|
|
#171
10-09-2007, 09:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Watch Out For Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] They made this clear last election cycle in Texas where due to a technicality the Republican candidate couldn't be on the ticket in a dominantly Republican precinct and rather than supporting the Libertarian candidate, they tried to do a write in knowing it would fail. The Democratic candidate won in a landslide. And then they turn around and tell us not to throw away our votes. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Why would Republicans support the Libertarian? Most Republican are ideologically most closer to the Democrats (especially Southern Democrats, as in the case you cited), than they are to the Libertarian Party. [/ QUOTE ] That's not what the Republicans and Democrats claim! (but I agree) [/ QUOTE ] You guys are confusing neoconservatism with true republicanism. The Bush administration is Republican in name only. [/ QUOTE ] Them and all the Republicans in congress? The president certainly doesn't pass laws by himself. When all your politicians are a certain way, the party and the label "Republican" is a certain way. Much like "Democrats" actually support and love corporations although many of their liberal supporters hate corporations. 
|
|
#172
10-09-2007, 09:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Watch Out For Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] " When the people are afraid of the state, Tyranny." - Thomas Jefferson. [/ QUOTE ] "I'm not afraid of the state." - Average American [/ QUOTE ] Wrong.
|
|
#173
10-09-2007, 09:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Watch Out For Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
He favors ending the War on Drugs. He favors neutering the DEA, if not abolishing it as well as other federal agencies like the ATF, IRS, etc. He is in favor of medical marijuana because he does not believe that sick people should be denied the right to use ANY medicine that might help them. It isn't because he thinks people should do drugs, it's because the federal government does not have the power under the Constitution to regulate these matters and the states do. He has sense enough to look at history and current events and realize that a government created war on X always means more X: War on Poverty -> more poverty War on Drugs -> more drugs War on Terror -> more terrorists [/ QUOTE ] Just to clarify, you're saying he's for favoring the federal legalization of all drugs (narcotics included) correct? Saying he's for "ending the war on drugs" is as meaningless as someone saying they "support the war on drugs", as "war on drugs" is a meaningless politician's term. What does that mean exactly? He wants to legalize all the drugs and regulate them? He wants to not legalize them but not bother with trying to stop them from coming into the country? Como what?
|
|
#174
10-09-2007, 10:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Watch Out For Ron Paul
He wants to leave it up to the states because the federal government has no business regulating any of it. Is that hard to comprehend? I suppose if there's no federal law making it illegal then it would be legal wouldn't it? Of course, all states have drug laws in place so it really doesn't make it legal from a practical standpoint does it?
Como states rights? edit: Sounds to me like you favor legalization of marijuana but not other drugs. Am I correct? Ron Paul does not believe that the Federal Government has been granted the right to regulate such matters. And ending the war on drugs is in no way meaningless. Californians running legal marijuana clubs who have been raided by the DEA know this all too well.
|
|
#175
10-09-2007, 10:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Watch Out For Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
Do you really think "rights being taken away" and "rights being violated" are different? [/ QUOTE ] When a right is "violated", there is recourse through the court system. But many in this thread have asserted that rights have "been taken away" and that their is no recourse at all. I'm just looking for a simple list of what rights people assert that have been taken away... And it sounds as if I may be waiting for a long time... [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]
|
|
#176
10-09-2007, 10:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Watch Out For Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
Look up the military commissions act of 2006 that denies habeas corpus rights to anyone deemed an enemy combatant, enemy of the state, etc. [/ QUOTE ] Um...you may want to read the actual text of the act you are asking me to look up. It specifically addresses "alien enemy combatants"....not US citizens. [ QUOTE ] There is now a separate military justice system for these people who can be anyone, even american citizens. [/ QUOTE ] Incorrect, it is not applicable to american citizens. [ QUOTE ] This is exactly what hitler did after the reichstag in order to properly punish the terrorists that set the fire. [/ QUOTE ] Punishing terrorists makes us Nazi's......sweet. [ QUOTE ] Here's a tip: spend less time asking questions you don't want to know the answers to and do some reading. This is afterall, the interweb. It has wonderful features such as The Google. [/ QUOTE ] Funny you should instruct me to "do some reading", when you are incorrectly citing the MCA of 2006 and misquoting it's applicability to american citizens. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]
|
|
#179
10-09-2007, 11:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Watch Out For Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
Deleted [/ QUOTE ] It has been asserted that rights have been "taken away". I ask for a list of them, rather than generalized rhetoric, and when you can't come up with a list.....you call me a troll. Sweet...
|
|
#180
10-09-2007, 11:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Watch Out For Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Incorrect, it is not applicable to american citizens. [/ QUOTE ] Unless that American citizen is an "enemy combatant"? [/ QUOTE ] Except the act applies only to alien enemy combatants. Seriously guy, take 5 minutes to bone up on the law you're honking on and on about. It isn't applicable to american citizens, no matter how bad you want to pretend it is, or how bad you want to misrepresent it as such for the purpose of political rhetoric.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
