In another thread, we mentioned this man briefly... Ron Paul




Now I like Ron Paul and his ideas... withdraw troops from abroad, get out of the UN, dropping income taxes.... however, what I want is this, my challenge to all Ron Paul supporters willing to talk to me on this:

How will Ron Paul make his policy's a reality?

Ron Paul will no doubt face a Democratic lead Congress. I will give you all this much: he will get us out of Iraq. He will enjoy, to my estimation, about 80% approval ratings for that alone, plus everyone will be glad to have Bush out.

However, how will he abolish income taxes with a Congress htat is talking about repealing the Bush tax cuts to raise income taxes again? And if he does do it, do you really think Congress will cut spending? What makes us think that the nations deficit will just soar that much faster?



Now, I'm not completly closed to the idea of supporting Ron Paul. I don't think very highly of any Republican or Democratic candidate. If it matters, right now I'm leaning towards Mike Huckabee as my favorite of the candidates, but I wuold consider Paul. Now, maybe a little bit of history....

Woodrow Wilson went to Versailles to negotiate a treaty to end WWI with his 14 points, one of which was the League of Nations. He refused to compromise with the Senate, which must ratify all treaties. Woodrow Wilson campaigned hard to get the treaty passed, but the Senate would not bite. The result: The US did not ratify the Treaty of Versailles. Had Wilson been willing to compromise and cooperate with the Senate, the US most likely would have signed the treaty.



My point with this lesson: sometimes a compromise must be made in order to get a policy made. The reason I am concerned abotu this is that Paul has never been willing to compromise. Perhaps as a Congressman, this is acceptable nad maybe a good thing. But with Paul facing a Democratic Congress, the day will come when he must meet Congress halfway to make things atleast better than they were before. Will Ron PAul do this, or will he just make constant speeches about "this must be done" and nothing happen as a result, with the government being in gridlock the whole time?


Thats my argument, and I don't to discuss, atleast here anyways, why Ron Paul's points are good or bad. I want to know how, if I were to vote for Ron Paul, that he would get his policy's to be come a reality.



Thanks for reading, and thanks in advance to all who are willing to help me out here.

 

.... anybody ? ....

 

If I recall my history lessons correctly, Wilson actually took a "Libertarian" stance following WWI (except his League of Nations nonsense), and he was appalled by the devastation it had wrought.To some degree, he was probably influenced by growing calls from Americansthat we stay out of European affairs, and stop meddling in their eternal wars. Wilson did not want tocrush Germany, nor be so punitive as to risk the possibility of German revenge down the road. The dudes from England and France disagreed, and the rest is history -the Treaty of Versailles made someone like Hitler and WWII all be inevitable. Keep in mind that lots of people, including Grandpa Bush, made untold amounts of money from WWII. As President Eisenhowersaid to the American people when he left office, "beware the military industrial complex". In my opinion, President Kennedy learned this lesson the hard way when he threatened to end our involvement in Vietnam.

There are powersbehind the scenes of our federal government, Cowboy - banksters, attorneys,the CFR, andothers.These people are not going tosit around and allowtheir "institutions", like the Federal Reserve, the tax code/IRS and the United Nations to bedismantled by one man. No, it's going to take a revolution of sorts - hence the designation of Ron Paul's campaign as such.

For a variety of reasons, it is unlikely that Ron (or anyone like him) will everbe "elected" to the presidency. However, for the sake of this discussion let's assume that it happens. What can he actually do?

Getting this country back on Constitutional footing is not something that can happen overnight - it's obviously going to take time.The important thing for a President Paulto do would be to get the immediate attention of the powers-that-be, and demonstrate in dramatic fashion that he means business. Here'sa few of the thingsformer Libertarian presidential candidate Harry Browne pledged to do on his first day in office:

1. Pardon everyone who has been convicted solely on a federal tax-evasion charge, a non-violentfederal drug charge, or anon-violent federal gun-control charge, order their immediate release from prison, and restore their civil and voting rights.

2. Instruct the Attorney General toprepare a list of persons convicted solely of federal victimless crimes, and pardon them too.

3. As Commander-in-Chief, remove all Americantroops from United Nations operations.

4. As Commander-in-Chief, remove all American troops from foreign soil...including Europe and Japan.

5. Bring an immediate end to all federal asset-forteiture cases, and initiate restitution to anyone whose property has been impounded, seizedor frozen by the federal government. Over 80% of such seizures occur when no one has even been convicted of a crime (betcha didn't know).

6. Everything put into the Federal Register by previous presidents can be taken out by this president. I will put a hold on regulatory activities while my staff review the Constitutionality of all existing regulations.

Harry also pledged to veto any bill or appropriation that was not specifically authorized byThe Constitution..."pens are cheap", he said.

There were some other things he promised to do immediately, but I think you get the picture. Others would get the picture as well, Cowboy, including attorneys, Congressand The Supremes. Would President Paul go to these lengths on his first day in office? I don't know, but I wouldn'tbet against it.

 

"But with Paul facing a Democratic Congress, the day will come when he must meet Congress halfway to make things at least better than they were before. Will Ron PAul do this, or will he just make constant speeches about "this must be done" and nothing happen as a result, with the government being in gridlock the whole time?"

I forgot to address this, Cowboy.Make things at least better than they were before? When is the last time the federal government did that?? You are a bright young man, and Iapplaud you for paying attention to govenment and politics. However, you must understand that the federal government, as an agency of coercion that has been allowed to stray fromThe Constitution, fails at everything it tries to do...EVERYTHING! What did the Korean War accomplish? Vietnam? Whatdid the "War on Drugs", the "War on Poverty", and all the other variousfederal wars accomplish? I'll tell you what they accomplished, Cowboy - nothing. In fact, they made the problems they were supposed to solve even worse. And what do we have to show for all of this? A bankrupt federal government that is $9,100,000,000,000 in debt.

 

wow, lots of zeros.

the only thing i can think of the government has done right is the maybe the Eisenhower Interstate System? was this done right?

thats not sarcasm, i hope, thats a legitimate question.

 

Cowboy, Libertarians like Ron Paul have very good and purist, and have wonderful ideological views.

They have one flaw though.

They want to remove "ENDOWED BY OUR CREATOR" from the constitution.

Inotherwords, they are conservatives who are secular.

That is why he is in single digits in all the polls.

 

I've been a Libertarian since 1996, and I must tell you that's a new one on me. Where in the heck did you dig that up?

 

It was fine in the beginning, but of course the feds couldn't leave well-enough alone. Scroll down to "the federal role in financing" in the link below, and you'll see why.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System

 

I believe it was you whosaid it yourself once, we started the war with islam.

That is wrong.

The war with Arab and Persian factions is well documented in the Bible.

God told Joshua that the Arabs would forever be a thorn in the side of Israel.

As a friend of Israel, we are under the same covenenat as them including the curse of radical islam.

The War withradical islam is not secular, it is religious and can only be won with strong spritual convictions and Paul and the Libertarian party show non of that

I have many conservative Libertarian friends who are Athiests and believe God has nothing to do with American politics.

Don't tell the moral majority that, obviously Paul is getting none of their votes.

I have heard Paul on Hannity and O'Reilly and he badly balks on the Radical Islam question.

It is not hard to figure out his secular point of view when it comes to terrorism.

 

Libertarians believe that the self is sovereign. It is not, only God is sovereign.

Libertarians believe that the self has the final say, the self doesn't, only God does.

Some Libertarians believe in abortion and the right for states to to govern that, God doesn't.

I could go on for hours on how Libertarians advocate a 'secular conservatism.'