Fixing to sit down with Ron Paul, Any questions you guys want asked?

[skarke]

He is speaking at a little library where I live.

[v-man]

What is his 2nd amendment position?
Where does he stand on the Fair Tax?
Has he got a plan to close the borders?
Is he a victim of political correctinitis or will he take a stand against Islam?

[Dee]

Apparently v-man you have never listened to Ron Paul or you would know resoundingly where he stands on all issues mentioned.

[wreckhog]

Do you think Obama is a legal President? (ie Kenyan, swearing in, no releasing birth certificate, etc). If yes, go home.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGPxZ2RXsXw

[powderman]

Ask him if he's aware that the social sec admins laws discriminate against married folks and encourage  shackups. We learned first hand. I've written Kentuckys congress critters and never gotten a reply. I too would like to know his stance on that Godless cult islam. I like RP. POWDERMAN. 

[v-man]

Dee, thanks for pointing that out. You have now proven that you are superior to me. Clearly I don't know the answers or I would not have asked. I have paid little attention to Ron Paul but some of my friends support him so I thought I'd reply to the thread with a few items I consider important. I am sorry that I asked questions you already know the answers to and I wasn't aware that this thread is restricted to people who are already experts on the subject of Ron Paul.

[streak]

Ask him what is ideas on the fastest and quickest way to get this country out of the current mess that it finds itself?

[skarke]

I'm goijng to be one of about 100 people.  I have the gumption to speak, but I'll probably get only one, maybe two questions in.  I have my own ideas, but I am more than interested to hear others' opinions.  Thanks for the suggestions.

1.  VMan, no questions are off limits, you might like Paul's stance on the issues you cite, do you have any others?
2.  Powderman, I'm sure that he is aware of the mess that is the SSA.  I'd assume his answer would be total privatization, but I don't want to put words in his mouth
3.  streak, the words "fast" and "quick" are oxymoronic in this current mess.  It took us years to get here, and it'll take all of us years to fix it, if we can
4.  Wreckhog, it's at this point, moot.  He is functionally our President for 2 years, 5 months, and a few days.

Man I wish we could all get together around a real stove, the conversations would be rich and fun.

[nw_hunter]

Man I wish we could all get together around a real stove, the conversations would be rich and fun.

  LOL! Black eyes and bruised knuckles rich and fun?

[jimster]

Can you fix everything all by yourself and save us all, or do you need some help?

How can we help?

 





 

[Dee]

Dee, thanks for pointing that out. You have now proven that you are superior to me. Clearly I don't know the answers or I would not have asked. I have paid little attention to Ron Paul but some of my friends support him so I thought I'd reply to the thread with a few items I consider important. I am sorry that I asked questions you already know the answers to and I wasn't aware that this thread is restricted to people who are already experts on the subject of Ron Paul.

Well in looking at my post I can see why you took it wrong, but I didn't really mean to sound condesending. I assumed that since you most likely voted in the last election that you had checked out the candidates voting records, but obviously you hadn't. I'm not an expert, but I'm sure there are some here that are. You have a nice day, and remember that information is just a key board away.

[v-man]

Dee, For decades I have been mired in that pit called don't waste a vote on a candidate that cannot win. Therefore, while I am probably closer to a Libertarian than anything else I didn't pay much attention to Ron Paul or really care where he stood. I know him to be a little "quirky" and stayed focused on the GOP. Yes, I am a little embarrassed cause whether Dem or Rep it seems the only real goal is to stay in office once there and the heck with the rest of the country. I don't know why anyone would expect a Libertarian or and independant to be any different once they get in office but I am becoming a little more interested, mostly out of frustration. And yes, your reply was a little offensive and really pushed my buttons. If I over-reacted I do apologize.

[blind ear]

Does he have a plan to expose the corporate control of this country?

Does he support transparency of all corporate ownership for all coorporations, both publicly owned and privately owned, that are incorporated under US charters or doing business with US concerns or banking/lending/borrowing, also includeing to the extent that any foriegn concerns can be forced to comply?

eddiegjr

[Oldshooter]

Looking forward to your report of the meeting Skarke.

Those were some good questions TM7

[blind ear]

TM7, why in private? If he won't make a commitment he ain't the man. eddiegjr

[streak]

.

Man I wish we could all get together around a real stove, the conversations would be rich and fun.
[/quote]


Yeah that would be a lot of fun, especially with rocking chairs setting around a big old wood burning "pot bellied" stove on a cold winter afternoon! Also add some good ' beverages" and solve all the problems of the world.
Speaking of problems just saw on the news that " Government Motors" just gave a nice charitable gift to the National Black Caucus. Our tax dollars at work again! Here they still owe about 50 billion to the tax payers and here they are handing out charitable gifts back to government entities just to get more influence! Talk about a scam!! It would be good to have Ron Paul`s views on that situation.

[torpedoman]

Dee, For decades I have been mired in that pit called don't waste a vote on a candidate that cannot win. Therefore, while I am probably closer to a Libertarian than anything else I didn't pay much attention to Ron Paul or really care where he stood.

Therein lies the problem with the U.S.  Political parties have convinced the populace that a vote for anyone other than their chosen ones is wasted. both parties are the same people interested only in their power and not in your country

[JPShelton]

I'm not Ron Paul, but here's my response to the below, for the record, in case I ever run for federal level public office, which I might do someday.....

What is your plan for medical care for folks who have no medical care even if they work?

I don't have one.  I don't think I need one, either.  As a candidate for a federal level office, I firmly believe that the federal government can and should only concern itself with those issues and matters that the U.S. Constitution allows it to.  Further, I believe that the federal government spends way too much time micromanaging the affairs of individual states, when it lacks the compelling legal authority to do so.

Should all persons running for office be made to divulge their full backgrounds, including memberships in all or any organizations, etc. to the voting public?

Absolutely!  Next question........

How would you re-vamp the electoral system to assure honesty and proper results?[

Your question, in the manner in which you phrased it, seeks stipulation on the part of the answerer that your flawed assertion is correct.  There are Consitituional mandates that deal with this issue and I think the framers got it right the first time around and the electoral system doesn't need tinkered with -with one caveat.  I think the framers might have expected less porous national borders, more dilligence with respect to the protection of those borders, and that those who participate in elections are actually legal citizens of the jurisidiction for which a given election is held, so stricter border control and real effort at stemming the tide of illegal immigration might help make elections more fair.

What would you do to end government careerism?

Not one thing.  Why should I fret over this when we have things called elections?  If people in Mass. want to keep voting for Ted Kennedy, they have a right to do that.  And yeah, I know he's dead.  But similarly, if people in California think the best representation they can get comes in the form of Pelosi and Boxer, et al, then they should have the right to send them to the Hill for as long as they want to keep on sending them there.  Again, we have these things called elections.  No need for term limits and such when you've got those.

What would you do to creat a more level economic playing field and to provide opportunity for all Americans to excell?

Deregulate where possible.  Instead of using regulation as an instrument for social change, lets let the marketplace be that instrument.  Instead of government telling Motown what to build, lets let consumers decided what they want to buy.  Get government out of the way, so that those with gumption and entreprenurial spirit can once again become the economic engine that they've historically been in this great nation.  Let's not force them to have to have upteen licenses and numerous inspections, etc, in order to set up their own businesses.  My fundamental argument is that Americans HAVE the opportunity to excell AS LONG AS government (their fellow Americans) get of the their backs and out of their way.

What would you do to normalize and stabilize American foreign policy..to end foreign entanglements?

As a nation, we have or should have a collective national interest in various wold affairs, and that interest should not only be protected, but furthered.  Sometimes, protecting that interest involves "foriegn entaglements."  As an example, Saddam Hussien had a "weapon of mass destruction" in his threat to trade Iraqi oil in Euros rather than dollars.  To a large degree, it is the exchange of oil for dollars on the world stage that gives our currency its value.  This is what "props up" the Almighty Buck.  Not a gold standard, but a "black gold" standard.  If you are the Illustrious Potentate of Ruritanea, and you want to buy oil on the world market, your first step is to convert Ruitanean Rupees into dollars.  This is why dollars are in demand.  Can't meet your energy needs without 'em.  Ah, but if you could use Euros instead, you wouldn't need to buy dollars first before buying oil.  The value of the dollar would plummet while the value of the Euro would rise.  As another example, let's say that a particular nation in Southeast Asia once known as the Jewel of the Orient is embroilled in a civil war and the Pinkos appear to be winning it.  Why should we care?  Maybe we shouldn't, unless the majority of the known reserves of Tungsten happen to be found there.  Then maybe we should.  See the question here?  It is, and always should be, "What's in it for us?"  if we take action or fail to act on the world stage.  Seflish?  Yep.  That is why it is called a "national interest" and it is why, if we as a nation no longer feel that there is anything on the world stage worth fighting for, we might as well cease being a nation.   

How would you stabilize our currency and turn back the debt culture?

If you're a slob and keep a filthy house, why should your kids be motivated to keep their bedrooms tidy when you tell them to?  No leadership by example there, is there?  Government needs to get its financial house in order and stop living on credit before it has the balls to ask its citizens to do likewise.  Who knows but that you might not have to accumulate as much personal debt (buying stuff you don't need on credit you can't afford) if you weren't getting taxed up the wanger to allow government to buy a bunch of stuff we don't need on credit we can't afford and our children definitely will not be able to afford.  So balancing the federal budget is job one.  And getting there is really pretty simple if the national collective will to do it is present.  The federal government sticks to exercise of powers specifically granted by the Constitution.  It then uses only those funds necessary to exercise those specific powers.  It stops stealing money from the citizens of Oregon to buy textbooks for students in Florida.  It stops stealing money from the citizens of Oklahoma to give WIC benefits to the children of undocumented illegal aliens living and working in California.  And so on.  It also stops penalizing success through a punitive tax code that serves politicians who feed off of the entitlement mentality that the tax code promotes.  It tells you that you have the right to pursue happiness but makes absolutely no promise that you'll achieve it beyond getting the hell out of your way so that you can.  Oh, and when some Potentate in the Mid East starts talking about setting up an Oil Bourse to trade Crude for something other than Greenbacks, we send the Secretary of State out to pay that guy a visit for the purpose of reminding him how well that kind of threat worked out for Saddam Hussien.

What about the private central bank..?

What about it?

What steps would you take to normalize our education sytem and to move it away from agenda driven curriculms..?

If you really want to move it away from "agenda driven curriculums," then don't have government pay for it.  Privitize it.  All of it.  Bet you didn't like that answer, but that's the only one that works.  If I let the government be responsible for paying my kid's tuition, then I accept that they're going to learn whatever crap Nancy Pelosi and her ilk want them to learn.  If I take responsibility for paying for my kid's tuition, then I call those shots.  If I don't like the curriculum, I yank my kid and my money out of that school and take kid and greenbacks to one a little more responsive to my needs and desires.  Its called capitalism.  It works.  Try it sometime, and you might be amazed at the result.

Ah, but what about those poor unfortunate souls who can't afford tuition?  Prophylactics don't cost much and if you can't afford to take care of a kid, you've got no business breeding them in to existance.

How would you deal with agenda driven media and the division of America..?

Oooooh.  That's an easy one, since I've made my living in mass media for the last nine years.  I'd butt the hell out and let Americans decide with their pocketbooks what media outlets they prefer.  I'd also recognize that we already have a mechanism of law to deal with this issue.  It's called the First Ammendment of the U.S. Constitution.  It allows a retard like Keith Oberman to be retarded on the air as long as NBC/MSNBC wants to pay his salary and the five or six people in his audiance want to keep listening to him.  It allows neocons on Fox to act like idiots, too.  Their right to do so, you see.  You have the right to ignore them.  I recommend you exercise it.

Now, as for the "division of America," you really think that a guy running for President, Senate, or House of Reps is going to fix this?  As long as their are people like you, Mr. Questioner, who don't seem to understand that government has no business concerning itself with the agenda of the media because of a little thing called the First Ammendment, then I guess Constitutionalists like me and folks like you will continue to be divided.  Ain't my job to make you stay awake in civics class, nor compell you to return for a refresher course in Constitution 101.

there's a few for starters, and obiviously you need to ask him most of these questions  in private....

A candidate should be willing to answer those questions publicly and be candid with their answers, even if the questions betray the viewpoint and expose the agenda of the questioner, as most of those above do.

I'm a libertarian.  I think people in this country have a right to strave to death, die from lack of health care, and so on.  I do not think they have the right to expect government to be their nanny because in that expectation, if they really understand what republican democracy is all about, they would know that in a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, when they expect government to solve their problems, they're really expecting me and you to solve them.  I think that mindset is supremely selfish and unfair.  It penailizes the productive who strive to excell at the expense of those who feel some sense of entitlement to underachieve.  In the process, it is they who are destroying this nation and all it stands for through their etitlement attitude because they drag the rest of us down with them. 

I don't want government's version of happiness.  I want government to get the hell out of my way so I can pursue JP's version of happiness.  The best way that government can help me is to butt out of my business and leave me alone.  I want liberity first, even if it comes with the freedom to fail.  I don't want to live the American Dream that TM7 and his ilk might have for me.  It is too small.  Too superficial.  Too patronizing.  Mine is bigger than that.  It would be a lot easier to achieve if liberal progressives would get the hell out of my way and let me get on with the goal of achieving it. 

I don't like this new, safer, failure-proof America.  I like the old "No Social Welfare Net Provided" frontier version a whole lot better, because in it, a rugged individualist could achieve something on the basis of his own merit and industry.  He didn't expect to achieve some watered-down, second rate existance on the backs of his fellow Americans, thus procaliming a present privilage of the here and now as a God-given right that never really was and ought not to ever be.

I reckon I won't be getting TM7's vote.  Fortunately, I wasn't counting on it.

JP

[Swampman]

Please ask him not to run again.  We don't need to put Obama back in office.

[magooch]

My only question to Ron Paul would be who he would support for a Presidential candidate at the present time from the short list of those who might stand any chance at all of making it through the primaries.

[Dee]

I personally don't know why ANYONE cares what Ron Paul thinks about ANYTHING. Their not going to listen to him anyway, and their certainly not going to vote for him. Their gonna vote GOP, or DP. It's as far as most all can think. We'll continue to elect him down here in Texas, but even most Texans will "follow the bouncing ball", and once again vote the "lessor of two evils".

[blind ear]

Isn't it sad. eddie

[subdjoe]

Man I wish we could all get together around a real stove, the conversations would be rich and fun.

  LOL! Black eyes and bruised knuckles rich and fun?

That is just "spirited comradely discussion." 

[Ruskin]

Tern limits?

[Swampman]

Mike Huckabee & Sarah Palin in 2012

[Oldshooter]

Again, we have these things called elections.  No need for term limits and such when you've got those.

BS FLAG ON THAT! Seems the main reason we have the problems we have with the ruling class now is that they don't think "we" know our asses from a hole in the ground and that they know better. Thing is is that they are so removed from what is our reality that they are the dumb asses!  Thank you very much! The elected offices were never meant to be full time jobs in the first place!

[Ruskin]

If elections replace term limits, why do we have the Reids, Pelosi, and the two women from Maine still in office?

Is it the dumb masses?

If you don't pay taxes or own property-no vote.  In our early history we had to own property to vote.  Now people with no dog in the fight and much to gain vote against me.

[Dee]

Again, we have these things called elections.  No need for term limits and such when you've got those.

BS FLAG ON THAT! Seems the main reason we have the problems we have with the ruling class now is that they don't think "we" know our asses from a hole in the ground and that they know better. Thing is is that they are so removed from what is our reality that they are the dumb asses!  Thank you very much! The elected offices were never meant to be full time jobs in the first place!

Not that I disagree with your statement Oldshooter, but in this case, it seems the real dumb asses are the ones that keep voting them back in knowing full well what you just said about them. It would seem to me, that the "ruling class" has got everyone on both sides pegged pretty well on what they'll do, election, after election, after election.

[billy_56081]

I personally don't know why ANYONE cares what Ron Paul thinks about ANYTHING. Their not going to listen to him anyway, and their certainly not going to vote for him. Their gonna vote GOP, or DP. It's as far as most all can think. We'll continue to elect him down here in Texas, but even most Texans will "follow the bouncing ball", and once again vote the "lessor of two evils".

Dan I didn't know you lived on the Gulf coast? I thought you were in North Texas?

[magooch]

So I guess my question to Ron Paul would be, who is the lesser of two evils?  I sure as heck don't want to make a mistake and vote for the greater of two evils.