Ron Paul's voting record speaks pro freedom volume

intruth · 01-19-2008, 11:28 AM

It is very easy to see who would be best Man for President of the USA... Just compare the Republican Presidential Candidates Voting Record, Biography and News History By far Ron Paul has never flip flopped on any issue and his record is rock solid while standing strong representing what the founding Fathers of the USA Constitution had in mind to provide and maintain the right to freedom for WE The People...

backgammonnn123 · 01-19-2008, 03:38 PM

RON PAUL is in 2nd place in the nevada primaries and we are almost done. This is something alot of people didnt expect. I just cant believe mitt romney is leading by that far of a margin.

Brian · 01-19-2008, 06:55 PM

beautiful, beautiful display of the power of grassroots

intruth · 01-20-2008, 10:04 PM

Man if you watch Msnbc, fox, cnn or any mainstream media outlet it seems like the big wigs dont want Ron Paul's Name on the air...

backgammonnn123 · 01-21-2008, 03:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by intruth

Man if you watch Msnbc, fox, cnn or any mainstream media outlet it seems like the big wigs dont want Ron Paul's Name on the air...

because he is one of the few candidates that speaks the truth and isnt controlled by any special interest groups. I will be voting for him also and i hope to go to one of his meetup groups in my area.

Myers · 01-21-2008, 08:13 AM

Aye, agreed that he speaks the truth, I might put a vote on his head to see him lead up

PocketSEO · 01-26-2008, 07:04 AM

Quote:

...representing what the founding Fathers of the USA Constitution had in mind

He wants prayer in schools... that is not what the founding fathers intended.

Atom · 01-26-2008, 07:08 AM

Ok well maybe we can talk him out of that one.

He appears to me to be our only hope. Just my impression.

PocketSEO · 01-26-2008, 07:14 AM

He also believes in the right for ordinary citizens to own fully-automatic, bipod-mounted machine guns and maybe worse.

If Ron Paul's ideas were implemented we would probably soon end up with a feudal society. From what I know about Libertarianism it sounds like that is where it would go.

Atom · 01-26-2008, 07:20 AM

I agree with him on the freedom to bear arms issue.

PocketSEO · 01-26-2008, 07:25 AM

Why do people need to own weapons that are only to be used in combat?

If the reason to bear rocket launchers is for "citizens to protect themselves against the government" then why is he saying that he supports non-violence, citing Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, and others?

It is possible for the people to protect themselves against the government without rocket launchers.

Atom · 01-26-2008, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PocketSEO

Why do people need to own weapons that are only to be used in combat?

If the reason to bear rocket launchers is for "citizens to protect themselves against the government" then why is he saying that he supports non-violence, citing Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, and others?

It is possible for the people to protect themselves against the government without rocket launchers.

Why do people need to own weapons that are only to be used in combat? I honestly don't know. I'm not one of them. I prefer single shot accuracy with a fine deer rifle.

PocketSEO · 01-26-2008, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Why do people need to own weapons that are only to be used in combat? I honestly don't know. I'm not one of them. I prefer single shot accuracy with a fine deer rifle.

You're OK with your mentally-sick neighbors that you mutually hate owning rocket launchers in a society where you can do nothing about it?

I think that a country where it is culturally acceptable to own guns like that sounds dangerous.

I think that Libertarianism's flaw is that it assumes people and groups are inherently good or rational. Unmoderated group behavior is not good. The wolves will exploit that situation.

I think that a lot of things should be changed in the government, including making many things smaller, but to "just make the government smaller so that people can regulate themselves" sounds like a disaster.

Atom · 01-26-2008, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PocketSEO

You're OK with your mentally-sick neighbors that you mutually hate owning rocket launchers in a society where you can do nothing about it?

Yes. As long as they conform to the legal restrictions that I'm thinking will surely be in place, accompanying reception of a special licence to own that category of weapon, or such. I don't think it'd be just a free for all. I'm thinking it'll be something like, sure anyone can own one, provided you meet the requirements and abide by the restrictions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PocketSEO

I think that a country where it is culturally acceptable to own guns like that sounds dangerous.

It does to me as well. But not in light of certain restrictions I'm thinking. Heck, maybe one of the restrictions will be that it has to be stored and used only in the desert, who knows. But yeah, sure, we'll let you play with a rocket launcher, but don't mess up or we may have to kill or jail ya, not just take away your licence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PocketSEO

I think that Libertarianism's flaw is that it assumes people and groups are inherently good or rational. Unmoderated group behavior is not good. The wolves will exploit that situation. ...

There would be moderation a plenty, I'm thinking.

Brian · 01-26-2008, 01:56 PM

libertarianism > everything (except hunter thompson)

I think everyone should not have PDAs though because they can hack into everything. HOW DANGEROUS.

PocketSEO · 01-26-2008, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atom

I'm thinking it'll be something like, sure anyone can own one, provided you meet the requirements and abide by the restrictions.

That is not what it sounds like Ron Paul's position is. It sounds like he thinks there is no difference between a hunting rifle and things like this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atom

There would be moderation a plenty, I'm thinking.

It seems like Ron Paul's position is based on that there would not be that kind of government interference (moderation).

Quote:

I think everyone should not have PDAs though because they can hack into everything. HOW DANGEROUS.

A PDA is much different than a gun...

Atom · 01-26-2008, 06:11 PM

I would think there would simply have to be some sort of special regulation with the increased capability of such classes of weapons such as fully automatic weapons and rocket launchers and the like.

PocketSEO · 01-26-2008, 06:16 PM

Do you think that fewer restrictions than we have now are enough? Do you think Ron Paul advocates background checks and waiting periods for people who want to buy fully automatic machine guns? (I would be surprised if he does.)

Ron Paul: "When asked whether individuals should be allowed to own machine guns, Paul responded, "Whether it's an automatic weapon or not is, I think, irrelevant.""

It's OK if your mentally sick neighbor who spent 30 years in prison for murder can go buy machine guns without a background check?

Brian · 01-26-2008, 06:19 PM

Atom · 01-26-2008, 06:25 PM

Well, I don't really like to speculate, I think it's probably a good idea for people to know the answer to that second question.