FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
I'm not a Libertarian, so this is irrelevant.
The Ron Paul that Ron Paul does not want you to know
- Thread starter blackascoal
- Start date
I'm not a Libertarian, so this is irrelevant.
then please take a remedial class on american civics
Both capital and labor pertaining to interstate commerce, are unambiguously a federal responsiblity. It's explicit in the constitution.
And please, don't hit me up with the hot dog stand question. LPs always yell at me: "Well, this is ridiculous! How can the Feds regulate a hot dog stand vendor!"
The answer is the feds can't regulate a hot dog stand vendor. The most cursory research into federal labor law, will tell you that. That's a state responsibility.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Give me a break .. where in the liberatrian platform is there defense of children?
LAWS TO PROTECT VICTIMIZATION OF CHILDREN=GOOD????
Libertarians' Toy-Gun Joke Is a Flop in East Harlem
February 7, 2003, Friday
Manhattan Libertarian Party says it was trying to make light of what it calls 'silly legislation' when it handed out hundreds of water pistols at East Harlem School in response to New York City Council's proposal to ban toy guns; Councilman Charles Barron calls party racist and residents of East Harlem berate party officials; bill party is objecting to would make it misdemeanor for merchants to sell any kind of toy gun and in some cases might lead to jail time for children caught with toy gun
Libertarian stupid as hell actions was to PROTEST A LAW DESIGNED TO PROTECT CHILDREN
Throw them in jail! That'll protect 'em! Sometimes you have to figure out who is DOING the victimizing. In that case it was the government.
LAWS TO PROTECT VICTIMIZATION OF CHILDREN=GOOD????
Libertarians' Toy-Gun Joke Is a Flop in East Harlem
February 7, 2003, Friday
Manhattan Libertarian Party says it was trying to make light of what it calls 'silly legislation' when it handed out hundreds of water pistols at East Harlem School in response to New York City Council's proposal to ban toy guns; Councilman Charles Barron calls party racist and residents of East Harlem berate party officials; bill party is objecting to would make it misdemeanor for merchants to sell any kind of toy gun and in some cases might lead to jail time for children caught with toy gun
Libertarian stupid as hell actions was to PROTEST A LAW DESIGNED TO PROTECT CHILDREN
Throw them in jail! That'll protect 'em! Sometimes you have to figure out who is DOING the victimizing. In that case it was the government.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
then please take a remedial class on american civics
Both capital and labor pertaining to interstate commerce, are unambiguously a federal responsiblity. It's explicit in the constitution.
And please, don't hit me up with the hot dog stand question. LPs always yell at me: "Well, this is ridiculous! How can the Feds regulate a hot dog stand vendor!"
The answer is the feds can't regulate a hot dog stand vendor. The most cursory research into federal labor law, will tell you that. That's a state responsibility.
Oh yeah. There's that whole interstate commerce things, completely forgot about that...
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Black, why don't we just take little children and lock them in a box tell their 18?
We shouldn't take away everything in life that's worth living in order to make it "safe".
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Please. Anyone of them would be insulted that a socialist even lives in America.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
That was the supreme court, which is kind of different.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
It is the federal goverment who freed slaves.
It is the federal goverment who guaranteed a woman the right to vote (after she fought for it).
It is the federal government who guaranteed a black man could not be murdered and have his white murderer go free. (after they fought for it.)
It is the federal government who guaranteed blacks could excercise their right to register and vote. (after they fought and died for it, and the feds needed troops to guarntee that)
It is the federal goverment who guaranteed that black children go to the same schools as white children. (after they fought for it, and oh, the feds needed troops to enforce that one)
It was the state governments at first who gave women the right to vote. Most states had asceeded by the time the federal government drug it's ass over to requiring it.
It was the federal government itself who game states the power to enslave people in the first place.
The federal government can do good and it does a hell of a lot of wrong. Using a few big things as justification for taking away the federal system of government is retarded.
It is the federal goverment who guaranteed a woman the right to vote (after she fought for it).
It is the federal government who guaranteed a black man could not be murdered and have his white murderer go free. (after they fought for it.)
It is the federal government who guaranteed blacks could excercise their right to register and vote. (after they fought and died for it, and the feds needed troops to guarntee that)
It is the federal goverment who guaranteed that black children go to the same schools as white children. (after they fought for it, and oh, the feds needed troops to enforce that one)
It was the state governments at first who gave women the right to vote. Most states had asceeded by the time the federal government drug it's ass over to requiring it.
It was the federal government itself who game states the power to enslave people in the first place.
The federal government can do good and it does a hell of a lot of wrong. Using a few big things as justification for taking away the federal system of government is retarded.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Wonderful post. IHG said before that he can understand my "rooting for you" over him. So I want to tell him, I am not rooting. These are my beliefs and you state them so beautifully. You are a great addition to this board.
I did not come by my beliefs casually, or without thought. I was a middle of the road democrat who leaned liberal. But I understood little and because I read a lot of history, thought I knew much. Until I met a man who was studying for a ph.d in black history and from him, I began to read history as written by the great black intellectuals, W.E.B. Dubois for instance. There was a time I dismissed the very idea of reperations and did not understand the black American reaction to the OJ verdict. But not only did reading the black intellectuals stun me with the poetry and beauty of their writing, but I began to understand and it has held me in good stead. For instance, from that I came to understand that you cannot know American history until you read black history written by people who are not white, and since that is true, it must also be true that you cannot understand American feminism until you read black intellectual feminists, and this turned out to be true as well. (you can think you know something about second wave feminism from reading Friedan, but she is soley about white, upper middle class women, and does not address race or class in any meaningful way whatsoever) I also became nearly obsessed with the presidency and tragedy of LBJ, and have read volumes and volumes about the civil rights movement, including the fascinating relationship between he and MLK.
The problem comes I think because Damo and IHG take it personally, as if in describing libertarian ideology, you are describing them personally. But here you make it clear that you are not. I am convinced that neither of them are racist, sexist or heartless...just misguided.
But what a great thread, really!
You're really sort of a populist... I've rarely heard you complaining much about social issues, and you support just about ever trade restriction between individuals anyone's ever thought up. Actually, sort of like Care I guess, except Care's a bit more conservative.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
The compassion and intelligence of Ron Paul
Paul on Social Security:
"We didn't have it until 1935. I mean, do you read stories about how many people were laying in the streets and dying and didn't have medical treatment?...Prices were low and the country was productive and families took care of themselves and churches built hospitals and there was no starvation."
WHAT?
Paul on Hurricane Katrina and Rita:
"Is bailing out people that chose to live on the coastline a proper function of the federal government?" he asks. "Why do people in Arizona have to be robbed in order to support the people on the coast?"
HUH? .. Robbed?
Paul on Medicare and Medicaid, which he thinks are unconstitutional:
"I think it's a flaw in the perfect society I would like to see where individuals take care of themselves."
WHAT?
Paul's choice for Vice President:
"John Stossel, John Stossel would be good"
WHAT? .. John Stossel is the worst news reporter in America. A BAD NEWS REPORTER AS VP?
Paul on Bill and Hillary Clinton in a letter he distributed:
Dear Fellow American:
You may not have much time left. Next year, or next month,
Bill Clinton's New Money could wipe you out. I don't mind telling
you: I'm scared.
Not that I miss George Bush. On November 1, 1988, I predicted
to a skeptical _Wall Street Journal_ that he would bring us "war
and depression." Little did I realize that he would also raise our
taxes, impose race quotas, and put East Africa on food stamps!
But bad as Bush was, Bill Clinton gives me the willies. The
slick willies. This guy will even make us nostalgic for Jimmy
Carter, the first Trilateralist "moderate" foisted on us.
It's sometimes thought that Rockefeller and his friends are
capitalists. But they're not. They're for special government
privileges and subsidies for themselves, and massive welfare for the
underclass. Your job, as a member of the middle class, is to pick
up the tab.
Clinton campaigned on a Rockefeller agenda: more spending and
more taxes to benefit big business and the welfare class. No wonder
Clinton was publicly blessed by David Rockefeller in the _New York
Times_, and by the Establishment media all during the campaign.
What kind of a man is Bill Clinton? Our families tell much
about us. Clinton's wife is a far leftist with _very_ close female
friends (while her husband is a sexual playboy of John F. Kennedy
proportions). A friend of mine who attended Yale Law School with
Hillary says that she was known as the "class commie." Today, I
guess, she is merely a pinko. And "Co-President" of the United
States.
According to the _Washington Times_, Clinton's mother spends
every day at the horsetrack near corrupt Hot Springs. According to
_The New Republic_, as a nurse anesthesist, she once let a patient
die while doing her nails. She was found to be criminally
negligent, and then cleared. Her son Bill, the governor, then
promoted the man who cleared her.
You may have read about the uproar over pardons of hardened
criminals signed by a state senator who was temporary Arkansas
governor during the inauguration. Now the _Washington Times_
reports that the pardons were engineered by Clinton before he went
to Washington. One of the criminals let out of prison was the son
of a politician who had been exposing Clinton's black and white
illegitimate children with photos and addresses. "Woods colts,"
they're called in Arkansas slang. Then they made a corrupt deal.
The man agreed to shut up during the campaign; Clinton agreed to
spring his son.
Then there is Clinton's brother Roger, who according to the
_Washington Post_, is a convicted cocaine dealer. What a "First
Family."
Politically, Clinton -- a VIP student visitor to Brezhnev's
Moscow under circumstances that have never been explained -- is a
McGovernite, not a "moderate." Just one example: his chief economic
advisor, Professor Laura Tyson of Berkeley, wrote three books
praising Stalinist economics in Romania! And when he was attorney
general of Arkansas, Bill Clinton declared a "war on cash." It was
good preparation for what he plans for you.
The good news is: you don't have to let it happen. But unless
you take action, it will.
Picture this: your feet are aching and your patience ran out
a long time ago. How dare these bureaucrats make you wait in line
to turn in your greenbacks? Then, when it's finally your turn, you
wish it weren't.
An IRS agent asks -- with that chilling politeness -- for your
name, address, Social Security number, and explanation and
justification of your cash. While muggers and rapists run free on
the streets, the government focuses on you.
***********
"I (Ron Paul) am reminded about all the stories of CIA-Contra cocaine smuggling through the Mena, Arkansas, airport when Clinton was governor, and his supposed protection of the racket.
The cocaine speculation would explain certain mysteries. During the campaign, Bill never released his medical records.... Could the reason for his reticence be DOPE? Clinton has perpetuated troubles with his throat and voice, which could be related to the nasal drainage a cokehead experiences. He is also an insomniac, which dopers are. None of this is conclusive, of course, but it sure is interesting."
Paul on Gold and Money
In a July 29, 1985 issue of Barron's Magazine, Paul issued this dire warning in a picth letter for his new investment bulletin ..
"Dear Friend.
Will you survive the "new money"? You must be prepared, because within one year, the U.S. Treasury will impose a radically different currency on the American people. Government officials won't tell you the truth about this ominous new development and most of your neighbors will be caught napping.... I saw the ugly new bills, tinted pink and blue and blighted with holograms, diffraction gratings, metal threads and chemical alarms."
The government, Paul assured his readers, would be recalling the old currency at the same time, which would cause a real problem for "the underground economy," most of whose participants are doing "a very worthwhile thing" that's good for the country. Paul's June 1985 newsletter told of one Professor Claude Martin of the University of Michigan, who supervised consumer testing of the new money in 1983: "Today... the professor sounds frightened and refuses to talk. After muttering that he no longer is permitted to discuss the project, he hangs up."
Professor Martin discussed the project at length with Barron's and said he'd never spoke to Paul. When confronted with this discrepancy, Paul said he'd heard the story from another person, "who I choose not to name." Ten years later, of course, the Treasury did begin redesigning our paper money—minus, one presumes, the chemical alarms—but never recalled the old bills; civilization did not fall.
Paul's solution? Gold. As with Bush and tax cuts, Paul has never found a problem for which gold was not the solution. A longtime proponent of returning the US to the gold standard, Paul's writings on gold—and there are a lot of them—are liberally sprinkled with references to the Federal Reserve, Bretton Woods, and the rest of the usual gang of tropes; they imbue the shiny, somewhat arbitrarily chosen metal with almost supernatural powers to save us from the impending doom that is always just around the corner but, somehow, never quite arrives. Fortunately, Barron's notes, the ever-helpful Paul had just the thing for the discerning gold buyer, "a coin dealer you can trust": Ron Paul & Co., Dealers in Precious Metals and Rare Coins.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/22/104728/153
THIS is the man you want to see as President?
Paul on Social Security:
"We didn't have it until 1935. I mean, do you read stories about how many people were laying in the streets and dying and didn't have medical treatment?...Prices were low and the country was productive and families took care of themselves and churches built hospitals and there was no starvation."
WHAT?
Paul on Hurricane Katrina and Rita:
"Is bailing out people that chose to live on the coastline a proper function of the federal government?" he asks. "Why do people in Arizona have to be robbed in order to support the people on the coast?"
HUH? .. Robbed?
Paul on Medicare and Medicaid, which he thinks are unconstitutional:
"I think it's a flaw in the perfect society I would like to see where individuals take care of themselves."
WHAT?
Paul's choice for Vice President:
"John Stossel, John Stossel would be good"
WHAT? .. John Stossel is the worst news reporter in America. A BAD NEWS REPORTER AS VP?
Paul on Bill and Hillary Clinton in a letter he distributed:
Dear Fellow American:
You may not have much time left. Next year, or next month,
Bill Clinton's New Money could wipe you out. I don't mind telling
you: I'm scared.
Not that I miss George Bush. On November 1, 1988, I predicted
to a skeptical _Wall Street Journal_ that he would bring us "war
and depression." Little did I realize that he would also raise our
taxes, impose race quotas, and put East Africa on food stamps!
But bad as Bush was, Bill Clinton gives me the willies. The
slick willies. This guy will even make us nostalgic for Jimmy
Carter, the first Trilateralist "moderate" foisted on us.
It's sometimes thought that Rockefeller and his friends are
capitalists. But they're not. They're for special government
privileges and subsidies for themselves, and massive welfare for the
underclass. Your job, as a member of the middle class, is to pick
up the tab.
Clinton campaigned on a Rockefeller agenda: more spending and
more taxes to benefit big business and the welfare class. No wonder
Clinton was publicly blessed by David Rockefeller in the _New York
Times_, and by the Establishment media all during the campaign.
What kind of a man is Bill Clinton? Our families tell much
about us. Clinton's wife is a far leftist with _very_ close female
friends (while her husband is a sexual playboy of John F. Kennedy
proportions). A friend of mine who attended Yale Law School with
Hillary says that she was known as the "class commie." Today, I
guess, she is merely a pinko. And "Co-President" of the United
States.
According to the _Washington Times_, Clinton's mother spends
every day at the horsetrack near corrupt Hot Springs. According to
_The New Republic_, as a nurse anesthesist, she once let a patient
die while doing her nails. She was found to be criminally
negligent, and then cleared. Her son Bill, the governor, then
promoted the man who cleared her.
You may have read about the uproar over pardons of hardened
criminals signed by a state senator who was temporary Arkansas
governor during the inauguration. Now the _Washington Times_
reports that the pardons were engineered by Clinton before he went
to Washington. One of the criminals let out of prison was the son
of a politician who had been exposing Clinton's black and white
illegitimate children with photos and addresses. "Woods colts,"
they're called in Arkansas slang. Then they made a corrupt deal.
The man agreed to shut up during the campaign; Clinton agreed to
spring his son.
Then there is Clinton's brother Roger, who according to the
_Washington Post_, is a convicted cocaine dealer. What a "First
Family."
Politically, Clinton -- a VIP student visitor to Brezhnev's
Moscow under circumstances that have never been explained -- is a
McGovernite, not a "moderate." Just one example: his chief economic
advisor, Professor Laura Tyson of Berkeley, wrote three books
praising Stalinist economics in Romania! And when he was attorney
general of Arkansas, Bill Clinton declared a "war on cash." It was
good preparation for what he plans for you.
The good news is: you don't have to let it happen. But unless
you take action, it will.
Picture this: your feet are aching and your patience ran out
a long time ago. How dare these bureaucrats make you wait in line
to turn in your greenbacks? Then, when it's finally your turn, you
wish it weren't.
An IRS agent asks -- with that chilling politeness -- for your
name, address, Social Security number, and explanation and
justification of your cash. While muggers and rapists run free on
the streets, the government focuses on you.
***********
"I (Ron Paul) am reminded about all the stories of CIA-Contra cocaine smuggling through the Mena, Arkansas, airport when Clinton was governor, and his supposed protection of the racket.
The cocaine speculation would explain certain mysteries. During the campaign, Bill never released his medical records.... Could the reason for his reticence be DOPE? Clinton has perpetuated troubles with his throat and voice, which could be related to the nasal drainage a cokehead experiences. He is also an insomniac, which dopers are. None of this is conclusive, of course, but it sure is interesting."
Paul on Gold and Money
In a July 29, 1985 issue of Barron's Magazine, Paul issued this dire warning in a picth letter for his new investment bulletin ..
"Dear Friend.
Will you survive the "new money"? You must be prepared, because within one year, the U.S. Treasury will impose a radically different currency on the American people. Government officials won't tell you the truth about this ominous new development and most of your neighbors will be caught napping.... I saw the ugly new bills, tinted pink and blue and blighted with holograms, diffraction gratings, metal threads and chemical alarms."
The government, Paul assured his readers, would be recalling the old currency at the same time, which would cause a real problem for "the underground economy," most of whose participants are doing "a very worthwhile thing" that's good for the country. Paul's June 1985 newsletter told of one Professor Claude Martin of the University of Michigan, who supervised consumer testing of the new money in 1983: "Today... the professor sounds frightened and refuses to talk. After muttering that he no longer is permitted to discuss the project, he hangs up."
Professor Martin discussed the project at length with Barron's and said he'd never spoke to Paul. When confronted with this discrepancy, Paul said he'd heard the story from another person, "who I choose not to name." Ten years later, of course, the Treasury did begin redesigning our paper money—minus, one presumes, the chemical alarms—but never recalled the old bills; civilization did not fall.
Paul's solution? Gold. As with Bush and tax cuts, Paul has never found a problem for which gold was not the solution. A longtime proponent of returning the US to the gold standard, Paul's writings on gold—and there are a lot of them—are liberally sprinkled with references to the Federal Reserve, Bretton Woods, and the rest of the usual gang of tropes; they imbue the shiny, somewhat arbitrarily chosen metal with almost supernatural powers to save us from the impending doom that is always just around the corner but, somehow, never quite arrives. Fortunately, Barron's notes, the ever-helpful Paul had just the thing for the discerning gold buyer, "a coin dealer you can trust": Ron Paul & Co., Dealers in Precious Metals and Rare Coins.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/22/104728/153
THIS is the man you want to see as President?
First of all, I do talk about gay marriage and abortion. Second of all I have no idea what you mean by I support every trade restriction between individuals ever thought up.
And third of all, your labels are meaningless, since you know very little about me.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
It's just you, the participants are doing just fine .. and if you believe it to be too long, why are you here posting?
Wow. So the man is actually bug-shagging nuts. He sounds like AHZ in some parts of this, and those are the more coherent parts
Nope, I'll pass!
I guess I just don't understand your position. On the one hand, the constitutional sound position is to say the Feds don't have the authority to prohibit child labor. On the other hand, you say you don't care if we do have a federal prohibition.
I care. And yes, I'm certain there are state labor laws pertaining to child labor. Federal laws can only apply to interstate commerce, and set a minimum national regulatory baseline. States are free to enact their own functionally equivalent, or stricter, labor laws.
I'm saying that it's merely an opinion that a political movement that didn't really exist until the 1950s, are the ideological heir to jefferson.
Portraying one's self as the ideological heir to Paine and Jefferson certainly sounds better than the real reason the american Libertarian ideology kicked off in the 1950s - to oppose New Deal progressive reforms. Since the New Deal reforms were largely high popular (and remain so to this day), it's harder to sell your ideology as being fundamentally anti-New Deal. The Jefferson-Paine angle sounds so much better
LPs get caught up in periphreal things around the margins, like tax rates, and specific government programs.
Liberalism at its core, is about individual freedom. LP's seem to always assume that one's marignal tax rate, is somehow a measure of "freedom". Freedom can, and is, measured in many other ways. A government that promotes and protects individual rights, promotes the common welfare, and reduces risk to citizens, is a liberal philosophy. At it's core. Jefferson and Paine were violently opposed to inheritance, aristocracy, and concentrations of corporate power and wealth. These are liberal traditions. Every LP I've heard in cyberspace defends the extreme wealth gap in this country, and the extreme concentration of wealth. That's neither a Jeffersonian or a Paine position to take.
So, we agree that the "General Welfare" clause isn't some meaningless phrase: A throw away line the founders just tossed into Article I Section 8.
Good. We agree that the general welfare clause does give congress some grant of authority to raise taxes for the common good and the general welfare of the nation, beyond the enumerated powers in the clauses that follow it.
The confederate constitution removed the general welfare clause - because they too knew it gave congress a broader grant of authority than libertarians accept. The confederate constitution would thus have been more in line with modern libertarian thinking.
Last edited:
I have never said that it was unconstitutional. I said that they can only create that minimum and it can only apply to interstate commerce. This limitation makes them weak compared to the states.
And I'm saying that they felt represented before this, but that doesn't mean that they "didn't exist in the US".
Portraying one's self as the ideological heir to Paine and Jefferson certainly sounds better than the real reason the american Libertarian ideology kicked off in the 1950s - to oppose New Deal progressive reforms. Since the New Deal reforms were largely high popular (and remain so to this day), it's harder to sell your ideology as being fundamentally anti-New Deal. The Jefferson-Paine angle sounds so much better
I don't "sell" my ideology, I only explain it to the uninformed.
I have never taken a position that Jefferson was 100% libertarian, but he certainly wasn't "Progressive". As I said, Jefferson's stance against centralized government and for a strong State government, and about a myriad of others makes him closer in ideology to myself than it does to you.
As for Paine, he was almost socialist, I would have no understanding why anybody would assume he was libertarian.
No, we don't. Specifically because there is an Amendment that limits Congress to those enumerated powers.
The current one is enough. I don't suggest a change in the constitution. You keep reiterating this as if I am suppose to run from it. Yet you ignore the fact that Amendment 10 limits the government to specific enumerated powers that are constantly ignored. If a change is needed, do it the right way with an Amendment, stop totally ignoring the constitution that your representatives swear to uphold.
Damo, I'm kind of tied up, so I can't respond point by point.
Here is my observation:
LP's assume that progressives are for a centralized, all-powerful federal goverment. As proof of this, LP's point to the modest social saftey program, and retirement insurance program run by the Feds.
The fact is, I DON'T want a powerful federal government. In fact, unless one is collecting a social security check, the average citizen has almost no interaction with the federal government on a day to day basis, and in their personal business. The Feds really don't do that much, other than national defence, and retirement and health insurance for seniors and the impoverished.
And that's the way it should be. The best federal government is the one that you barely notice is there on a day to day basis. Virtually everything in my day to day life, involves state and local government: roads and highways, education, parks and recreation, law enforcement, courts, water and sewage, garbage and sanitation. I don't want the Feds running those things.
LPs want to measure the "power" of the federal government, based on the size of marginal tax rates, and the total expenditures of government. It doesn't work that way. Federal government may cost a lot, but on a day to day basis, they have virtually no influence over me and my personal business. And I agree that we need to drastically scale back the military industrial complex: that is BY FAR, the greatest discretionary expenditure.
What I want the Federal government to do, is to protect and promote my freedoms and rights as an individual - protect my pursuit of happiness and promote the general welfare as Jefferson and the progressive founders put it: my rights as a worker, under interstate commerce authority, my voting rights pursuant to federal and constitutional law, and to judiciously promote the general welfare with modest investments in science, environmental protection, and infrastructure. By using the regulatory and appropriations authority given to in, in the Constitution.
Here is my observation:
LP's assume that progressives are for a centralized, all-powerful federal goverment. As proof of this, LP's point to the modest social saftey program, and retirement insurance program run by the Feds.
The fact is, I DON'T want a powerful federal government. In fact, unless one is collecting a social security check, the average citizen has almost no interaction with the federal government on a day to day basis, and in their personal business. The Feds really don't do that much, other than national defence, and retirement and health insurance for seniors and the impoverished.
And that's the way it should be. The best federal government is the one that you barely notice is there on a day to day basis. Virtually everything in my day to day life, involves state and local government: roads and highways, education, parks and recreation, law enforcement, courts, water and sewage, garbage and sanitation. I don't want the Feds running those things.
LPs want to measure the "power" of the federal government, based on the size of marginal tax rates, and the total expenditures of government. It doesn't work that way. Federal government may cost a lot, but on a day to day basis, they have virtually no influence over me and my personal business. And I agree that we need to drastically scale back the military industrial complex: that is BY FAR, the greatest discretionary expenditure.
What I want the Federal government to do, is to protect and promote my freedoms and rights as an individual - protect my pursuit of happiness and promote the general welfare as Jefferson and the progressive founders put it: my rights as a worker, under interstate commerce authority, my voting rights pursuant to federal and constitutional law, and to judiciously promote the general welfare with modest investments in science, environmental protection, and infrastructure. By using the regulatory and appropriations authority given to in, in the Constitution.
Last edited:
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
"WHAT? .. John Stossel is the worst news reporter in America. A BAD NEWS REPORTER AS VP?"
Stossel actually won like 10 different Emmy's once. But he's a Libertarian, so it'd make sense for Ron Paul to choose him. Not like it's ever going to happen.
Stossel actually won like 10 different Emmy's once. But he's a Libertarian, so it'd make sense for Ron Paul to choose him. Not like it's ever going to happen.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
I agree, Cypress.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
HA!
Black, I was meaning that as a sort of jest. This is a 25 page topic... you're too serious about things, man. Lighten up.
I wouldn't usually expect a topic this long even if the title had been "Ron Paul is a part of NAMBLA!"
Last edited: