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.
Boy are you wrong, in the long run LIBertarians have more in common with the progressive movement ie the li, li, LIBerals than they do with the Republican party. For example progressives want to end the BS war on drugs and so do libertarians, just so happens the rethugs want to keep it illegal so that they can make money off the illegal sales and on the law enforcement/corrections side of the house.
With good P.R the rethhugs woo libertarians with their bible thumping, gun toting, homophobia, fake conservative principals and disingenuous dedication to free market values.
Truth is if the Libertarians had enough numbers and influence the Republicans would despise you more than liberals. A free market should only come into play until after a corporation has carved a monopoly out in whatever industry and not one second sooner.
Dont believe me ---watch how FOX treats Paul whenever he gets any good press lol and then you TELL ME what you think.
i would suggest that libertarians are the opposite of liberals in the thing that matters most to our economy, spending.
libertarians want less government, not more. liberals want more government, not less.
i think the reason ron paul is gaining in popularity is that he understands what americans want. his most recent bill proposed is ONLY ONE PAGE LONG, and proposes to simply end the mandate to force americans to buy health insurance.
Forcing every American to obtain health insurance is a blatant violation of the Constitution. Defenders of this provision claim the Congress’s constitutional authority to regulate “interstate commerce” gives Congress the power to mandate every American obtain a federally-approved health insurance plan. However, as Judge Andrew Napolitano and other distinguished legal scholars and commentators have pointed out, even the broadest definition of “regulating interstate commerce” cannot reasonably encompass forcing Americans to engage in commerce by purchasing health insurance.
Forcing every American to obtain a congressionally-approved health insurance plan is not just unconstitutional; it is a violation of the basic freedom to make our own decisions regarding how best to meet the health care needs of ourselves and our families.
i give ron paul a lot of credit and hope that he succeeds in this.
my basic thoughts of "if Ron Paul were Elected" would be this:
things would get worse before they got better, and he has no problems relaying that truth. america is the epitamy of instant gratification, things have to turn around RIGHT NOW, or THIS YEAR!!
does that make sense??
and btw, i voted for Ron Paul in 2008. and i'de do it again...
Ron Paul has an attitude of, America needs to be selfish.
The USA needs to start caring more about the uniqueness of the USA and not the worlds charity.
Yes, those of you who are not comfortable with massive military base closures overseas and cutting aid to Israel need not vote for Paul. Military spending would likely fall to half when he is president, and the savings would come from closing bases overseas.
Boy are you wrong, in the long run LIBertarians have more in common with the progressive movement ie the li, li, LIBerals than they do with the Republican party. For example progressives want to end the BS war on drugs and so do libertarians, just so happens the rethugs want to keep it illegal so that they can make money off the illegal sales and on the law enforcement/corrections side of the house.
With good P.R the rethhugs woo libertarians with their bible thumping, gun toting, homophobia, fake conservative principals and disingenuous dedication to free market values.
Truth is if the Libertarians had enough numbers and influence the Republicans would despise you more than liberals. A free market should only come into play until after a corporation has carved a monopoly out in whatever industry and not one second sooner.
Dont believe me ---watch how FOX treats Paul whenever he gets any good press lol and then you TELL ME what you think.
Whatever could be said about Obama, if his poor performance as president could lead to Ron Paul being elected in 2012, he'd at least have a lasting legacy of doing something right for the country.
Forcing every American to obtain health insurance is a blatant violation of the Constitution. Defenders of this provision claim the Congress’s constitutional authority to regulate “interstate commerce” gives Congress the power to mandate every American obtain a federally-approved health insurance plan. However, as Judge Andrew Napolitano and other distinguished legal scholars and commentators have pointed out, even the broadest definition of “regulating interstate commerce” cannot reasonably encompass forcing Americans to engage in commerce by purchasing health insurance.
I agree with Paul and Napolitano that the individual mandate is unconstitutional as it forces individuals to buy a product. OTOH single payer healthcare would be perfectly constitutional under the Tax Clause as it would affect everyone equally and not force individuals to buy private services.
When the next presidential election draws near, we won't get a choice that anyone in their right mind will be able to get excited about. We won't get the chance to vote for Ron Paul, or Dennis Kucinich, or anyone who would offer us hope. I've been around a long time, it's aways the same--hold your nose and vote. The powers-that-be will not allow anything real to change.
We will be offered Obama (the worst thing the Democrats have come up with) and the absolute worst, intellectually challenged, most unelectable Republican they can find, possibly Sarah Palin. The vote will be split almost perfectly 50-50. It will be a huge media event and everyone will be interested because we won't know who wins until the last second. And no matter who wins, the result will be exactly the same: bigger government, more spending, more borrowing, more pork. We will continue to push the accelerator to the floor as we drive off the cliff.
Think about it: in a country with at least 300 million people, how can ANY question/issue be so evenly split that you end up with an almost-exact 50/50 split? Ever think it was inconsistent that Republicans, the party that's supposed to want to keep government out of the average citizen's life, have adopted a government-intervention view on abortion (that most personal of decisions is between a woman, her doctor and government Legislators)? And if you want to minimize the size of Government, both parties say NO (Republicans because they want a huge military, Democrats because they want huge welfare programs).
I'm a fiscal conservative and a social liberal; I despise military spending and only support welfare programs in very limited circumstances (and having children should not qualify you for aid). I believe in preserving nature and the environment, but through reducing human overpopulation rather than lowering human quality of life.
So far the Libertarian Party seems the only hope for this country, but I'm cynical enough to believe the media will continue to slander and marginalize Libertarians so that they will never have the chance to stop the governmental parasite from killing the economic host.
I used to pray for Dick Cheney's health because of her.
So, now you want him to die?
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.
Prophesy
