive without some authoritarian big daddy telling them what to do.
RP says the Federal war on drugs should be stopped. If the states want to do something, that is up to the states.
Local control in Texas is certainly not more effective. It is as corrupt as any place on the planet.
well I certainly give you credit for 2 things: 1-you realize he isn't going to get the nomination and you are honest enough to admit it; 2- You are not staying at home on election day, you are voting Libartarian party. Though I will vote for the Republican that gets the nomination, I respect eveyone's right to vote for whom they support but I do have a huge problem with people who do not vote period cause they can't have their way.
my suggestion watch more youtube videos about the past debates.
on the war on drugs.
yep its a loser like the prohibition you cannot prevent/ban people from harming themselves. look at junkfood and soda, you can discourage it of course.
Ron Paul said that war on drugs should be ended of course hopely all states would stop it as well.
BUT if they really want to ban alcohol they also have the right to but since it is localized the people in the area get to choose if they want that law or not.
it would be easier to deal with it than on the federal level which applies to everyone then.
but he mostly favors ending it completely and would encourage states to do so but by no means FORCE them to do so.
thus its up to the states not the federal government.
So btw some states have legalized weed for medical uses and legalized growing weed. So what are the feds going to do about it eh?
as you can see some states are rebelling against government tyranny already.
you cannot enact a law you cannot enforce after all.
NO LAWS should be passed that cannot be enforced it means it is a meaningless law and only to meant to punish those that they wish to put in jail
aka encouraging selective jailing: racism by the police
thus the drug wars and laws are in fact racism
the 0% interest are also selective bailouts and prejudice vs middle class and poor because they cannot borrow at 0% now can they?
So casper you are in fact partially wrong on this but partially correct.
but i have also said old people are stubborn and wont admit they are wrong when they are wrong so i doubt any old people will admit it.
loveshiscountry explained it better than you already though. just delivered it a bit more demeaning than you would like hence you wont admit it.
oh well.
My advise, YouTubes can be doctored, edited whatever. I take all of them with a grain of salt, I wish everyone did.
well I certainly give you credit for 2 things: 1-you realize he isn't going to get the nomination and you are honest enough to admit it; 2- You are not staying at home on election day, you are voting Libartarian party. Though I will vote for the Republican that gets the nomination, I respect eveyone's right to vote for whom they support but I do have a huge problem with people who do not vote period cause they can't have their way.
Nita
Thanks,
There was a time when I'd be voting Republican. Until Texas does something about the TDHCA and contractors having a set fee for their bribes and the way they handle tax credit housing, I'll never vote for a Republican for state or local office again.
My precinct traditionally has 7 Libertarian votes. It does not matter who gets my vote in the general election, Texas will go Republican.
If my vote mattered, I'd rethink my position. Like Emma Goldman said, "if voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal".
There was a time when I'd be voting Republican. Until Texas does something about the TDHCA and contractors having a set fee for their bribes and the way they handle tax credit housing, I'll never vote for a Republican for state or local office again.
My precinct traditionally has 7 Libertarian votes. It does not matter who gets my vote in the general election, Texas will go Republican.
If my vote mattered, I'd rethink my position. Like Emma Goldman said, "if voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal".
I don't totally agree with that last statement or I certainly don't want to be that negative. I want to keep as positive as we can..you know the glass is 1/2 full.
If you vote for the lesser of two evils, guess what? You just voted for evil.
Yes, a write-in vote for a real candidate with actual principles is so much better than voting for an evil DNC or RNC candidate. He probably won't win, but at least you won't be participating in electing evil to run your country.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
