Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

If Ron Paul Were President...

page: 1
4

log in

join

posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Being a libertarian can be incredibly frustrating during an election year. While at the very least enjoying the horse-race circus and laughing at the absurdity, most often we are left with two politicians who agree on 95%-97% of substantial issues, but differ on minor ones, wear different suits, or use different rhetoric.


As Friedrich Hayek noted decades ago, liars and crooks tend to rise to the top in politics, and this presidential election is no different. Obama versus Romney, two wings of the same bird of prey.


1) A Curtailment of Empire




Paul has said repeatedly that if the president has the power to order U.S. forces into combat on nothing more than his own say-so, then it stands to reason he can order troops home as well. On day one, Paul tells his generals that he needs a quick, effective exit strategy on his desk tomorrow morning, or their resignation letters.


2) The Bill of Rights is Restored




Paul's "Freedom Agenda Act of 2007" would be the basis of his work to stop the erosion of our basic civil liberties. The bill, which basically repeals the Military Commissions Act of 2006, would "clarify that no information shall be admitted as evidence if it is obtained from the defendant through the use of torture or coercion.


3) End to the Drug War




Even with the threat of the federal government and a very aggressive DEA hanging over the heads of any state that wants to write its own laws...


Please avoid discussion that will violate the T&Cs on the above topic. You can Read More at the source.

4) No More Corporate Welfare




This is an easy one. The super-rich are easily the biggest benefactors of government welfare and wealth transfers, and this becomes a popular place to cut. The Export-Import Bank is defunded, no more TARP-style bailouts, and corporations like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Monsanto, and hundreds of others that wax fat off of government subsidies are forced to compete in the free market and face the wrath of choosy consumers.


5) Social Security Protected




While correctly noting the unconstitutionally of welfare transfer programs like Social Security, President Paul does more in one term to preserve the program than any person before him. Most of the empire and overseas spending is slashed by now, and the money saved is used to patch up the current holes in Social Security and help those who currently rely on it for their retirement. But in the midst of making sure these programs aren't touched, Paul is frank and honest with the American people: these types of programs are not authorizes in the Constitution, are antithetical to a free society, and that previous administrations have been lying to you about the cost.


And perhaps most importantly, for four years President Paul has the bully pulpit at his disposal, and in his calm and gentlemanly demeanor, would do what he did for decades on the House floor, issuing prophetic warnings about the dangers of central banking, empire, a vanishing Bill of Rights, and the virtues of peace and a free society.




posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Another important thing the article left out.

No more foreign aid. We are broke we can't afford to keep giving billions away to other countries.

If people want to give money to other countries fine go ahead just do it out of your own pocket.



posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Ron Paul isn't a Libertarian. He's an establishment Republican.

Gary Johnson is a Libertarian.



posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by jtap66
Ron Paul isn't a Libertarian. He's an establishment Republican.

Gary Johnson is a Libertarian.

You are incorrect.

Mr. Gary isn't much of a libertarian.




posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by jtap66
Ron Paul isn't a Libertarian. He's an establishment Republican.

Gary Johnson is a Libertarian.


You're misinformed, my friend. Ron Paul is a libertarian running in the GOP primary. It is both self-proclaimed and backed up by his voting record and long-standing fight for self-liberty.



posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
He sure is!

Nothing like talking about shrinking government and slashing spending while you line up untold millions in pork for your district.

He's a real throwback to the founding fathers, that Ron Paul.



posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by jtap66
He sure is!

Nothing like talking about shrinking government and slashing spending while you line up untold millions in pork for your district.

He's a real throwback to the founding fathers, that Ron Paul.


So your saying that the taxpayers in RP's district shouldn't be allowed to get anything for their taxes?



posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 

So your saying that the taxpayers in RP's district shouldn't be allowed to get anything for their taxes?

Or that the money won't be spent (in likely more stupid fashion) if it's not earmarked?

People don't seem to understand that if the money isn't earmarked (allocated for specific spending projects, etc.), then the discretion on how to spend it ends up with the Executive, effectively guaranteeing the money disappears with no record of how it was spent and likely going to black-budget military operations or god knows what else.

I agree with Paul - ALL federal expenditures should be earmarked, and honestly the government should just stop taking so much money from the people through so many different channels and guises in the first place so we can do the things that need to be done from the ground-up instead of having a bunch of idiots far-removed stealing from us and acting like they know better than us what needs to be done with our money.



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   
While I agree with Paul's position on many items, I also think he'd face a tough time as President....mostly vs. the Congress. That's where his true battle would be.

To make some of the sweeping changes we want, he'd have to go through Congress, and that would be difficult at best without party allies.

Still though, I think the shakeup is what we need.

That said, I have no delusions...he won't win the nomination, or the votes for President...but I do hope that even if a write-in, he gets enough to send the message that not all of us are sheep, and many of us realize we don't have to vote for one of two choices force-fed to us.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by freakjive
 

The problem is stopping Mr Paul from being assassinated. Money will buy almost anything and money is power and there would be plenty of takers I'm afraid.






top topics



 
4

log in

join