what is the main reason you support ron paul,

Only if they ceceeded from the nation...

 

If they had the power??? States do not have the power to close their borders.

 

Nothing is sure.
But I don't think that states could close their borders, I doubt seriously that the federal govt. would shrink enough to allow states to seccede. Honestly, while I like some of Paul's ideas, I doubt even if elected he would be able to implement more than a handful of them. I mean how is he going to just abolish the income tax? I see lots of opposition there, and closing down the dept. of Ed, again there will probably be a lot of opposition. While I agree more power needs to be put in the hands of the states and the people, I am not sure how Paul plans to do this. I doubt congress or the courts will be behind him. Does he plan on usurping even more power for the presidency than W? Could set a dangerous precendent.
Also what exactly is his view on the welfare programs? I hear him say he wants to fix it, but how? I agree it needs some work, and is abused, but you can't just let people starve either. I am not sure his ideas are feasible.
I just hear a bunch of vague grand ideas with very little explanation of how these things would work. And what about the thousands of federal workers without a job after he closes all the federal deptartments? How is our economy going to handle that kind of widespread unemployment? How far does he really want to go with privatization? Common sense tells me if everything is paid for privately, the rich are going to have the best of everything and the poor will make do with the rubbish. Will we have second class schools, roads, fire and police protection? How does he plan to stop that?
There are just lots more issues to explore than how he feels about abortion or if the states should have more individual power.

 

i agree with you 100 percent on the reality if he were to be elected. everyone here seems to think the president has far more power than he does. there is no way he could hope to accomplish even a 10th of what he proposes in 4 years . even he acknowledges that.

as far as him not articulating how it would all work out,i beg to differ,he is the only candidate that ive seen that spells out there plan completely. theres hours of footage of him lecturing,being interviewed etc.if youd take the time to find them on the web.i feel he outlines how it will all work in great detail.( assuming the other branches of government were behind him 100%)

but once again,i applaud you for reminding everyone,,again, that we are not electing a dictator. this is still the united states,he can only accomplish what the legislative and judicial branches allow him to accomplish..

 

LBJ accomplished a SHITLOAD in his term(s).

Johnson, like him or hate him, got most of his agenda through.... one way or the other.

There hasn't been a politician like him since, but to say that a president CAN'T accomplish much of their agenda in a small time isn't so.

The "Johnson Treatment" worked so effectively that LBJ got what he wanted MOST of the time.

 

well , i would love to discuss it,but being there was a banning and a stern warning about being off topic in another politics thread today,i feel it best to try an get this thread back on topic..

is there something positive youd like to say about ron paul???

 

A president who was actually ONE OF US would certainly suffer from the same problems of red tape and beurocracy within government that we do. If his agenda was not in line with "THE" agenda, it would make it even harder for him to get anything "accomplished". I've heard him say himself that he doesn't expect to get everything accomplished that he wants to. Actually, we've gone so far astray for so long that he would have to take us in a totally opposite direction for quite some time before we even got back to square one so that he could go foreward the OTHER direction towards his goals! No one is allowed to BE president long enough for all that. But what he CAN do is to START the process. Which is really all anyone including him can expect. You DO have to begin somewhere. That's just realistic.

 

Sure, I'll say something good about Ron Paul. He wants to end the stupid, ineffective "war" on drugs and the stupid "war" on "terror", and the stupid war in Iraq.

But, that's about it for me and Ron Paul. We both hate war.

 

I can't believe that in 2007 people STILL fucking believe that tripe.

And are STILL in "authority."

 

I may have called you a fascist once or twice back then. I don't really think you're a fascist, though I am strongly opposed to libertarianism....

 

I like Ron Paul's decision to get rid of the IRS and fed bank.
And his plan to follow the constitution.

The problem is he makes no sense when it comes to freedom.
He's pro-drugs and pro-guns...he's for everyone's rights even if they make stupid decisions and yet he's against pro-choice when it comes to women's rights.
Not to mention he is more interested saving money then helping the poor
...though I guess that's how small govt works.

I only like him because I feel I can trust him because of his consistency with his message and his anti-war stance.