Ron Paul: Our Constitution Has Failed

[Spider]

[eynon81]

Ron Paul brought 2 valuable issues to the table; our foreign policy and our monetary policy...both of which are more than a bit broken and both of which see little debate in-side the main stream. Did I agree with Dr. Paul on his specific stances? not really, especially in re the monetary policy. Guy was still a valuable voice in the wilderness though.

[exploited]

Hard to believe the retardation shown in this thread.

The guy who stood in front of the tank in Tiananmen Square - ineffectual, worthless, didn't accomplish any real change.

The monks who burned themselves alive during Vietnam - stupid, archaic assholes who weren't pragmatic enough to get people on their side.

I mean, this is just unreal. All you guys are doing is highlighting how cynical and jaded you are, and attacking Ron Paul for having the idea that things don't have to be this way, and that a person shouldn't just get a long, go along because they want more power. I disagree with alot of Ron Paul's policies, but he was a principled man and one of the few people around who actually made decisions according to those principles, instead of throwing them away whenever it was convenient.

[The Dharma Bum]

[Spider]

Here's the reality:

The rules require a candidate to carry 15% of the electorate in 5 major public polls.

She failed to meet the requirment. So she wasn't invited.

Case closed.

Its like if you take a test, and get a 59 instead of a 65. One qualifies you for a D. The other doesn't. \

That simple.

She acted like a f**k child. It was goddamn hilarious.

You don't have to like the regs...but nobody has to invite you if you don't follow them.

[Spider]

[NAB]

[exploited]

[Professor]

You knew I'd be here sooner or later.

I don't really know Ron Paul or his beliefs that well. Just what I've heard about him in the news, which I never trust implicitely. So, I can't comment on the messenger. But, I would like to comment on things I've heard here, as they regard our Constitution.

Isolationism - There are many forms of this. Our Constitution hints at a form of isolationism that is in line with my beliefe. Basically, economic globalism and military isolationism. How do I conclude this? Because the power to establish and maintain relationships with foreign states is given to the President. Certain treaties must be ratified in Congress, but the vast majority of leeway is given to one man. This means that our President may do pretty much whatever it wants when dealing with other countries. That's globalism. But, it requires a vote of Congress to go to war. This means that it is relatively difficult to go to war. In fact, the only thing that is harder to do in our country than go to war, is change the Constitution. This translates to economic globalism and military isolationism. However, our courts and Congress has decided to circumvent the Constitution and allows the president to go to war without Congressional approval. This is f**ked up and needs to change.

Federal rights - dose of reality here. No one (at least, no reasonable person) wants to go back to slavery, Jim Crow, or segregation. The Declaration of Indepence says that all men are created equal. The Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law to all. These are absolute phrases. No state should be able to circumvent these. No state, county, or city should be allowed to make any law distinguishing one person from another on account of race, religion, sex, etc. for any purpose. The Federal government has the responsibility to ensure that states do not violate Federal law.

States rights - Given the above, any power not explicitely reserved to the Fed is given to the state. For instance, if it's commerce but not the transfer of goods across state lines, the Fed can't touch it.

[The Dharma Bum]