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.

 

Iowa Aftermath – Ensuring the Empire Comes to an End

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by The Old American
 


First of all Obama is not destroying the economy. In truth the President actually has very little to do with the economy, as in day-to-day business operations. And Ron Paul can be called "an anti-interventionist" but its still the same isolationism, just repackaged. What went around goes around, so you dress it up differently. Same difference.

I agree I would love to see a vital third, or forth or fifth party. I may be in some broad ways be quite conservative, but the GOP has been taken over by the lunatic fringe. And they are anything but in favor of more government involvement in our personal lives. Why? So a bunch of gay people get married, who the hell cares? I'm gay and couldn't care less. It affects know one but those participating. And don't blame Obama for GW's patriot act. A war started under false pretense, and a people who were understandably scared after 9/11.

So the patriot act was rammed down our throats. As far as I'm concerned it remains a major threat to civil liberties. The old FISA courts worked just fine, and were rarely denied. And Paul could still run as an independent, he did run under the Libertarian ticket before he got the big bucks of the Republicans. We shall see. But I do have problems with some of Paul's views that are important to me. And yet I do like a lot of what he says. Just not all of it.




posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by arbiture
reply to post by The Old American
 


First of all Obama is not destroying the economy. In truth the President actually has very little to do with the economy, as in day-to-day business operations. And Ron Paul can be called "an anti-interventionist" but its still the same isolationism, just repackaged.


The two are quite different.

One involves trading with foreign nations, while the other one does not. Isolationism would be bombing a nation rather than making friends with them, which is the exact opposite of what Ron Paul wants to do.

And unfortunately, the President has much to do with the economy. He is responsible for appointing the Fed Chair and the Treasury Chair, and he is responsible for the executive budget. He could, on his own, cut dozens of entire departments saving hundreds of billions of dollars a year.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


In theory yes. But then congress would have to approve anything he did. And we know the current congress is not going to do anything, even when its common sense to help this President. They go out of their way and for what? To prove their all a bunch of idiots. Duh. Perhaps after 2012 the people will clean out the idiot morons from office, Frankly I have had enough of this circus. Why is it only people with low IQ's and a bunch of fools with money that support them run for Congress? Perhaps because they couldn't get a "real" job? You know like the kind I offer, in the private sector?



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by arbiture
 


The President can cut the executive budget down to nothing and he can veto all the spending bills.

Paul could do quite a bit on his own without the need for Congress to do anything.

The American President is much more akin to a dictator than an equal arm of the federal government. This power can be used for good in Paul's case, or it can be used for evil in Obama's case.



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by arbiture
 


The President can cut the executive budget down to nothing and he can veto all the spending bills.

Paul could do quite a bit on his own without the need for Congress to do anything.

The American President is much more akin to a dictator than an equal arm of the federal government. This power can be used for good in Paul's case, or it can be used for evil in Obama's case.


There are checks and balance's on any American President. Mostly I think it's designed to prevent a President from arbitrarily starting WW-3. But it can't if he has an agenda prevent him from starting just any old war. Another and hardly new danger because of this to any President is by he time he IS President, (and by osmosis everyone else, not just Americans) he has people around him who want to "make him happy". Validate him, to validate themselves etc. Yuck.

Some of Ron Paul's change's he would make to government (I said some) I really like. There are those heavily invested who would not. The US Government is the most complicated, extensive "thing", an entity fully embodied and entitled with that word, the human race has ever created. This sucker is big enough it creates it's own weather. And a lot of people have gotten to love the climate. As for Obama being a dictator just a thought, you haven't really met any real dictators have you?



new topics

top topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join