• Ron Paul thinks FEMA isn't necessary for Hurricane Irene response, that it should be like 1900
    113 replies, posted
[QUOTE=rilez;31974134]What bugs me most about Ron Paul is that he wants to leave issues he personally disagrees with up to the States. Why the hell should human rights be up to the individual states? I don't care if you're anti-gay or pro-life or whatever; letting the state decide which rights you can and can not have sets a far too dangerous precedent. Sure, that might lead to some states finally making some social progress, but what about other states that might decide to pass even more discriminatory garbage?[/QUOTE] That was actually one of the arguments used [I]for the U.S. having a bill of rights[/I] (along with a central government with more power than the absolute fuck-all given by the original articles of confederation), making Paul the kind of idiot we haven't seen since the fucking federalism debate.
Ron Paul mentions he thinks one thing should be like it was in 1900 and adds in several other decades therefore he wants everything ever to be like the earliest date he said.
[QUOTE=Chilean;31977565]Ron Paul mentions he thinks one thing should be like it was in 1900 and adds in several other decades therefore he wants everything ever to be like the earliest date he said.[/QUOTE] No but wanting to revert to states rights to allow civil liberties to be decided upon by possibly bigoted states is not a good thing.
[QUOTE=Chilean;31977565]Ron Paul mentions he thinks one thing should be like it was in 1900 and adds in several other decades therefore he wants everything ever to be like the earliest date he said.[/QUOTE] His example of what people should do in a hurricane situation was one from 1900, and he connected it to free market rhetoric and other nonsense.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;31977403]That was actually one of the arguments used [I]for the U.S. having a bill of rights[/I] (along with a central government with more power than the absolute fuck-all given by the original articles of confederation), making Paul the kind of idiot we haven't seen since the fucking federalism debate.[/QUOTE] he never said anything about taking away the base federal powers in the constitution, just ones that have appeared since then. The constitution still called for states to have powers, and a lot more than most countries at that. [editline]27th August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;31977588]No but wanting to revert to states rights to allow civil liberties to be decided upon by possibly bigoted states is not a good thing.[/QUOTE] Yes, however, not the issue in the article, and I'm not even sure if he wants that or it's merely conjecture based on an oversimplification of his views.
[QUOTE=Chilean;31977641]he never said anything about taking away the base federal powers in the constitution, just ones that have appeared since then. The constitution still called for states to have powers, and a lot more than most countries at that.[/QUOTE] Yeah, and that means no federal income tax, no social security, no medicare, no medicaid, etc. I am not a fan.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;31977625]His example of what people should do in a hurricane situation was one from 1900, and he connected it to free market rhetoric and other nonsense.[/QUOTE] Yes and I think that's stupid. However, it's also stupid to connect what he said to other unrelated issues, which people are doing. [editline]27th August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Megafanx13;31977657]Yeah, and that means no federal income tax, no social security, no medicare, no medicaid, etc. I am not a fan.[/QUOTE] Nor am I. But it's important to actually understand what he wants and not generalized and discredit him based on that.
[QUOTE=Chilean;31977675]Yes and I think that's stupid. However, it's also stupid to connect what he said to other unrelated issues, which people are doing.[/QUOTE] He also talked about leaving even things like this "up to the states". People are discussing his larger policies because he talked about them in reference to the hurricane.
[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;31977322]I was saying communities are short on skilled workers to do the rebuilding compared to the 1900s. There are people out there who can barely drive a nail much less build a house.[/QUOTE] That's because being a tradesperson isn't respected in America anymore
And he can solve the debt crysis by cutting military spending and giving us some national sovereignty, something that nobody's brought up in congress for some reason..
[QUOTE=Rick Ross;31977745]And he can solve the debt crysis by cutting military spending and giving us some national sovereignty, something that nobody's brought up in congress for some reason..[/QUOTE] ...and in the process also take away a lot of necessary services and taxes.
[QUOTE=Chilean;31977641]he never said anything about taking away the base federal powers in the constitution, just ones that have appeared since then. The constitution still called for states to have powers, and a lot more than most countries at that.[/QUOTE] It's been assumed since the beginning that the federal government was going to grow in terms of the rights it defended and guaranteed to individuals as the U.S. grew. Paul's desires, regardless of his rhetoric, are from before federalism. Pushing for a return to the original U.S. constitution is actually a pre-federalist argument, when one considers Article V and the things said by the guys involved before and as the constitution hit. [QUOTE=T-Jeff]Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. ... But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. .. Each generation is as independent as the one preceding, as that was of all which had gone before. It has then, like them, a right to choose for itself the form of government it believes most promotive of its own happiness; [gibberish specific to Virginia state omitted][/QUOTE] Those motherfuckers knew this kind of fetishistic view of what the country should be based on what it once was would be dangerous before the country even really fucking existed.
Didn't one of the founders say that a new constitution should be written every 7 years or something
[QUOTE=Zeke129;31978140]Didn't one of the founders say that a new constitution should be written every 7 years or something[/QUOTE] Jefferson believed the government should be overthrown and resown with the blood of tyrants every 20 odd years.
Jefferson also owned slaves.
[QUOTE=rilez;31973649][img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/Sharkey.JPG/554px-Sharkey.JPG[/img] Seriously, vote for him[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://slacktory.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Jonathon-Sharkey-holding-a-sword.jpg[/IMG] Do it, you know you want to.
What the hell is up with ultraconservatives trying to delude people into thinking the past was better? It wasn't. In 1900 millions of people died every year from basic shit like the flu. Also Rockefeller was forcing employees to live in company dorms and paid them in coupons for the company store. Life was shit in 1900, and it's incredibly irresponsible for people like Paul to whitewash it and suggest that our society needs to regress by 100 years.
ron paul wants things to be like the 1900's because that's when he was in the prime of his youth hahahahaha get it he's so old hahaha
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;31979586]What the hell is up with ultraconservatives trying to delude people into thinking the past was better? It wasn't. In 1900 millions of people died every year from basic shit like the flu. Also Rockefeller was forcing employees to live in company dorms and paid them in coupons for the company store. Life was shit in 1900, and it's incredibly irresponsible for people like Paul to whitewash it and suggest that our society needs to regress by 100 years.[/QUOTE] I think the quote here directly talks about FEMA being an 'unnecessary' arm of government that can be cut rather than the overblown 'the 1900's were better'. Political attacks, rather than misplaced nostalgia. This 'age old' community spirit thing is OK; but it wouldn't work in modern society because back then a larger majority of the population were carpenters, builders, smiths, bricklayers, etc. Those are specialist trades now.
Ron Paul: Because fuck poor people, they can clean up their own ruined houses, that money would be better spent on rich people who earned it.
[QUOTE=cqbcat;31973457]FEMA is conspiracy anyways. They'll force everyone into into camps and use vaccines as a form of population control. Black helicopters will drop down blue helmeted UN peace keepers to take away our guns form my cold dead hands.[/QUOTE] Where's the Shadow Government when you need it?
[QUOTE=Zeke129;31973717][release]He has run both as a Republican and on the ticket of his own Vampires, Witches, and Pagans Party[/release] Sharkey/Bachmann 2012[/QUOTE] Well I suppose he couldn't run with Christine O'Donnel.
[QUOTE=ShadoWxAssassiN;31973664]He's better than Obama and Bachmann I can tell you that much.[/QUOTE] I'm not really a fan of any of them and I don't get why people on here like Obama so much. I mean news stories come out here every other day giving a new reason why America is going down the shitter so why would you want to keep the same people in office?
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;31979787]ron paul wants things to be like the 1900's because that's when he was in the prime of his youth hahahahaha get it he's so old hahaha[/QUOTE] [img]http://lynnrockets.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/ron-paul.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;31980942]I'm not really a fan of any of them and I don't get why people on here like Obama so much. I mean news stories come out here every other day giving a new reason why America is going down the shitter so why would you want to keep the same people in office?[/QUOTE] Because correlation is not causation, just because times are tough doesn't mean that everyone involved is to blame.
[QUOTE=Rick Ross;31981001][img]http://lynnrockets.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/ron-paul.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] reminds me of the sad people i see at the old folks home when i visit my grandma, the ones who's grandkids AREN'T visiting them :(. poor ronnie.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;31973504]But they [I]survived.[/I][/QUOTE] Sort of. Have you been to Galveston? It's a shithole compared to what it was pre-hurricane. Before, it was almost as important of a port as New Orleans, then everyone left.
[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;31980942]I'm not really a fan of any of them and I don't get why people on here like Obama so much. I mean news stories come out here every other day giving a new reason why America is going down the shitter so why would you want to keep the same people in office?[/QUOTE] Obama's not the only member of our government that can fuck everything up.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;31981402]obama doesn't run everything, infact he has pretty much barely any power when it comes to social issues[/QUOTE] I'm not saying that it's all Obama's fault but you can't ignore the fact that things are about the shittiest they've ever been so you can't say that he's done us any good either. People on here are in total denial of what a mistake his presidency was. I mean when you point out other periods in time people are like "Bush fucked it up" or "Reagan fucked it up" but when the country is in the shitter this time everyone is like "Well the president doesn't actually do much so Obama's still okay"
I'm all for getting weed legalized but it isn't worth it if we have to go through him to get it done. Besides bet you anything it will be legal in cali in 5-10 years.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.