Who do you feel Pittsburghers would prefer more? (Republic: bill, build)

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by mike02

I still don't believe he's advocating for state or local mandatory prayer in public schools.

He is praising that tradition prior to the federal courts getting involved, and advocating that all those federal court decisions get nullified so that states and localities can do it again. Spin it however you like, that isn't someone I want as President.

Lets go back to what I stated before in bold

We covered that. This is only one aspect of his overall radical constitutional vision, which he intends to enforce through vetoes, proposed legislation, and undoubtedly judicial nominations.

You may like that radical vision, but those of us who think that radical vision is erroneous, and who also think that such attempts by a President to enforce it would be disasterous, have every reason to take these issues extremely seriously when evaluating Paul as a presidential candidate.

And you can all us "statists" all you like, but by that definition the vast majority of the electorate are happily "statists", and that is one of several independently sufficient reasons why Paul is never going to be President.

[Hopes]

I admire Paul for being firm on his positions. He doesn't get wishy washy and change his opinion to get votes. That's admirable. But that doesn't mean he's the right candidate for this Pittsburgher.

In addition to many issues Brian mentioned, I'll add the military. He's too idealistic. Sure, it would be great to only have a defensive military, but that's not the reality of our place in the world at this time. I LOVE the idea but it's not feasible. It would be nuts to severely cut back on the military. And his position on abortion bothers me too.

[BrianTH]

I will say that I like having Paul as a Republican candidate, even though I would never want him as my President, because he challenges the conventional wisdom in the Republican primaries on several key issues. And I agree that in light of that role, the firmness of his convictions is an asset (in contrast, for President, I agree you need a pragmatist not an ideologue).

[mike02]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Spin it however you like, that isn't someone I want as President.

Okay, I get it. You rather a president that keeps the Patriot Act in full force and can detain indefinitely an American citizen, as well as assassinate one. I guess that's what the majority of Pittsburghers and the country wants as their president.

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by mike02

Okay, I get it. You rather a president that keeps the Patriot Act in full force and can detain indefinitely an American citizen, as well as assassinate one. I guess that's what the majority of Pittsburghers and the country wants as their president.

Selecting a president is too complex to narrow down to just one or two issues. There are just way too many things about Paul that make me uneasy. I liked what he had to say about certain things. On the surface, many things sound great. The more I thought about the implimentation of those changes, the more I realized they are too idealistic and potentially dangerous. I'm a registered republican. I'd love for the republican party to represent my beliefs. Heck, I'd love for there to be any party that does. But you're not going to scare me with the Patriot Act and indefinitely detaining Americans. I'm not easily motivated to vote based on fear tactics. The sky is not falling, Mike. It's not. While those issues are important, they're not pressing issues for this election at this point in time. (Just like abortion isn't really a pressing issue for every election.) We've been living with the Patriot Act and losing our liberties ever since Bush screamed the sky was falling. Eventually someone will get around to correcting it. Right now, I'm more worried about other issues. I'm certainly at no risk of a drone assassinating me.

[jay5835]

Originally Posted by mike02

OTOH, he doesn't want a fed. court interfering with one's right to pray in school.....

If one wants his children to pray in school, one should send them to a religious school. It's what my parents did, and what tons of other similarly motivated religious people still do. We don't need prayer in schools that have no religious affiliation. Pe.Ri.Od.

Oh, and before you go off on your "president that has signed laws to detain american citizens indefinitely and to assassinate american citizens via drones" crapola, know that I do not want Obama again, either. Whatever whoever said about his being for the top 10% and bottom 10% is so true. I'm going to write in Bill Clinton. I wish Brian would run for president, but in the meantime, I'm writing in Bill Clinton.

[mike02]

Originally Posted by jay5835

If one wants his children to pray in school, one should send them to a religious school. It's what my parents did, and what tons of other similarly motivated religious people still do. We don't need prayer in schools that have no religious affiliation. Pe.Ri.Od.

Oh, and before you go off on your "president that has signed laws to detain american citizens indefinitely and to assassinate american citizens via drones" crapola, know that I do not want Obama again, either. Whatever whoever said about his being for the top 10% and bottom 10% is so true. I'm going to write in Bill Clinton. I wish Brian would run for president, but in the meantime, I'm writing in Bill Clinton.

Assuming if Paul ever won the presidency and decided to do what he claims to want to do (getting fed courts out of jurisdiction of local affairs on religious issues), I don't think it will change the current status quo. You are right that most parents with strong religious beliefs send their kids to private religious schools. Under a Pres. Paul, I just don't foresee local school districts trying to mandate prayer in school. This isn't the 1950s.

And you should write in who you believe should be the best president. That's is one thing voters shouldn't shy away from. If they don't like the D and R on the ballot, they shouldn't just pick the lesser of the two evils. Write-in who they feel best reflects their beliefs and values.

[WINDCHIMES]

I know of many people who are worried about the new act, taking away our freedoms, and now they closed 52 borders into canada or are in the process of doing that...I honestly don't know what to think about that, I am kinda of worried why Obama would allow those laws, I mean he said he was against the patriot act so why sign these things into law? Or why not at least change the wording not to include american citizens? He refused to do this...why not outcry on the left? Um, this is kinda of worse than the patriot act, not saying that was ok either, cause it sure wasnt ok....I could never vote for Obama, he reminds me of his presesdor....I honestly don't know what to think or believe anymore, but I could never in good conscience vote for someone who doesn't care about the middle class, who continues to do the bidding for the rich...

[Caladium]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

I will say that I like having Paul as a Republican candidate, even though I would never want him as my President, because he challenges the conventional wisdom in the Republican primaries on several key issues. And I agree that in light of that role, the firmness of his convictions is an asset (in contrast, for President, I agree you need a pragmatist not an ideologue).

Good point. Challenges from a person like him also (sometimes) get the other candidates to say what they really think instead of dodging around the issues with sound bites.

[greg42]

Which candidate for federal office actually doesn't continue to do the bidding of the rich? Oh, I'm sure many of them think they don't, but they end up doing it as a whole, that's the problem. Only a very few actually continue not to, and those few votes aren't enough to sway the rest.

Even Ron Paul wouldn't achieve that kind of change. And I think Hopes' post is a good summary of the Paul situation for me (except for the registered Republican part; I'm registered no party). When I heard what he said last night about war with Iran, I'm thinking "Yeah, there's one republican who's smart on that", the only one of that whole lousy lot I'll bet (except for maybe Huntsman, not sure of his position on it; Huntsman strikes me as smart). And that's really important. And I've always been concerned about the Patriot act and am concerned about this indefinite detention and all the other possible overstepping of bounds by law enforcement. Hell, I won't fly on a plane right now because of the current TSA procedures. But I can't vote for Paul just on that basis alone. I have to size up everything that is important and make a decision based on that, then hold my nose because there will never be a candidate that truly reflects all my ideal views (or not actually vote, but I haven't missed a presidential vote).