It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ron Paul A Distaster For The USA. Hes Always Wrong. Why Is There So Much Love For Him ? Wrong Paul

page: 23
50
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by gorgi
 


Opinions vary~ Thank goodness yours doesnt amount to much~




posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by gorgi
 

We do not need a small weak government. Countries with small weak governments are Somalia and Sudan and Kenya ect... Is that what you want. Ron Pauls ideas will lead to that.


Weak government would be a problem, perhaps, but small government would not necessarily be. I wouldn't mind an explanation of exactly what you think a 'weak' government would be, and how it would differ from our apparently 'strong' government, though?

I believe Ron Paul's main idea is to cut out redundancy, waste, and beaurocracy, though. What exact is the point of having a Department of Homeland Security that oversees the CIA, NSA, FBI and various other 'intelligence' and law enforcement agencies? My understanding is that Ron would effectively centralized all the disparate functions under the FBI, or the like - seeing as how the agencies haven't been communicating too well and actually seem to get into pissing contests with each other resulting in inefficiency, I can't really see the issue with this.

In fact, as I read the constitution, it seems to me that the founders actually intended what you might consider a 'weak' government. The federal government was supposed to have all powers and responsibilities enumerated to it, with the rest belonging solely to the states and people - and not a whole lot of powers or responsibilities were enumerated. If you think the government should have additional powers, perhaps you should push your representatives for amendment or convention instead of appearing to support the thought that the government should just overstep its contract with the people?


Our Constitution was designed to evolve with the times and to allow flexibility when times change. This is nothing bad.


Yes...via the amendment or constitutional convention processes. When's the last time we did either? I'm not a fan of the 'living document' idea, and neither was Jefferson:

Our peculiar security is in possession of a written constitution...Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.


Be well.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by LexiconRiot
Civil liberties should be observed but the greater issue is that lobbiests from BIG business have our politicians in their pockets.

Again REFORM not BREAK.


Absolutely correct! Its not even a secret that big business funds the campaign election process OPENLY by allowing "donations" of any monetary amount to any candidate and/or political party. If people cannot see the root cause of evil in america then I am afraid we are all wasting our time.

There used to be some restrictions to the amount and how they could be made but the supreme court, ruled by a majority of republicans, overturned the previous legislation and now amost anything goes. So much for accountability, as though there was any to begin with. Fredom of speach equals freedom to donate/bribe.

Simply stated voting should be a necessity for all adults and be funded with tax money. No ifs or buts and no more donations, wether visible or under the table.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by gorgi
 


I think you need to do a little more research on how the country regulates businesses.
jan.ocregister.com...



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by LexiconRiot
I find it mind blowing that the biggest proponents of small government is BIG business. There is a reason for this. Smaller government makes it easier to control the resources. This would not be a pull your self up by the boot straps deal it would equate to modern day slavery. The issue is not the size of the government, it is that the government is in bed with BIG business. There is no free and open market. Think it this way: Wal-Mart places 6 stores in 10 miles kills small businesses then closes 3 stores to streamline profits. Ideals are nice but the reality is people want small government so they can buy bigger TVs and more cushy items. Be damned with thy neighbor.

Again REFORM not BREAK.


I think you are confused with regard to "small government" v. "limited government". The big, over reaching government that you defend has made the abuses you cite not just possible but highly probable. When government over reaches is Constiutional powers corruption becomes endemic.

Ron Paul defends the government limiting itself to its constitutionally defined powers and leaving to State's government all powers not delegated to the Federal govermnent.

I suggest you read Article 1 Section 8 of our Constitution. Its quite clear.

topics.law.cornell.edu...






edit on 7-5-2011 by robyn because: spelling



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman
LexiconRiot and Gorgi.
Look, you are either sharing a brain or are the same.

Your posts are the basis of what most of the elitist schools of higher learning pitch, and the students fall for it about 90% of the time.
Your ideas of how America and the American economy are flawed, but its not totally your fault.

Any basic thought would lead any sane person to the conclusion that the present course of the Fed Govt is not only wrong, but bound for failure.

You rally for more Fed Govt, so as the Govt has expended over say, the last 20 years, things have gotten better?
Lets take a poll, as your statement is infected.


I think you are missing my point. Things are not working they way they are now that we all can agree upon. My argument is that Ron Paul is for the systematic deconstruction of the American Government. This is beyond impossible. It would be irresponsible to do as Paul suggests. We need to reform the current system to make it effective not destroy it.

If what you were saying was "an sane thought" then how is it that this is "fringe politics"? Stop demoralizing others for not agreeing with your point of view. I don't agree with everything Gorgi says but at least he is adding to the debate.

There is common ground here if people are willing to see it. Lets move past ideology and discuss the reality with real solutions.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by LexiconRiot
Civil liberties should be observed but the greater issue is that lobbiests from BIG business have our politicians in their pockets.

Again REFORM not BREAK.


Absolutely correct! Its not even a secret that big business funds the campaign election process OPENLY by allowing "donations" of any monetary amount to any candidate and/or political party. If people cannot see the root cause of evil in america then I am afraid we are all wasting our time.

There used to be some restrictions to the amount and how they could be made but the supreme court, ruled by a majority of republicans, overturned the previous legislation and now amost anything goes. So much for accountability, as though there was any to begin with. Fredom of speach equals freedom to donate/bribe.

Simply stated voting should be a necessity for all adults and be funded with tax money. No ifs or buts and no more donations, wether visible or under the table.

See real solutions to a real problem!
Lets hope this type of thought continues.
edit on 7-5-2011 by LexiconRiot because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by LexiconRiot
 


Sorry, but the vie for common ground is how America got to be in the toilet.
Now the tone of Lexicon has come down, as I am sure that the tone of Gorgi will ramp up.

Look, I know how this works, playing one character off the other. Its not new and your not that good.

I and we here are not fools, and you are trying to play it off as we are.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by robyn

Originally posted by LexiconRiot
I find it mind blowing that the biggest proponents of small government is BIG business. There is a reason for this. Smaller government makes it easier to control the resources. This would not be a pull your self up by the boot straps deal it would equate to modern day slavery. The issue is not the size of the government, it is that the government is in bed with BIG business. There is no free and open market. Think it this way: Wal-Mart places 6 stores in 10 miles kills small businesses then closes 3 stores to streamline profits. Ideals are nice but the reality is people want small government so they can buy bigger TVs and more cushy items. Be damned with thy neighbor.

Again REFORM not BREAK.


I think you are confused with regard to "small government" v. "limited government". The big, over reaching government that you defend has made the abuses you cite not just possible but highly probable. When government over reaches is Constiutional powers corruption becomes endemic.

Ron Paul defends the government limiting itself to its constitutionally defined powers and leaving to State's government all powers not delegated to the Federal govermnent.

I suggest you read Article 1 Section 8 of our Constitution. Its quite clear.

topics.law.cornell.edu...






edit on 7-5-2011 by robyn because: spelling


I think you are confused with the Ideology vs Reality argument here. The issue is not the over reach of government. It is that the overreaches are perpetrated by the lobbiests who control the government!



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by gorgi
 


What a silly argument you make. The fact that we still have some liberties is because the full agenda of socialism/facism/marxism hasn't yet been realized. What you defend will destroy those liberties.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by gorgi
 

We do not need a small weak government. Countries with small weak governments are Somalia and Sudan and Kenya ect... Is that what you want. Ron Pauls ideas will lead to that.


Weak government would be a problem, perhaps, but small government would not necessarily be. I wouldn't mind an explanation of exactly what you think a 'weak' government would be, and how it would differ from our apparently 'strong' government, though?


The problem is we have both an abnormally big and abnormally weak government. I mean really I don't think it can get much worse than what we have been having the last 50 years or so. Even a fascist goverment under mussolini looks good compared to what we have.

Or maybe its just me and my "know-it-all" attutude. LOL



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by LexiconRiot
 


Sorry, but the vie for common ground is how America got to be in the toilet.
Now the tone of Lexicon has come down, as I am sure that the tone of Gorgi will ramp up.

Look, I know how this works, playing one character off the other. Its not new and your not that good.

I and we here are not fools, and you are trying to play it off as we are.


Silly conspiracy theorist Gorgi and I are very different people. Sadly you will never be convinced of this because you are so paranoid that you see doom and gloom in everything.

Two people disagree with me? They must be the same because everyone knows I am always right and the world is against me for knowing the truth!!!!!!!



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by LexiconRiot

Originally posted by robyn

Originally posted by LexiconRiot
I find it mind blowing that the biggest proponents of small government is BIG business. There is a reason for this. Smaller government makes it easier to control the resources. This would not be a pull your self up by the boot straps deal it would equate to modern day slavery. The issue is not the size of the government, it is that the government is in bed with BIG business. There is no free and open market. Think it this way: Wal-Mart places 6 stores in 10 miles kills small businesses then closes 3 stores to streamline profits. Ideals are nice but the reality is people want small government so they can buy bigger TVs and more cushy items. Be damned with thy neighbor.

Again REFORM not BREAK.


I think you are confused with regard to "small government" v. "limited government". The big, over reaching government that you defend has made the abuses you cite not just possible but highly probable. When government over reaches is Constiutional powers corruption becomes endemic.

Ron Paul defends the government limiting itself to its constitutionally defined powers and leaving to State's government all powers not delegated to the Federal govermnent.

I suggest you read Article 1 Section 8 of our Constitution. Its quite clear.

topics.law.cornell.edu...






edit on 7-5-2011 by robyn because: spelling


I think you are confused with the Ideology vs Reality argument here. The issue is not the over reach of government. It is that the overreaches are perpetrated by the lobbiests who control the government!


I am not in the least confused. You are atempting to confuse the issue. Reread my post. It's clear.

Anyhow, nice use of Rule 8 * of Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsly (Barrack Hussein Obamas inspiration):

RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by gorgi
 

We do not need a small weak government. Countries with small weak governments are Somalia and Sudan and Kenya ect... Is that what you want. Ron Pauls ideas will lead to that.


Weak government would be a problem, perhaps, but small government would not necessarily be. I wouldn't mind an explanation of exactly what you think a 'weak' government would be, and how it would differ from our apparently 'strong' government, though?


The problem is we have both an abnormally big and abnormally weak government. I mean really I don't think it can get much worse than what we have been having the last 50 years or so. Even a fascist goverment under mussolini looks good compared to what we have.

Or maybe its just me and my "know-it-all" attutude. LOL


To a degree i agree with you. We need to reinforce our realities of today with the values of the constitution. We need to come together for the common good of all. This division of our populace only makes it easier to exploit us.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by LexiconRiot
 


Has nothing to do with disagreeing with me.

The facts that the Lexicon account was created today, with a straight entrance to this post to defend the Gorgi account is large.
The fact that Lexicon defends Gorgi and becomes aggressive as Gorgi backs down is also huge.

No one here buys your crap.


edit on 7-5-2011 by macman because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by robyn

Originally posted by LexiconRiot

Originally posted by robyn

Originally posted by LexiconRiot
I find it mind blowing that the biggest proponents of small government is BIG business. There is a reason for this. Smaller government makes it easier to control the resources. This would not be a pull your self up by the boot straps deal it would equate to modern day slavery. The issue is not the size of the government, it is that the government is in bed with BIG business. There is no free and open market. Think it this way: Wal-Mart places 6 stores in 10 miles kills small businesses then closes 3 stores to streamline profits. Ideals are nice but the reality is people want small government so they can buy bigger TVs and more cushy items. Be damned with thy neighbor.

Again REFORM not BREAK.


I think you are confused with regard to "small government" v. "limited government". The big, over reaching government that you defend has made the abuses you cite not just possible but highly probable. When government over reaches is Constiutional powers corruption becomes endemic.

Ron Paul defends the government limiting itself to its constitutionally defined powers and leaving to State's government all powers not delegated to the Federal govermnent.

I suggest you read Article 1 Section 8 of our Constitution. Its quite clear.

topics.law.cornell.edu...






edit on 7-5-2011 by robyn because: spelling


I think you are confused with the Ideology vs Reality argument here. The issue is not the over reach of government. It is that the overreaches are perpetrated by the lobbiests who control the government!


I am not in the least confused. You are atempting to confuse the issue. Reread my post. It's clear.

Anyhow, nice use of Rule 8 * of Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsly (Barrack Hussein Obamas inspiration):

RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)


This is silly talk. You give Obama FAR too much credit sir. We can make these rules apply to anything. Please stop with the silliness and attempt to have a real discussion.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
I mean really I don't think it can get much worse than what we have been having the last 50 years or so.


Well here is the rub

Can you tell us which nation of people has more power?

More influence?

More wealth?

In the last 50 America became the super power...



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by gorgi
 


I just wanted to say you are entitled to you opinion but just a couple things in response.

1. The Federal Reserve is not a body of government! Its holding our country hostage and is the number one reason why our dollar is collapsing and the price of everything is skyrocketing.

2. You really believe the DHS is protecting us? All they are doing is taking away our freedoms in the name of protecting us from harm. I am sorry but we do have a military and I can protect myself if need be. DHS is just another unnecessary government agency.

3. The IRS are a bunch of thugs that seek to simply get somebody for making a mistake on their taxes and then charging interest and penalties so they can take more and more money. The IRS needs to be abolished or in the very least their needs to be a fair tax and the IRS can only collect that and prosecute those that intentionally avoid paying their taxes.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 

I had an account before today. Under the name Faithmender. Look it up. However my email had been hacked so i hadn't bothered to create an account until this thread because the flaming was blatant and useless. Gorgi made valid points you wish to not hear so you feel the need to discredit any who can see his validity by lumping us all together. There is no need for this world vs me outlook. Calm down breath and realize that people can disagree with you.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by gorgi
 


OP: Are you being sarcastic?
edit on 7-5-2011 by KelvinH because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
50
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join