Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why I will NOT vote for Ron Paul

page: 7
16
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by juveous
he's also a veteran and applying for commander in chief, none of his competition have this on him.


Almost any man his age would be a veteran. He was drafted.

Hardly a qualification in my opinion.

Especially since he's going to bring all the troops home.



In my opinion Ron Paul's veterans status puts him more in touch with the minds and hearts of a large part of our population that has or is serving in our military.

Which is a huge advantage.




posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:12 PM
link   
I will not argue with the majority of what you said, but I will say that I do not think that you actually understand how much more beneficial it would be for all of us if we did away with certain government agencies, and then turn that power over to the states. I see nothing wrong with that, because it will be an improvement.

As for where the correct place is to get information...Hmm. We already know where the MSM stands on anything involving Ron Paul, and because of the tactics they have used so far, we cannot trust the majority of what they say. If you do not believe what has been written on Paul's own website, regarding his views, then I suggest going over his voting history one more time, while keeping in mind the constitutionality of the things he wants to abolish, as well as any benefit that would be garnered by transferring those powers to the state.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

I am a progressive futurist globalist


You should have little problem in the coming elections outside of taking your pick. Almost all are globalists, though not many would likely admit to it. Problem could be not many are progressive futurists in any good sense of the term.

I guess you feel one-size-fits-all is a good marketing strategy. I personally am thankful for other governments to choose from when I had enough of the US.

Sorry I missed out on the Obama years - doubt I will be back in the US any time in the coming year or more. I've heard many people are not happy with him and is about as unpopular as Bush, hard as that is to imagine.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by mileysubet
In my opinion Ron Paul's veterans status puts him more in touch with the minds and hearts of a large part of our population that has or is serving in our military.

Which is a huge advantage.


He is 75 - - from the draft era.

I'm sure all those who support volunteer draft and choose to wag their flags from their porches - - can relate.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shark_Feeder

Originally posted by openminded2011
reply to post by CaDreamer
 

So what do you think about removing the EPA, and getting rid of the minimum wage and OSHA? Do you think our country doesnt need environmental protections?


The EPA would be much more effective and powerful if there was a group for each state...instead of a massive overreaching federal agency...and this is from a biologist.


As it stands now, these federal programs collect all this money, pay many, many administrators and whatnot, and then hand the remaining back to the states.

Paul is not AGAINST environmental protection - I suspect He is all for it - what He is against is the FEDS handling it. Money would be more abundant without paying a host of critters on the federal level to play with it and give it back when it's dwindled greatly.

Thanks for Your astute post.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erongaricuaro
You should have little problem in the coming elections outside of taking your pick. Almost all are globalists, though not many would likely admit to it. Problem could be not many are progressive futurists in any good sense of the term.


I understand that.


I guess you feel one-size-fits-all is a good marketing strategy. I personally am thankful for other governments to choose from when I had enough of the US.


I'm not sure I understand that.


Sorry I missed out on the Obama years - doubt I will be back in the US any time in the coming year or more. I've heard many people are not happy with him and is about as unpopular as Bush, hard as that is to imagine.


Propaganda emotional hysteria is more like it. Ask people why they don't like Obama - - few can give you a factual intelligent political answer.

The presidency is a team - not one man. The system is set up with checks and balances that do not always weigh in favor of your chosen leader.

I personally do not need a Rah! Rah! "Feel Good" leader. IMO Obama is a very intelligent methodical thinker. That fits me best.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by mileysubet
In my opinion Ron Paul's veterans status puts him more in touch with the minds and hearts of a large part of our population that has or is serving in our military.

Which is a huge advantage.


He is 75 - - from the draft era.

I'm sure all those who support volunteer draft and choose to wag their flags from their porches - - can relate.


I am not sure I understand how your point relates to my post....



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
I do not think that you actually understand how much more beneficial it would be for all of us if we did away with certain government agencies, and then turn that power over to the states.


I do not want Sheriff Arpaio and his like running Arizona.

How does a city Phoenix (similar to Los Angeles) understand the needs of a mostly rural agricultural state.

QUESTION: Someone please explain how marriage is a state issue.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by mileysubet
In my opinion Ron Paul's veterans status puts him more in touch with the minds and hearts of a large part of our population that has or is serving in our military.

Which is a huge advantage.


He is 75 - - from the draft era.

I'm sure all those who support volunteer draft and choose to wag their flags from their porches - - can relate.


Then you obviously don't understand the respect that contemporary service members and veterans have for those that did serve during the vietnam war, drafted or not, the military will support him, and as you can see by his campaign contributions from active military in comparison to the other candidates, they favor him. It also helps that he isn't as hasty to risk the lives of troops over a conflict that he wants to avoid.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by juveous

Then you obviously don't understand the respect that contemporary service members and veterans have for those that did serve during the vietnam war, drafted or not, the military will support him, and as you can see by his campaign contributions from active military in comparison to the other candidates, they favor him. It also helps that he isn't as hasty to risk the lives of troops over a conflict that he wants to avoid.


I'm 65. Please enlighten me of the Vietnam era.

Global conflict is not avoidable. It can only be postponed or re-directed.
edit on 1-1-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by openminded2011
 


It's like he's trying to turn us into respectful adults instead of immature Snooki wannabes who have to have someone standing to wipe their @$$ for them.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Headband7
reply to post by openminded2011
 


It's like he's trying to turn us into respectful adults instead of immature Snooki wannabes who have to have someone standing to wipe their @$$ for them.


Isn't it every individuals responsibility to turn themselves into respectful adults?



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by openminded2011
I know a lot of people like him because of his isolationist position on world affairs and his willingness to legalize weed, but there are some real concerns that people should have regarding some of his other positions. Even though he might be viewed as the underdog and an alternative to the mainstream GOP, a lot of his positions fall right in line with the republican agenda that has decimated our country for 30 years now. I know this will rub a lot of people the wrong way, but here are my 3 main reasons I will not vote for him:

1. Dr Paul wants to eliminate the Environmental protection agency. Our country is already heavily polluted and he would remove the remaining obstacles corporations face to pollute even further. The last thing we need is more power for corporations to pollute our air and water. The disaster in the Gulf of Mexico would become one of many disasters if this is allowed.

2.He is no friend of working people. He supports abolishing the Federal minimum wage, has twice introduced legislation to repeal OSHA, or the Occupational Safety and Health Act and would deal devastating blows to Social Security including repealing the act that makes it mandatory for employees of nonprofits, to make “coverage completely optional for both present and future workers”, and would “freeze benefit levels”. He has also twice sponsored legislation seeking to repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act which among other things provide that contractors for the federal government must provide the prevailing wage and prohibits corporate “kick backs.” see the bills: H.R.2030, H.R.4604, H.R.736, and H.R.2720

3. Ron Paul’s tax plan is unfair to lower earners and would greatly benefit those with the highest incomes.He has repeatedly submitted amendments to the tax code that would get rid of the estate and gift taxes, tax all earners at 10%, disallow income tax credits to individuals who are not corporations, repeal the elderly tax credit, child care credit, earned income credit, and other common credits for working class citizens. refer to bill H.R.05484


I feel that Dr Pauls yearning for smaller government is just to facilitate removing the obstructions government poses to the top one percent and predatory capitalism. We would see a return to the guilded age where a small powerful elite rules over the country like feudal nobles over the rest of us. He is a wolf in sheeps clothing and I am worried that people dont seem to see this or want to see this. There is a war being waged against the working class in this country and this guy is NOT on our side of the fence.


edit on 1-1-2012 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-1-2012 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-1-2012 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)


Firstly, for someone so concerned about the Republican agenda, why are you using Republican agenda propaganda? They love to say Ron Paul is an isolationist. He is not. he wants to trade with countries, not bomb them. When did it become isolationist to NOT start wars and interfere in other country's affairs?

Secondly, It's clear you look down on Ron Paul supporters from your high pedestal when you say people like him because he wants to legalize pot. As if that is a defining factor for the majority of his supporters. Ridiculous.

Protecting the environment will not be abandoned, it will be up to each state to manage the forests and parks within their OWN land instead of the federal government doing it.

It is not as if everything Ron Paul wants would instantly come into effect just by winning an election. There is a system of checks and balances, and some of his most extreme stances would certainly be tempered by congress. He can compromise.
edit on 1/1/2012 by Drezden because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by juveous

Then you obviously don't understand the respect that contemporary service members and veterans have for those that did serve during the vietnam war, drafted or not, the military will support him, and as you can see by his campaign contributions from active military in comparison to the other candidates, they favor him. It also helps that he isn't as hasty to risk the lives of troops over a conflict that he wants to avoid.

I'm 65. Please enlighten me of the Vietnam era.


ahh, so your age some how nullifies my post about supporting prior service members, of course. I would have said the same for any war mind you.


Global conflict is not avoidable. It can only be postponed or re-directed.
edit on 1-1-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)


who's talking about global conflict, I was just referring to this Nation. Switzerland and Canada have been doing pretty good for a while.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   

[
And I guess there is no chance companies will gravitate to the states with the lowest wage, right?


news flash companies already gravitate to states that suit them



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shark_Feeder

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
he's done nothing to prove as a republican candidate he isn't going to protect the rich at the expense of everyone else


Well that is NEVER going to happen, as you cannot prove a negative.


And the President has a heck of alot more influence on the national and global economy, than a single Congressional Rep does.


the president is a puppet. the president can not be an agitator, he has to be a calmer and someone who give sthe nation confidence. there is even a confidence index. with paul slashing away at middle class and poor safety nets, and coddling the rich, how much confidence will there be ?

none

economy goes boom

paul is a registered republican. that means he protects the wealthy at everybody elses expense

feel free to dispute that



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by juveous
ahh, so your age some how nullifies my post about supporting prior service members, of course. I would have said the same for any war mind you.


You're the one who threw in the Vietnam war. If you fully meant all/any wars - - why? Because it was controversial?

I personally support global international peacekeepers - - but we aren't quite there yet in official title - - although that is pretty much how this last global terrorist war worked itself out.

I actually live in a military town. The military is made up of mostly young kids trying to better themselves. Good for them.

Anyway - - back to the starting gate. I don't see any importance of the president today having a military background. The military does not lack advisers. I'd much prefer the president have a background in international diplomacy and cultural differences.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by openminded2011
reply to post by CaDreamer
 

So what do you think about removing the EPA, and getting rid of the minimum wage and OSHA? Do you think our country doesnt need environmental protections? I would really like to know, why do we need to get rid of the EPA? OSHA?? Please explain this. I dare one RP supporter to give a valid explanation for these positions.
edit on 1-1-2012 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-1-2012 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)


Can you provide a link showing he wants to end the EPA? My research has shown this was a spoof done by Conan Obrien....



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by openminded2011
reply to post by CaDreamer
 


And you should stop getting your info from PRO Ron Paul sites only. I am being objective, and one thing I have noticed about Paul supporters is that they cant look at the facts unless they come from a pro Paul perspective.

You didn't understand the other poster. He's not making up stuff to cover for RP he's just stating RP's politics directly from his platform...



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   
Researching Ron Paul's military service is quite interesting.

He serviced 2 years as a Flight Surgeon - - then finished in the Air Reserves.

"I have been told through comments that Ron Paul did receive a draft notice and chose to join the Air Force, as an option he was given, in order to avoid service in the Army as an enlisted man. So, it is apparently okay for Ron Paul to use a legal means by which to avoid being drafted into the Army but not for Newt Gingrich. Well, at least he isn’t hypocritical or anything."

stevebussey.com...





new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join