Ron Paul: Too weird for the White House

[xj0hnx]

Ron Paul feels like the states can put their respective boots down onto the civil rights of individuals and nobody else can do anything about it because he doesn't believe that those civil rights apply against state governments. So, no, Ron Paul isn't interested in directing anything towards equilibrium. He wants total abrogation of individual civil rights and liberties when it comes to the states.

Seriously, where do you come up with these demented lies? Is there a talking points web site or something?

 

[RabidMongoose]

I don't agree with RM on all his points. However, this is rather non-responsive to the point he's making. When you say he is trying to restore a balance in federal vs. state power, you are talking about something different - his narrower interpretation of the Commerce Clause. What RM is talking about is that Paul doesn't believe in the incorporation doctrine, i.e. that the Bill of Rights applies to the states. Meaning state governments can trample on individual rights as much as they desire. That has nothing to do with federal power over the state. It has to do with state power over the individual. What kind of "libertarian" thinks a state government can infringe on freedom of speech, take away your Second Amendment gun rights, and search your house without probable cause?

Yup. I just want to re-iterate this position as it's very clear that Ron Paul is anti-civil liberties in the end. Ron Paul does NOT believe that the Bill of Rights applies to the states because he does not believe in the incorporation doctrine. Moreover, he also wants to remove the 14th Amendment from the Constitution, which is the very basis of the incorporation doctrine. He does not think that all sorts of rights that most people think apply to them should apply against state government.

 

[xj0hnx]

Craig isn't thinking staight on this issue, but calling him a racist is over the top here. I'm often critical of Craig, but this is beyond the pale.

Think for a second about who you are responding to, the guy is one of the bigger trolls on this site.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I feel that while states can make up their own laws, they cannot supersede national federal laws such as the Civil Rights Act 1964 etc. If RP were elected president and by executive order repealed CRA and other federal level bills, or tried to get rid of the 2nd Amendment, IMO there would be riots and armed anarchy in the streets.

Checks and balances, as well as our rights in our constitution should be permanent and untouchable. It is the insubordination of the constitution as well as the checks and balances systems our founding fathers instituted that will be our downfall.

Meanwhile, whats sad is that novel liberty-crushing bills like SOPA and NDAA tried by our current crop of "constitution stompers" is met with little protest or opposition.

You are missing the point. Ron Paul feels that states are not bound by the Bill of Rights. He doesn't believe in the state being checked or balanced. This isn't an issue of federal law, but of whether entire portions of the Constitution apply to the states.

 

[RabidMongoose]

..

 

[Nebor]

So RabidMongoose is a baby rapist? I knew it!

 

[RabidMongoose]

Craig isn't thinking staight on this issue, but calling him a racist is over the top here. I'm often critical of Craig, but this is beyond the pale.

Maybe, but he has been accepting of racists in the past or at least making excuses for them. For example, he has been very insistent on deflecting criticism of discriminatory practices when it comes to certain European institutions. I feel like that kind of attitude would make one dismiss Ron Paul's racist nature.

 

[SilthDraeth]

I be thinking that rabidmongoose is a racist piece of shit, because he is so vocal about Ron Paul being one. He is attempting to deflect any attention of his racist views away from him.

In fact in real life, rabidmongoose is so racist he drinks bleach so that his shit comes out white. And all this forum threads attacking racists is him trying to repent.

 

[Spikesoldier]

You are missing the point. Ron Paul feels that states are not bound by the Bill of Rights. He doesn't believe in the state being checked or balanced. This isn't an issue of federal law, but of whether entire portions of the Constitution apply to the states.

Please link me up and enlighten me. Not sarcastic, I don't do anything P&N outside of AT P&N.

 

[Craig234]

At a minimum he "lent" his name to that vile crap for years. Paul was a public figure all along, he knew the value of his name as a brand and utilized it in this way. It matters little whether he actually wrote the words. He assumed responsibility for what was published under his name, to attempt to evade it now is weasely.

This is just a case of my not having the facts to say more. It seems likely that if something was under his name for years, he should have been aware and put a stop to it.

It's a situation where since he's denying he knew of it and says he doesn't agree with it, I'd like to confirm he's not being honest before saying he's lying.

I can think of unlikely scenarios where it might be the case - maybe someone had one conversation with him saying they wanted to use his name on a Libertarian pamphlet.

I've seen Paul's son Rand be weasely, disingenuous; but I don't recall seeing it from Ron Paul. More info needed is all.

 

[xj0hnx]

..

That's the most truth you've made in one post yet, you're making progress. It's funny because you are now on the same level as a Birther, or Truther.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Please link me up and enlighten me. Not sarcastic, I don't do anything P&N outside of AT P&N.

You should just do a Google search for Ron Paul and incorporation doctrine. There are thousands of links about it. It's one of the most popular searches about Ron Paul, but let me know if you are having problems finding anything.

Originally the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states. After the 14th Amendment, the Bill of Rights began to be incorporated against the states by the Supreme Court. Ron Paul opposes this incorporation of the Bill of Rights by the Supreme Court and that is the basis of his opposition to the 14th Amendment, since that is the reason why the Bill of Rights became enforceable against state governments.

 

[airdata]

Ron Paul is a lunatic. He is:

1. a vile disgusting racist
2. believes in a joke of an economic theory that doesn't believe in reality
3. anti-Constitution
4. anti-civil liberties.

So, yeah, he is too weird for most people who aren't racists.

Perfect Troll or Fucking idiot post.

There's only those 2 choices. We'd all like to think you're just trolling. If not, the only option is that you're a fucking idiot.

 

[SilthDraeth]

Really? WTF?

 

[airdata]

Also... The Israel thing is 100%.

Believe me, Israel is doing just fine. They don't need anymore money from us. They're more than self sufficient.

If we're bankrupt we don't need to give Israel billions of dollars when they don't even need it.

 

[Spikesoldier]

You should just do a Google search for Ron Paul and incorporation doctrine. There are thousands of links about it. It's one of the most popular searches about Ron Paul, but let me know if you are having problems finding anything.

Originally the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states. After the 14th Amendment, the Bill of Rights began to be incorporated against the states by the Supreme Court. Ron Paul opposes this incorporation of the Bill of Rights by the Supreme Court and that is the basis of his opposition to the 14th Amendment, since that is the reason why the Bill of Rights became enforceable against state governments.

Please select your favorite sources, preferably from a moderate source. I did do a search, but I am naive to whether particular sources are biased in one way or another, and want to get the real, unbiased information.

I'm sure you have a few in mind from the thousands (44,000+) results.

 

[kranky]

Seems like this is where the country is now with respect to elections... only the stereotypical career politicians are seen as electable, while any non-mainstream candidates are written off as weird. Heck, in my county we just had a election for Controller where the two candidates were an experienced finance executive, your basic "concerned citizen" who wanted to put a stop to sweetheart deals and waste; and the other person was a person who had zero financial background, but whose father was a prominent area career politician.

It was a landslide for the child of the career politician. Like 75%.

I would love to see Ron Paul or someone like him in the White House just to enjoy the chaos that would ensue as the good old boy network (both parties) takes a beating for a while. But I don't think voters are brave enough to disrupt the system since both major parties share a common interest in not rocking the boat too much.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Please select your favorite sources, preferably from a moderate source. I did do a search, but I am naive to whether particular sources are biased in one way or another, and want to get the real, unbiased information.

I'm sure you have a few in mind from the thousands (44,000+) results.

You can read about it from Ron Paul's own words:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul259.html

 

[Siddhartha]

I be thinking that rabidmongoose is a racist piece of shit, because he is so vocal about Ron Paul being one. He is attempting to deflect any attention of his racist views away from him.

In fact in real life, rabidmongoose is so racist he drinks bleach so that his shit comes out white. And all this forum threads attacking racists is him trying to repent.

How about not diverting this thread from the OP to attacks on RM? Is it an issue or not with you that Mr Paul either wrote these blogs\columns or allowed people who wrote them to use his name?

 

[Spikesoldier]

How about not diverting this thread from the OP to attacks on RM? Is it an issue or not with you that Mr Paul either wrote these blogs\columns or allowed people who wrote them to use his name?

this post would have gone so well in the RP iowa thread.

 

[SilthDraeth]

How about not diverting this thread from the OP to attacks on RM? Is it an issue or not with you that Mr Paul either wrote these blogs\columns or allowed people who wrote them to use his name?

I believe Ron Paul error-ed and he wasn't diligent enough at the time. It shows that he isn't infallible.

I don't know why everyone needs such proof that he can make mistakes.

Also, the ability of people to apologize for, and accept other politicians dirty laundry when it is far more detrimental to the health of this country and to their character, and to not accept Ron Paul's sincere statements that he messed up, and that he doesn't hold those views and never has... Illogical!

 

[woolfe9999]

I feel that while states can make up their own laws, they cannot supersede national federal laws such as the Civil Rights Act 1964 etc. If RP were elected president and by executive order repealed CRA and other federal level bills, or tried to get rid of the 2nd Amendment, IMO there would be riots and armed anarchy in the streets.

Checks and balances, as well as our rights in our constitution should be permanent and untouchable. It is the insubordination of the constitution as well as the checks and balances systems our founding fathers instituted that will be our downfall.

Meanwhile, whats sad is that novel liberty-crushing bills like SOPA and NDAA tried by our current crop of "constitution stompers" is met with little protest or opposition.

The POTUS actually does not have the authority to order that the Bill of Rights not apply to the states. That authority rests squarely with the SCOTUS. It is they who decided that it applied to the states to begin with. The only way to override that is by Constitutional Amendment, or if the SCOTUS reverses itself. However, that isn't the point. The point is that a libertarian shouldn't be arguing that state government can trample individual rights. RP is not universally appreciated by all libertarians, and this is one of the reasons.

 

[slayernine]

I love how people are actually realizing that Ron Paul is the only viable republican candidate for President. Why else would everybody be out there finding everything wrong with him if they aren't concerned he might actually become the next president.

I'm not American but I think you should all vote for Ron Paul.

 

[slayernine]

Really? WTF?

It is crap like this that makes me wish we could just burn down all established media and start over.

 

[Blueychan]

Perfect Troll or Fucking idiot post.

There's only those 2 choices. We'd all like to think you're just trolling. If not, the only option is that you're a fucking idiot.

Couldn't he be both?