Forum Post: SUPPORT A LEFT RIGHT ALLIANCE against Corporatism. HUMILITY required: Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, RonPaul, and Noam Chomsky
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 15, 2011, 10:02 a.m. EST by jjpatrick
(195)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNacRfsH4qo
In a GOP debate, RonPaul mentioning the ongoing “Occupy Wall Street” protesters, stated that the Wall Street banks “deserve taxation or they deserve to have all their benefits removed...crony capitalists benefit from contract from government, benefit from the Federal Reserve, benefit from all the bailouts. They don’t deserve compassion."
In the last 2008 election, progressives like Raph Nader and libertarian RonPaul were thinking of forming an alliance in order to address the underlying root problems and pursue common goals that would change the entire Establishment from the inside. Even Dennis Kucinich said he'd have RonPaul as vice president and academic Noam Chomsky agreed with RonPaul's stance against the wars and foreign occupations costing billions of our tax money, furthering the U.S. federal debt into the trillions that one day we'll have to pay off.
If you want change, then tell them to re-form this alliance and it's guaranteed that they will strip the power away from Wall Street and the top 0.01% richest in the weapons manufacturing industry who currently own Washington.
However, this will require humility on both sides to let go of their biases, be willing to associate with people you consider as 'ignorant' all in order to enact the change required so that Washington once again serves the people. If you want a movement that the 99% will support, it'll require joining forces among the 99% pursuing the common goals that everyone wants to see.
Once this change happens, then you can choose to vote in the term after for the candiate that bet suits your political ideology whether it's Dennis Kucinich or Raph Nader who support a 1 tier public health care system or RonPaul who wants to end the drug wars and decrease the size of the federal government.
Without a real change in Washington, don't expect your voices to be heard. The most scary thing about taking a chance on these guys is that they might actually bring about the revolution that OWS and the 99% will want to see.
It's takes humility however because we all want our specific solution to shine as the be all end all answer.
Some interesting facts: As you know military and defense spending has increased under Obama so far using our tax paying money and furthering the national debt in the trillions at a rate that has been the fastest in history.. and the reason why is now clear:
Guess who received the most funds from Boeing nearly double the amount Bush got in 2004. No other than the nobel peace prize winner, Obama http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?id=D000000100&type=P&cycle=2008&state=&sort=A
Top 20 recepients of Wall Street funds. The guy who promised to take on the big banks is number 1 but gave big bailouts to http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U
This is starting to make more sense day by day.
It would be interesting to know how much they took advantage of the insider trading "legal fraud”
The OWS has been a huge eye opener. I have a feeling “we aint seen nothin’ yet”
So this is yet another of the incessant manipulative tactics used to promote ronpaul on these forums.
Manipulative one?
Why is promoting RP such a bad thing. I'm also promoting Dennis K and Ralph Nader. These three are the only ones most consistent to addressing what OWS's about.
So which politician do you think lines up most to addressing the problems between Wall Steet and Washington?
Scary" Gary North Dominionist theology generally and Christian Reconstruction specifically would not be what they are today without Gary North. When he first met Rushdoony in 1962, the two grew so close that North eventfully married Rushdoony's daughter, Sharon, in the early 1970s. As Rushdoony's son-in-law, North proved to be a prolific and able popularizer of Rushdoony's complex theological ideas. North demonstrated a willingness to reach out across sectarian boundaries in order to engage folks who were not quite as Christian as Rushdoony might have preferred, and directly engaged politically active conservatives, something Rushdoony largely avoided unless he could maintain strict control over their theological allegiances. As a result of his popular appeal and tireless advocacy of the Reconstructionist world-view, one could argue that North did more than any other Reconstructionist short of Rushdoony to reconstruct the world for Christendom.
Beginning in 1963 Rushdoony helped North secure a series of jobs working for the Volker Fund and the Foundation for Economic Education. So by the time North went to work for Rushdoony's Chalcedon Foundation in 1973, he was a bona fide veteran of the American libertarian movement. He had worked for two of its most important organizations and maintained friendly relationships with men like Opitz, among many others. Rushdoony brought him to Chalcedon to research the relationship between biblical law and laissez-faire economics. North threw himself into a project that he has yet to finish. Since 1977 he has spent a minimum of ten hours a week, fifty weeks a year writing a commentary on biblical economics.23
This nineteen volume (and counting) series documents North's assessment of the relationship between Rushdoony-style "theonomy" (or God-rooted law) and the prescriptions for economic behavior North believed he found in the Bible. A complex mix of Austrian economic theory, Van Til-inspired ethics, and acrid prose, North's study of biblical economics laid the foundation for a series of failed predictions regarding the imminent collapse of the federal government. Most notoriously, North predicted that the Y2K computer glitch would lead to the total collapse of the global economy, leaving Christians in the United States to pick up the pieces.24 North's pessimism, unrelenting literary output, and hardboiled rhetoric eventually earned him the nickname "Scary Gary."
"Scary's" track record of failed predictions belies a neglected aspect of his theology. North, unlike Rushdoony, believes that the eternal human social institution is the Christian church. In the event of the catastrophic collapse of such transient institutions as the federal government, churches will step into the void left by its implosion. While this view of the emergent, decentralized church is consistent with North's unique fusion of libertarianism and postmillenarian eschatology, it is sharply at odds with Rushdoony's view. Rushdoony envisioned the church and family as two separate, exclusive spheres. For Rushdoony the family is the primary social unit while the church represents a limited ecclesiastical organization of believers in Christ. Conversely, North believed men owed their allegiances to a church first and the family second.
Like all aspects of Reconstructionist theology, these two perspectives have real-world consequences. When translated into theology, North's focus on the future role of the church led him to embrace a more active political agenda. Long before North and Rushdoony publicly parted ways, North had already aggressively sought out political influence. In 1976 he worked in Washington, D.C. as a staffer for Texas Representative Ron Lawl. After Paul's defeat, North wrote a testy screed warning Christians that Washington was a cesspool that can't be changed overnight.25 He turned his back on national politics and began developing practical tactics for churches to deploy at the grassroots level.26 Unlike Rushdoony who focused most of his attention on ideas, North explicitly worked to pull together disparate church groups, most notably reaching out to charismatic and Pentecostal congregations in the South in an effort to fuse Reconstructionism's grassroots activism with committed congregations. When American society collapses under the combined weight of massive foreign debt, military overstretch, and internal decadence, North hopes to have a network of churches ready to step into the breech. In preparation, he has written book after book aimed at educating Christians on how to live debt free, avoid electronic surveillance, and develop the skills necessary for surviving economic collapse.27 In short, North's version of Reconstructionism blazed a path for the militia and Christian survivalist groups of the 1990s to follow.
Where's the part where's there's something good about RP?
Oh yeah, end the FED. Only he's not the first, nor the only one.
A career politician with 20+ years of introducing some of the worst legislation possible.
All of that buried beneath tons of tired, 20 year old rhetoric.
And even end the Fed is a part of the far Christian right plan to destroy the USA. They want to break down the US and rebuild it as Christian only country with laws that reflect what is written in the Old Testament.
There are more forward thinking economists who want to end the FED, with much better reasoning than Mr. Paul has ever had.
http://pragcap.com/resources/understanding-modern-monetary-system
But Paul's reasons are different than those economists and he hides them very well.
No!
No!
No!
No!
No!
No!
No!
No!
No!
There is no center to the right. The right has declared war on the American people. They have used subtlety and guile as their weapons.
They have sown distrust, confusion, and division.
We will be divided no more.
Here is an article I highly recommend, written by a Washington insider:
-- Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult Saturday 3 September 2011 by: Mike Lofgren, Truthout | News Analysis http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779
.
He says almost exactly what I said here: -- Upon the Question of Default of Our National Debt July 6th, 2011 http://zendogblog.net/blog/
But he does so with a great deal more clarity and insight.
Go market your lies elsewhere.
RP has millions in gold stocks and has frequently demanded the gold reserves be increased to artificially bolster the value of his stocks.
Conflicts of interest like this make Boehner and Pelosi's case seem weak.
So you'd rather continue with all these wars to make sure the U.S. dollar stays high.
I think connecting the U.S. dollar to gold is smart. It'll stabilize the markets and there won't be the crashes that serve to only profit the big banks who bet on the market to crash while only the taxpayer loses out. Besides, the only way to keep the demand for the U.S. dollar high without being connected to something like gold, is to occupy the world with a heavy military presence and take over the oil reserves of the Middle East. i.e. Keep initiating wars, deal out our weapons for profit and make sure no Middle East or African country get rich.. not Libya or any other country. If Africa gets out of debt and becomes self-sufficient, U.S is screwed if our dollar is not connected to gold. Hence why, making sure the Middle East is always in a state of war profits the U.S (why we supply Israel's enemies more weapons but defends them when they attack. Why we cooperate and fund Saddam and then kill him after. Why we fund Al Quada in the Cold War, then fight them, and then team up with them to attack Libya.. a country who gave up WMD's only to get bombed by them). It keeps the value of the U.S. dollar high and our ecomomy gets a boost after each war despite the initial set back I.e. we need to be an empire. I can see why RonPaul''s a threat to the richest 1%. So when Obama says, we go into war to serve our interests and security.. he's not lying in that case... but it has nothing to do with terrorists..
"I can see why RonPaul''s a threat to the richest 1%."
I don't see how this would even fit into all the other nonsense even if the rest of it made sense.
If RonPaul hates being taxed and considers gold to have intrinsic value that never goes down, then his fans would use gold as a currency among themselves..
But they don't
Why not??
Because even they know the crap he says is just a bunch of nonsense.
Forcing an enormous government takeover of all gold transactions is only something that fake Libertarians that follow RP advocate.
have you ever wondered why the U.S. dollar is valued so high? **hint: it's also why we spend 1/3 of the U.S. budget on wars.
http://www.ronpauldonate.org/political-topics/energy/ron-paul-inflation-statistics-are-rigged-bernankes-money-printing-is-a-total-failure/
According to Ron Lawl, it isn't high. In fact, sometimes he claims we're in hyperinflation. In case you don't know (probably don't) inflation is the devaluation of money relative to goods.
You can't claim it's both "valued so high" while advocating that we're in a state of hyperinflation at the same time.
RonPaul would say inflation is high with respect to 20 years ago. What I'm saying and I'm sure RonPaul would think is that inflation has the potential to become worse.
So my question is; Why is then that the U.S. dollar is still relatively high? And if it some sort of gold or silver standard is not returned, the real value of that green paper will equal that of what monopoly money is worth.
So, my question is do you know why the American dollar is worth so high despite being 15 trillion dollars in debt.
Let me guess??
http://news.goldseek.com/GoldSeek/1234836000.php
With all you conspiracy theorists reposting all your spam, it's easy to find the latest nonsense..
Now, lets address the fact that neither you nor the conspiracy theory advocating, gold-pushing website postulate exactly what you mean by "still relatively high" and look at the real factors..
We've had low inflation for the past few years, especially after the financial collapse. The selloff on stocks and reluctance to buy goods domestically causes an increase in demand for dollars relative to goods and investments. Same exact thing happened in other recessions (except 1980s because that was stagflation).
Internationally, people seek treasuries and while the US economy is not looking good, many other currencies look worse. We're basically the tallest midget. To buy treasuries you must buy dollars(more increase in demand) and the purchase of treasuries also bolsters the speculative value of dollars between now and their maturity date which is a speculative increase in demand for future dollars.
That's only a couple of the factors that go into the value of the dollar but I don't care to get any more into it because you'll just assume that I'm either a part of the conspiracy or have fallen victim to the big conspiracy that manufactures complicated and multifaceted explanations to cover up the real truth.
also explains why even Obama has been using some hash language on China in trip in Asia as of the moment... telling them to grow up. There's a currency war.. and again.. RonPaul saw it coming.
and just to clarify about 'relatively high,' what I mean is that because most countries use the USD as the main currency to puchase oil from OPEC or an what an African country would receive in a loan fto build capital.
In other words, most countries have tons of US bills and if all of a sudden countries decide that the USD shouldn't be the only currency out there and start to diversify, it will expose the real value of the USD.... it would then become hyper-inflated because the US federal reserve has been dishing out trillions to even other countries.
So high because if countries start to purchase oil in a different currency, (with all eyes on China), then U.S. is not looking so good. Hence, why RonPaul is suggesting that the U.S. should also back up the dollar with something like gold.
Man if RonPaul gets this right, then he's not really a politician but a genius economist. This guy saw the housing bubble crisis like a few years before it happened to the very detail of how it was going to happen. Bush ignored him, others called him crazy. it's funny how Bush said no one saw it coming when RonPaul did.
Yeah, that could be it. I'm not too sure what that article is saying to be honest.
My answer to why the USD is relatively high despite being 14 trillion in debt is because of OPEC and the fact that most countries have a reserve of USD since it was the main currency used to purchase oil. In addition, I think the UN and the World bank use the USD as the main currency.
It's not a conspiracy, that's just a fact.
And just going back to the article you just posted.. I'm not sure what the article writes but unless Canada is also a conspiracy generator, check this interesting article posted by the Globe and Mail just hrs ago. If this is true, then are these countries doing the very same thing RonPaul has been advocating for.. in order to save America from the inevitable. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/central-banks-go-on-a-gold-rush/article2239253/
Hence why Dick Cheny's group that thought they needed something like 9/11 to go into war would boost the economy. (I'm not saying 9/11 was an inside job), but it was a perfect opportunity to achieve what every U.S. adminstration needs to boost our faulty economy unless we connect our money to something like gold.
RonPaul doen't make it a secret that he wants the gold standard. It may be our safety net in the future.. either that or we take over the world to ensure the U.S. dollar is in high demand and what every country compares it to. We need to not only have a strong military presence but ensure that the world will always be in a state of war to profit off of.
It's similar to JFK's $4.2 billion in silver certificates issued into circulation. Without the U.S. dollar being connected to anything, occupying the world and keeping the U.S. the most powerful country in the world is the only way to keep our paper money valuable.
Well, it's not really a conflict of interest to invest in gold unless miners are pouring millions into Ron Lawl's campaign. Besides, is the gold industry that's causing all of society's ills? or is the war industry and wall street industry who's more of a culprit.
If he is investing in gold, it only shows that what he believes is true.
"If he is investing in gold, it only shows that what he believes is true."
Same could be said for Goldman Sachs betting on a mortgage crisis. As long as you believe and help make it happen, you're absolved of any wrongdoing, huh? Ridiculous.
Only but those are two different things here. I know there's some twisted thing in the stock market world of betting actually on things to fail, but Goldman Sachs was directly connected to the whole financial fiasco.
The only big difference I see is that Goldman Sachs was successful at profiting from the problems they caused.
But RP is only convinced he can do the same.
And so what you're saying also is that you're assuming that Ron Lawl's wanting to connect money to gold will produce a crisis. Yes, there won't be the fall and rise of the market, but it'll be a lot more stable. You can't just keep spending and making paper money hoping the demand for the U.S. dollars stays on top.
The only way for the U.S. dollar to not crash is either we connect it to something like gold or we occupy the world, occupy the oil reserves in the Middle East, and be a heavy military presence in the world.
Oh wait, we are an empire. Ok I see why RP's a threat.
and another key difference is that Goldman Sachs represents a corporation that can last beyond a person's lifetime.
RP's money is invested in corporations, also. Gold Mining, Gold Exploration, and some ETFs that just hold gold. He also invests in other mineral resources (like Aluminum). However, he also constantly proposes legislation that will enrich these companies.
Also, bear in mind that RP is vehemently opposed to any legislation that would overturn corporate personhood or put caps on campaign finance. These are just things that his fans assume. He advocates completely free markets, and that includes buying legislation. Whenever confronted about these positions, he simply says he advocates less government but makes absolutely no case as to how his advocacy for these things will lead to it. It's a ridiculous position where he attributes all business problems to government authorities meddling in their business. It's like blaming the police because every time a murderer is apprehended, the police always seem to be involved.
I have no idea what you're saying. If you're speaking of Goldman Sachs, then you should see who they bet heavily on in 2008.. Obama has been Goldman Sachs' top recepient in funds throughout history especially leading up to the big bail outs.
It's a problem that they can buy votes through campaign finance.
But the main distinction that makes RP worse is that he is trying to personally enrich himself. Campaign funds aren't very versatile. You're extremely limited as to what you can spend it on. Unless you're Christine O'Donnell, in which case you live off of it.
As far as him being the top recipient "throughout history", I'm pretty sure he wasn't the top recipient in his senate campaign. It usually goes towards the most viable presidential candidates.
I'm done with RP-bashing though since I don't even care about his gold investments. I'm just bothered by the fact that his fans perpetuate this purist image of him, despite these facts. Any other candidate would we be bludgeoned by the media if they had such an undiversified portfolio matched with such an undiversified agenda that just so happens to enrich them personally. Someone needs to call him out on this.
Ron Lawl GOLD! GOLD! GOLD!
-- What is his obsession with gold, and does this make for sound economic policy?
H.R.3101: To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide for the establishment of a precious metals investment option in the Thrift Savings Fund.
H.R.3732: To amend title 31, United States Code, to limit the use by the President and the Secretary of the Treasury of the Exchange Stabilization Fund to buy or sell gold without congressional approval, and for other purposes.
H.R.4226: A bill to provide for the minting of gold coins and silver coins by the United States.
H.R.1662: A bill to provide for the minting of American Gold Eagle coins pursuant to Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States.
H.R.1663: A bill to provide for the minting of American Gold Eagle coins pursuant to Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States.
H.R.878: A bill to execute Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution.
H.R.391: A bill to repeal the privilege of banks to create money.
H.R.3862: A bill to provide for a full assay, inventory, and audit of the gold reserves of the United States, and for other purposes.
H.R.3349: A bill to direct the Secretary of the Treasury to strike and sell gold medallions to the general public.
H.R.2658: A bill to amend the Federal Reserve Act to terminate the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury to require the delivery of gold to the Treasurer of the United States, which shall be known as The Gold Ownership Act of 1979.
H.R.5605: A bill to amend the Trading with the Enemy Act.
H.R.5658: A bill to make Federal Reserve Notes and United States Notes redeemable in gold.
H.R.6217: A bill to prohibit the sale of gold bullion by any agency of the United States unless specifically authorized by law.
H.R.6297: A bill to direct the Secretary of the Treasury to strike and sell gold medallions to the general public.
H.R.7874: A bill to repeal the privilege of banks to create money.
H.R.6054: A bill to provide for the minting of the American Eagle gold coin pursuant to article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States.
-- He might even try to get rid of the Federal Reserve, which has long been a bogeyman of the far right:
H.R.2778: To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and for other purposes.
H.R.5356: To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and for other purposes.
H.R.1148: To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and for other purposes.
H.R.875: A bill to repeal the Federal Reserve Act.
H.R.876: A bill to repeal section 105(b) of the Monetary Control Act of 1980.
H.R.4652: A bill to provide that no officer or employee of the United States shall change the design of Federal reserve notes unless such change is specifically authorized by Federal law.
-- Does he want to abandon the dollar and set up 50 separate state currencies? Does that even make sense?
H.R.2779: To repeal section 5103 of title 31, United States Code.
H.R.3931: A bill to amend the Coinage Act of 1965 to provide that coins and currencies of the United States, including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve banks and national banking associations, shall be legal tender only for the payment of Federal taxes, duties and dues.
Hey Greedkills, I like to ask you again.. you claimed RonPaul has been Boeing's top recepient of funds, when really Obama received 10 times more and 2 times more than what Bush got even.
I think connecting the U.S. dollar to gold is smart. It'll stabilize the markets and there won't be the crashes that serve to only profit the big banks who bet on the market to crash while only the taxpayer loses out.
Besides, the only way to keep the demand for the U.S. dollar high without being connected to something like gold, is to occupy the world with a heavy military presence and take over the oil reserves of the Middle East. i.e. Keep initiating wars, deal out our weapons for profit and make sure no Middle East or African country get rich.. not Libya or any other country. If Africa gets out of debt and becomes self-sufficient, U.S is screwed if our dollar is not connected to gold. Hence why, making sure the Middle East is always in a state of war profits the U.S (why we supply Israel's enemies more weapons but defends them when they attack. Why we cooperate and fund Saddam and then kill him after. Why we fund Al Quada in the Cold War, then fight them, and then team up with them to attack Libya.. a country who gave up WMD's only to get bombed by them). It keeps the value of the U.S. dollar high and our ecomomy gets a boost after each war despite the initial set back
I.e. we need to be an empire. I can see why RonPaul''s a threat to the richest 1%.
So when Obama says, we go into war to serve our interests and security.. he's not lying in that case... but it has nothing to do with terrorists..
As your name hints at: Greedkills (just bigger than what you thought).
It'll be interesting to see if China screws the U.S. with the debt and interest we own them in the future, cuz then America will be screwed. The only way to contain them is to surround that area.. we gotta be in all the countries near there including Pakistan, India, and Iran... got to take over all of the oil reserves before China gets their act together. We've already got Libya, Afghanistan, and Iraq... their oil is as good as ours and just need to keep a strong presence there with a 110 acre embasy holding tens of thousands of ex solders and contracters.
And you thought it was all about gay marriage.
Another way to ensure that the U.S. doesn't crash is to decentralize the power of the federal government and don't let the greedy hands get a hold of the most powerful richest budget in the world. I.e don't put all of our eggs in one basket but like what they say in investing.. 'diversifying and spreading out the risk,' hence why again RP's may be onto something.
It's no wonder he predicted the housing crash in accurate details before any signs of it happening. He knows how the U.S. runs and knows the various foreign relations and domestic policies that the think tanks come up with before the president implements them.
If I were you, I'd go find those policy briefing notes and why as Noam chomsky sees it each adminstration's policies been always similar with a slight spin on each, but oddily calling Obama the worst with respect to the wars.
Well if Ron does well and goes against Obama the money will come. But you're too blind to see that the big boys back winners and if they think ronnie could win the money will flow. And just like he took StormFront's money he will take their's also. He has no morals as you can see with the crush videos.
Remove RP and replace him with Bernie Sanders.
RP is and has always been a sham.
Washington is broken but let's find common ground among those within the 99% to find common unifying goals that 99% will agree on.
The demands of the 99% should only be allowed if 99/100 of the people agree on it. After those key changes, then we can have a fair debate to what sort of government we want, but first a revolution has to occur that changes Washington from the inside out and from the grassroots and up.
there's almost nothing at all you could find 99/100 people to agree on.
Well if indeed this is a movement that represents the 99%, the demands should be in agreement by 99% of voters. Hence, why this alliance should be supported.
if that was a true requirement, then nothing would ever be accomplished ever.
Then the 99% movement is truely not representative of the 99% I'm wondering out of 100 people, how many would dissent against:
Would anyone disagree with this? Maybe 1% of people would but imagine the change that would occur if these policies were enacted.
2 people would already disagree with, but your problem is most of these are simply generic general statements. sure #1 everyone can agree with. then what? does corruption magically stop? the question is how to execute and get there and actually accomplish something. that's something you're not going to get 99% to agree on ever.
Easy to begin:
End the war on drugs and release all non violent drug offenders.
you won't get 99% on the first two, and the last is pretty generic.
Well, of the OWS protestors, I'm sure you'll get 99% to agree with those two and you'll probably be surprised how much more ppl would agree if they realize how much of their tax money is being spent on them while going into further national debt for it a debt that tax payers will eventually have to pay the accumulating interest for. As for the last one... is it really that generic? All it means is: no more bailouts for the big banks.
i don't even know if you'd get that among people in the movement. and how exactly do you even define who counts and is in it? the last one i didn't read as about bailouts at all, so it was definitely too ambiguous. for that matter, if we simply respected real capitalism (like we are supposed to) there would never have been any bailouts for them. since politicians don't, including the bush and obama administrations, we've ended up in a spot today where the banks are even too bigger to fail. suffering major losses today, the same damn thing would happen. we shouldn't need this rule anyway, and the people should have chucked all the damn politicians out - yet this wasn't done either was it.
Then I'm in agreement with you.. so why not support an alliance of politicians who are for a real government representative of people's wishes and would let big banks fail if they are the source of the problem.
i'm a practical libertarian and big supporter of Ron Lawl. i have for years only supported people who would have let the banks fail.
You will NEVER cause the change I believe you are trying to affect unless you define your premise in ways that everyone can support you and in a way that revolutionary change can occur. Tackle TRUE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM. Demand laws that state that a politician CANNOT accept or spend ANY contribution that does not come from a citizen that he or she would represent. No PACs...no corporate donations. Even push for a Constitutional Amendment. Everyone would join you on this.
You will NEVER cause the change I believe you are trying to affect unless you define your premise in ways that everyone can support you and in a way that revolutionary change can occur. Tackle TRUE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM. Demand laws that state that a politician CANNOT accept or spend ANY contribution that does not come from a citizen that he or she would represent. No PACs...no corporate donations. Even push for a Constitutional Amendment. Everyone would join you on this.
Though I don't agree with RP in a lot of things, I believe he and Dennis K are the only two candidates who are the real deal-both of whom has asked for increased transparency and have many times were teh only 2 voters to vote against their parites. I know RP has a stronger base of support, but if Ralph Nader, Dennis K, and RonPaul form an alliance as they had talked about in the last election, then I would supoort them.
I personally would support RP on the issue of cutting down on military spending and shrinking the federal governmnet, while passing down some of its jurisdictios such as health care and education down to the state level, allowing them to increase taxes as they wish.
I also favor a public option that would keep health care costs from skyrocketing. If Americans are willing to incrase State taxes then I'd support a 1 tier public health care system.
So shrink the federal government and beef up the State government. If you don't like your State, move.
I have even a better one:
[1] Ron_Paul & Dennis_Kucinich on presidential war powers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=sSBdRVH3AUI
[2] http://occupywallst.org/forum/do-you-really-want-to-know-how-to-solve-global-fin
I 100% support Ron_Paul & Dennis_Kucinich.
Ron Lawl has stated that the OWS movement are just afraid of not getting their handouts. Ron Lawl hates the poor with a passion and in his Value Voters speech he even twisted Jesus' words of helping the poor. He is so nuts that he voted against outlawing crush videos ( torturing animals ) because it is against someone's right to be a sick psychopath.
To add to all that his deregulation is in lockstep with the Koch Brothers who already own his son Rand and I'm sure they are funneling money to Ron's campaign, This man is DANGEROUS!!!
why is it that when unity is brought up by fiscal conservatives, the liberals go in to a tirade and say there is no way? hung up on social issues? Many liberals and libertarians have the same view about social issues. I don't agree with Ron Paul on social issues but I agree with him more than the other candidates overall. Repubs on social issues really suck but does it really matter if we're all homeless and starving?
change in washington unitedrepublic.org
Hit the plus sign on my posts at the bottom of this thread to see what Ron Lawl supporters felt they needed to hide about The One Who Stood By Reagan ;)
Ron Lawl on CORPORATE POWER
-- He would repeal significant portions of antitrust law, including the Sherman Antitrust Act, the Clayton Antitrust Act, and others.
H.R.1247: To ensure and foster continued patient safety and quality of care by exempting health care professionals from the Federal antitrust laws in their negotiations with health plans and health insurance issuers.
H.R.1789: To restore the inherent benefits of the market economy by repealing the Federal body of statutory law commonly referred to as "antitrust law", and for other purposes.
-- He would gut the regulatory power of Federal agencies, forcing Congress to micromanage all decisions:
H.R.1204: A bill to an Act to restore the rule of law.
Scary" Gary Dominionist theology generally and Christian Reconstruction specifically would not be what they are today without Gary North. When he first met Rushdoony in 1962, the two grew so close that North eventfully married Rushdoony's daughter, Sharon, in the early 1970s. As Rushdoony's son-in-law, North proved to be a prolific and able popularizer of Rushdoony's complex theological ideas. North demonstrated a willingness to reach out across sectarian boundaries in order to engage folks who were not quite as Christian as Rushdoony might have preferred, and directly engaged politically active conservatives, something Rushdoony largely avoided unless he could maintain strict control over their theological allegiances. As a result of his popular appeal and tireless advocacy of the Reconstructionist world-view, one could argue that North did more than any other Reconstructionist short of Rushdoony to reconstruct the world for Christendom.
Beginning in 1963 Rushdoony helped North secure a series of jobs working for the Volker Fund and the Foundation for Economic Education. So by the time North went to work for Rushdoony's Chalcedon Foundation in 1973, he was a bona fide veteran of the American libertarian movement. He had worked for two of its most important organizations and maintained friendly relationships with men like Opitz, among many others. Rushdoony brought him to Chalcedon to research the relationship between biblical law and laissez-faire economics. North threw himself into a project that he has yet to finish. Since 1977 he has spent a minimum of ten hours a week, fifty weeks a year writing a commentary on biblical economics.23
This nineteen volume (and counting) series documents North's assessment of the relationship between Rushdoony-style "theonomy" (or God-rooted law) and the prescriptions for economic behavior North believed he found in the Bible. A complex mix of Austrian economic theory, Van Til-inspired ethics, and acrid prose, North's study of biblical economics laid the foundation for a series of failed predictions regarding the imminent collapse of the federal government. Most notoriously, North predicted that the Y2K computer glitch would lead to the total collapse of the global economy, leaving Christians in the United States to pick up the pieces.24 North's pessimism, unrelenting literary output, and hardboiled rhetoric eventually earned him the nickname "Scary Gary."
"Scary's" track record of failed predictions belies a neglected aspect of his theology. North, unlike Rushdoony, believes that the eternal human social institution is the Christian church. In the event of the catastrophic collapse of such transient institutions as the federal government, churches will step into the void left by its implosion. While this view of the emergent, decentralized church is consistent with North's unique fusion of libertarianism and postmillenarian eschatology, it is sharply at odds with Rushdoony's view. Rushdoony envisioned the church and family as two separate, exclusive spheres. For Rushdoony the family is the primary social unit while the church represents a limited ecclesiastical organization of believers in Christ. Conversely, North believed men owed their allegiances to a church first and the family second.
Like all aspects of Reconstructionist theology, these two perspectives have real-world consequences. When translated into theology, North's focus on the future role of the church led him to embrace a more active political agenda. Long before North and Rushdoony publicly parted ways, North had already aggressively sought out political influence. In 1976 he worked in Washington, D.C. as a staffer for Texas Representative Ron Lawl. After Paul's defeat, North wrote a testy screed warning Christians that Washington was a cesspool that can't be changed overnight.25 He turned his back on national politics and began developing practical tactics for churches to deploy at the grassroots level.26 Unlike Rushdoony who focused most of his attention on ideas, North explicitly worked to pull together disparate church groups, most notably reaching out to charismatic and Pentecostal congregations in the South in an effort to fuse Reconstructionism's grassroots activism with committed congregations. When American society collapses under the combined weight of massive foreign debt, military overstretch, and internal decadence, North hopes to have a network of churches ready to step into the breech. In preparation, he has written book after book aimed at educating Christians on how to live debt free, avoid electronic surveillance, and develop the skills necessary for surviving economic collapse.27 In short, North's version of Reconstructionism blazed a path for the militia and Christian survivalist groups of the 1990s to follow.
Ron Lawl has stated that the OWS movement are just afraid of not getting their handouts. Ron Lawl hates the poor with a passion and in his Value Voters speech he even twisted Jesus' words of helping the poor. He is so nuts that he voted against outlawing crush videos ( torturing animals ) because it is against someone's right to be a sick psychopath.
To add to all that his deregulation is in lockstep with the Koch Brothers who already own his son Rand and I'm sure they are funneling money to Ron's campaign, This man is DANGEROUS!!!
Well if Ron does well and goes against Obama the money will come. But you're too blind to see that the big boys back winners and if they think ronnie could win the money will flow. And just like he took StormFront's money he will take their's also. He has no morals as you can see with the crush videos.
Has any of the Paulites ever heard of Gary North???
Gary North (Christian Reconstructionist)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other people of the same name, see Gary North (disambiguation).
Gary Kilgore North
Gary North speaking at the Mises Institute in 2004 after receiving the Rothbard Medal.
Born
February , 1942
Education
Ph.D. in History, University of California, Riverside
Occupation
Christian Economist, Blogger, Author
Known for
Co-Founder of Christian Reconstructionism; Contributions to Austrian School of Economics
Religion
Christian
Denomination
Presbyterian Church in America
Spouse
Sharon Rushdoony
Children
Darcy, Lori, Scott, and Caleb
Website
http://www.garynorth.com/
Gary Kilgore North (born, February 1942) is an economic historian and publisher who prolifically writes on topics including economics, history, and Christian theology.
Contents [hide] 1 Education and Background 2 Y2K controversy 3 Political beliefs 4 Religious Views and Affiliations 5 Books and newsletters 6 Documentary and educational film 7 Quotes 8 See also 9 References 10 External links
[edit] Education and Background
Gary North grew up in southern California, the son of FBI special agent Samuel W. North, Jr., and his wife, Peggy.[1] North converted to Christianity in high school and began frequenting right-wing bookstores in the Los Angeles area during his college years.[2] Between 1961 and 1963, while an undergraduate student, North became acquainted with the works of Austrian School economists Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek, and Murray Rothbard. During the same period, he began reading the works of ultra-conservative Presbyterian minister Rousas John Rushdoony.[3] North made it his life's work to synthesize Austrian Economics with Rushdoony's theological conservatism. Starting in 1967, North became a frequent contributor to the libertarian journal The Freeman where he had first read their work.[4] He later joined the senior staff of the publisher, the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), 1971–73. North received a PhD in history from the University of California, Riverside in 1972. His dissertation was The Concept of Property in Puritan New England, 1630–1720.
He served as research assistant for libertarian Republican Congressman Ron Lawl in Paul's first term (1976), and he shared a small office with the staunchly Calvinistic political philosopher, John W. Robbins, who later became a noted anti-Van Til, pro-Clark presuppositional apologist, author, and publisher. Also on the staff was economist and historian Bruce Bartlett, although in his pre-supply-side economics days. Many of North's articles have appeared on LewRockwell.com.
[edit] Y2K controversy
Scary" Gary Dominionist theology generally and Christian Reconstruction specifically would not be what they are today without Gary North. When he first met Rushdoony in 1962, the two grew so close that North eventfully married Rushdoony's daughter, Sharon, in the early 1970s. As Rushdoony's son-in-law, North proved to be a prolific and able popularizer of Rushdoony's complex theological ideas. North demonstrated a willingness to reach out across sectarian boundaries in order to engage folks who were not quite as Christian as Rushdoony might have preferred, and directly engaged politically active conservatives, something Rushdoony largely avoided unless he could maintain strict control over their theological allegiances. As a result of his popular appeal and tireless advocacy of the Reconstructionist world-view, one could argue that North did more than any other Reconstructionist short of Rushdoony to reconstruct the world for Christendom.
Beginning in 1963 Rushdoony helped North secure a series of jobs working for the Volker Fund and the Foundation for Economic Education. So by the time North went to work for Rushdoony's Chalcedon Foundation in 1973, he was a bona fide veteran of the American libertarian movement. He had worked for two of its most important organizations and maintained friendly relationships with men like Opitz, among many others. Rushdoony brought him to Chalcedon to research the relationship between biblical law and laissez-faire economics. North threw himself into a project that he has yet to finish. Since 1977 he has spent a minimum of ten hours a week, fifty weeks a year writing a commentary on biblical economics.23
This nineteen volume (and counting) series documents North's assessment of the relationship between Rushdoony-style "theonomy" (or God-rooted law) and the prescriptions for economic behavior North believed he found in the Bible. A complex mix of Austrian economic theory, Van Til-inspired ethics, and acrid prose, North's study of biblical economics laid the foundation for a series of failed predictions regarding the imminent collapse of the federal government. Most notoriously, North predicted that the Y2K computer glitch would lead to the total collapse of the global economy, leaving Christians in the United States to pick up the pieces.24 North's pessimism, unrelenting literary output, and hardboiled rhetoric eventually earned him the nickname "Scary Gary."
"Scary's" track record of failed predictions belies a neglected aspect of his theology. North, unlike Rushdoony, believes that the eternal human social institution is the Christian church. In the event of the catastrophic collapse of such transient institutions as the federal government, churches will step into the void left by its implosion. While this view of the emergent, decentralized church is consistent with North's unique fusion of libertarianism and postmillenarian eschatology, it is sharply at odds with Rushdoony's view. Rushdoony envisioned the church and family as two separate, exclusive spheres. For Rushdoony the family is the primary social unit while the church represents a limited ecclesiastical organization of believers in Christ. Conversely, North believed men owed their allegiances to a church first and the family second.
Like all aspects of Reconstructionist theology, these two perspectives have real-world consequences. When translated into theology, North's focus on the future role of the church led him to embrace a more active political agenda. Long before North and Rushdoony publicly parted ways, North had already aggressively sought out political influence. In 1976 he worked in Washington, D.C. as a staffer for Texas Representative Ron Lawl. After Paul's defeat, North wrote a testy screed warning Christians that Washington was a cesspool that can't be changed overnight.25 He turned his back on national politics and began developing practical tactics for churches to deploy at the grassroots level.26 Unlike Rushdoony who focused most of his attention on ideas, North explicitly worked to pull together disparate church groups, most notably reaching out to charismatic and Pentecostal congregations in the South in an effort to fuse Reconstructionism's grassroots activism with committed congregations. When American society collapses under the combined weight of massive foreign debt, military overstretch, and internal decadence, North hopes to have a network of churches ready to step into the breech. In preparation, he has written book after book aimed at educating Christians on how to live debt free, avoid electronic surveillance, and develop the skills necessary for surviving economic collapse.27 In short, North's version of Reconstructionism blazed a path for the militia and Christian survivalist groups of the 1990s to follow.
Reconstruction Today Where does Christian Reconstruction stand today? This is difficult to answer primarily because of the temptation to look in the wrong place for Rushdoony's influence. Many popular attacks on Rushdoony overestimate his influence on Bush and the GOP and misread his ideas as a cloaked desire to take over the government by hook or crook.30 But the fitful electoral success of the Christian Right has exacerbated tensions in the movement by dividing those calling for a limited government based on Christian principles and those willing to forgo ideological purity for short-term political gain. With their anti-interventionist, libertarian ethos, those inspired by Christian Reconstructionism tend to fall into the principled camp and a good many see national electoral success as a sign of ideological weakness. Their rigid theological consistency also leaves them reluctant to compromise with Republicans and more moderate evangelicals. As a result, Reconstructionists are as likely to disengage from politics as they are to engage in it.
Rushdoony himself is the model for this antagonistic stance toward national politics. In the 1980s, he became increasingly disgusted with partisan politics and worked to disengage from cooperative political action. While it has been widely reported that Rushdoony served as an original member of the Board of Governors of the Council for National Policy (CNP), a secretive right-wing organization cofounded by the evangelical minister and coauthor of the Left Behind novels Tim LaHaye,31 it is less widely known that Rushdoony severed his ties with the group in the late-1980s.32 Rushdoony stopped attending CNP meetings almost as soon as the organization started and ceased paying his membership fee in the late-1980s. He even went so far as to publicly dismiss the organization because of its emphasis on "socializing purposes" over ideologically sound political action.33
Similarly, Rushdoony played an important role in the formation of the Coalition on Revival (COR), an ecumenical organization designed to bridge the gap between Rushdoony's Reconstructionists and premillenarian evangelicals like LaHaye and Francis Schaeffer. Rushdoony and other Reconstructionists famously signed a series of COR Christian World View documents that highlighted points of Christian consensus in their resistance to secular humanism. As with the CNP, Rushdoony stopped working with the group and publicly trashed COR as "an ineffectual group that doesn't change things."34
Between Rushdoony's cool response to national politics and Gary North's abrasive engagement in doomsday theorizing, Christian Reconstructionism's direct influence on national trends has been severely limited. Rather than look for Christian Reconstruction's direct influence on this or that aspect of national policy, it is best to look for its indirect influence on a network of broader, local Christian concerns. At the local level, Rushdoony's ideas have helped to mobilize any number of movements. In particular, Reconstruction has spurred "reform" movements in church groups both large and small.
One of the most obvious local expressions of Reconstruction's "reform" impulse can be seen in the Exodus Mandate Project. Exodus Mandate is a ministry organized by Rev. E. Ray Moore, Jr., a former Army chaplain and pastor active in the Southern Baptist Conference (SBC). Exodus seeks to "encourage and assist Christian families to leave government schools for the Promised Land of Christian schools or home schooling."35 In his writings, Rev. Moore explicitly acknowledges his debt to Rushdoony and other Reconstructionists.36 Dr. Bruce N. Shortt, one of Moore's allies in his fight against public education, has been promoted by the Chalcedon Foundation and his book, The Harsh Truth About Public Schools,37 was published by Chalcedon. Since 2004 Moore and Shortt have teamed up with others in the SBC to promote an "exit strategy" from the public schools. The resolution they proposed for the 2007 annual meeting calls for the formation of an alternative K-12 school system to be administered by Christian churches. Echoing Rushdoony's writings from nearly a half century ago the resolution states, "education is not theologically neutral, and for generations … [children] have been discipled primarily by an anti-Christian government school system."38 If successful, this small grassroots movement could lead to the departure of millions of children from the public school system throughout the United States.
Conclusion Even though the Chalcedon Foundation has fallen on hard times since Rushdoony died in February 2001, Reconstructionism is hardly dead. Through the careful, persistent promotion of his theology, Rushdoony managed to spread his ideas far and wide. Arguably, with his passing the intellectual impetus behind Reconstructionism specifically and Dominionism more broadly is on the wane. But the ideas Rushdoony developed laid the foundation for an incredibly vibrant and adaptable theological system that equally motivates conservatives from various religious and political backgrounds to take action in the name of Christ.
Nowhere is Rushdoony's intellectual influence more evident than in a May 2007 gathering of some 800 socially conservative Protestants for the second annual Worldview Super Conference outside Asheville, North Carolina.39 The conference's program promised to help prepare this generation of Christians "to capture the future" for Christ. Slickly produced and organized by Gary DeMar, an avowed disciple of Rushdoony and president of the American Vision ministry based in Georgia, the four-day event featured more than a dozen speakers, including Gary North.40 Many of the speakers and participants shared Rushdoony's contempt for America's secular society and government. Unlike Rushdoony, however, the participants consistently exhibited their commitment to direct political engagement rather than abstract theological debate.
Today, the public activism advocated at DeMar's Worldview conference and local reform movements like Moore's Exodus Mandate all attest to the enduring reach of Rushdoony's theological mission. His ideas aren't going anywhere just yet. The Chalcedon Foundation, under the leadership of Rushdoony's son, Mark, continues to publish its founder's manuscripts. Meanwhile, Gary North continues to warn of the impending collapse of America's secular system. But most importantly, all three volumes of Rushdoony's magnum opus, The Institutes of Biblical Law, remain in print; Christian colleges and home schooling programs regularly assign Rushdoony's surveys of American history; bloggers write in his honor. In truly libertarian fashion, Rushdoony's ideas have spread far and wide across the Internet and via a diffuse network of right-wing interest groups to create a wide array of Reconstructionist-inspired groups. The decentralized, bottom-up model of social organization Rushdoony championed will all but assure his continued influence for decades to come.
What the heck are you blabbing about?
I think in the middle of your speel, you switched Rushdoony with North. So to help me understand what the hell you're saying...
Ok, so you're basically saying this guy named North who supports RonPaul is dangerous because he wants to bring his 'Reconstructionism's' ideology into RP's campaign???
Then how can you say Bush was the same? because as you know Bush's bigger and wider policies with increased foreign aid and his unpopular support for faith-based organizatinos are in start contrast with RonPaul's ending all finanical aid--none to Israel nor their enemies. RonPaul wants to shrink the federal government while Bush increased it. RonPaul wants out of all these wars, while Bush increased it.
So which of these two does a 'reconstruction' theology line up with? Care to explain what it is first of all? and I hope you're not twisting it here and there like you did in your other post saying RonPaul got the most money from weapons manufacter boeing when it was 10 times less than what Obama's got.
Then you try to justify why obama got so much money when you're the one who brought it up in the first place.. but thanks to you, I did learn now why Obama turned in to a war-monger.
Guess who received the most funds from Boeing nearly double the amount Bush got in 2004. No other than the nobel peace prize winner, Obama http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?id=D000000100&type=P&cycle=2008&state=&sort=A
Top 20 recepients of Wall Street funds. The guy who promised to take on the big banks is number 1 but gave big bailouts to http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U
The news media has pinned us against each other so we will never unite against the real problem.
Awesome post, friend. The greatest trick the money masters ever pulled was making people think that the OWS protest was the problem.
Nationalize the federal reserve, and radically change campaign financing. Overturn "Citizens United" and get money out of the greedy pockets of politicians. They get paid a couple hundred grand a year and get great benefits. That's plenty of money. A candidate needs hundreds of millions of dollars to win an election. Obviously they have to play toward the financiers if they want to win.
This is the type of thinking we need. I meet Occupiers and Tea Partiers that hate one another; it doesn't make any sense.
We're all going in the same direction: downwards. We all need to collectively pull our heads out of our asses and find new ways to relate to one another! Ways that weren't defined by the 1960's idea of hippies and squares. It was bullshit then and it is bullshit now.
This makes no sense: "pick the side that's side is not picking sides." Yeah right. Regardless of "who" is selected as the puppet it's still has no power; just a face of a puppet.
Why doesn't this "99%" go directly to the 1% and make it 100% (no puppet needed...sorry Gonzo and Animal).
"I support the left right whaaa."
Published on Sunday, October 30, 2011 by NBC News
Ron Lawl, Tea Party Godfather, Says ‘Occupy’ All About ‘Handouts'
by Anthony Terrell and Domenico Montanaro
CARROLL, Iowa -- Ron Lawl outlined what he believed was the difference between “Occupy Wall Street” and the “Tea Party.”
Rightwinger Ron Lawl on the Occupy Wall Street protesters: "They’re scared to death they won’t get their handouts." “Some are demonstrating, because they’re scared to death they won’t get their handouts,” Paul said yesterday. “And the other half are demonstrating, because they’re sick and tired of paying for it. I’m on the side of sick and tired of paying for it.”
Paul's popularity has risen since 2008 largely because of the Tea Party. He doesn't lead in polling in any state, but he is routinely in the top three in states like Iowa and New Hampshire.
OMNIBUS REACTIONARY
Ron Lawl has favored all manner of other right-wing policies, in the following case with a single bill, which includes provisions for such things as supporting corporal punishment, requiring that young people seeking reproductive care have their parents notified, allowing churches and religious organizations that run "public" services to discriminate against potential clients, and moving us back to school segregation.
H.R.7955: A bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.
Fortunately, Ron Lawl rarely gets anywhere with his proposals. I doubt there would be many progressives, or even many liberals, who would like where this man comes from politically, or where he wants to take us.
what are the alternatives? more of the same (status quo)
Umm not a candidate who believes in Christian Reconstructionism...
christian fundamentalism sucks but Obama is bankrupting the country and has done nothing to curb the fascism.
No Bush bankrupted the country remember 2008??? Speaking of Bush he was a fundamentalism just like your boys Ron and Rand Paul.
sure but spending an additional 4 trillion is sealing the deal. I'd rather have a sound economy than ideal social issues. We've been living with prejudice.
Ron's EDUCATION POLICY
-- Speaking of schools, he would weaken educational standards by using Federal power to interfere with states improving their standards for teacher certification:
H.R.966: To prohibit the Federal Government from planning, developing, implementing, or administering any national teacher test or method of certification and from withholding funds from States or local educational agencies that fail to adopt a specific method of teacher certification.
H.R.1706: To prohibit the Federal Government from planning, developing, implementing, or administering any national teacher test or method of certification and from withholding funds from States or local educational agencies that fail to adopt a specific method of teacher certification.
H.R.4653: A bill to prohibit the payment of Federal Education assistance in States which require the licensing or certification of private schools or private school teachers.
TAX POLICY
-- He wants to dramatically reduce the tax obligations of people who make inordinately high incomes and who inherit large fortunes they did not earn. Specifically, this includes attempts to repeal the estate tax, and to apply one tax rate to all income levels.
H.J.RES.23: Proposing an amendment the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.J.RES.14: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.J.RES.15: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.J.RES.45: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in the business in competition with its citizens.
H.J.RES.81: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.J.RES.116: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.R.5484: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to provide for the taxation of certain income at the flat rate of 10 percent and to repeal the estate tax.
H.R.2137: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to provide that a 10-percent income tax rate shall apply to all individuals, and to repeal all deductions, credits, and exclusions for individuals other than an exemption of $10,000.
H.R.1664: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to provide that a 10-percent income tax rate shall apply to all individuals and to increase the deduction for personal exemptions from $1,000 to $2,500.
H.J.RES.23: A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.R.6352: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to provide that a 10 percent income tax rate shall apply to all individuals, and to repeal all deductions, credits, and exclusions for individuals other than an exemption of $10,000.
H.R.4569: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to repeal the estate and gift taxes and the tax on generation-skipping transfers.
H.R.15619: A bill to repeal the estate tax.
-- And short of that he wants us to pay our income taxes every month, and not use withholding.
H.R.1364: To restore to taxpayers awareness of the true cost of government by eliminating the withholding of income taxes by employers and requiring individuals to pay income taxes in monthly installments, and for other purposes.
H.R.4855: To restore to taxpayers awareness of the true cost of government by eliminating the withholding of income taxes by employers and requiring individuals to pay income taxes in monthly installments, and for other purposes.
Ron's EDUCATION POLICY
-- Speaking of schools, he would weaken educational standards by using Federal power to interfere with states improving their standards for teacher certification:
H.R.966: To prohibit the Federal Government from planning, developing, implementing, or administering any national teacher test or method of certification and from withholding funds from States or local educational agencies that fail to adopt a specific method of teacher certification.
H.R.1706: To prohibit the Federal Government from planning, developing, implementing, or administering any national teacher test or method of certification and from withholding funds from States or local educational agencies that fail to adopt a specific method of teacher certification.
H.R.4653: A bill to prohibit the payment of Federal Education assistance in States which require the licensing or certification of private schools or private school teachers.
TAX POLICY
-- He wants to dramatically reduce the tax obligations of people who make inordinately high incomes and who inherit large fortunes they did not earn. Specifically, this includes attempts to repeal the estate tax, and to apply one tax rate to all income levels.
H.J.RES.23: Proposing an amendment the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.J.RES.14: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.J.RES.15: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.J.RES.45: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in the business in competition with its citizens.
H.J.RES.81: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.J.RES.116: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.R.5484: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to provide for the taxation of certain income at the flat rate of 10 percent and to repeal the estate tax.
H.R.2137: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to provide that a 10-percent income tax rate shall apply to all individuals, and to repeal all deductions, credits, and exclusions for individuals other than an exemption of $10,000.
H.R.1664: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to provide that a 10-percent income tax rate shall apply to all individuals and to increase the deduction for personal exemptions from $1,000 to $2,500.
H.J.RES.23: A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
H.R.6352: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to provide that a 10 percent income tax rate shall apply to all individuals, and to repeal all deductions, credits, and exclusions for individuals other than an exemption of $10,000.
H.R.4569: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to repeal the estate and gift taxes and the tax on generation-skipping transfers.
H.R.15619: A bill to repeal the estate tax.
-- And short of that he wants us to pay our income taxes every month, and not use withholding.
H.R.1364: To restore to taxpayers awareness of the true cost of government by eliminating the withholding of income taxes by employers and requiring individuals to pay income taxes in monthly installments, and for other purposes.
H.R.4855: To restore to taxpayers awareness of the true cost of government by eliminating the withholding of income taxes by employers and requiring individuals to pay income taxes in monthly installments, and for other purposes.
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND MILITARY ISSUES
-- This "champion of peace" wanted to prohibit the dismantling of ICBM silos in the U.S.:
H.R.1665: To prohibit the destruction during fiscal year 2002 of intercontinental ballistic missile silos in the United States.
H.R.3769: To prohibit the destruction during fiscal year 2001 of intercontinental ballistic missile silos in the United States.
-- He would continue U.S. opposition to the International Criminal Court, despite the usefulness of this body for prosecuting war-crimes that are not challenged domestically.
H.R.1154: To provide that the International Criminal Court is not valid with respect to the United States, and for other purposes.
H.AMDT.480 (A010): An amendment numbered 9 printed in part A of House Report 107-450 to prohibit funds authorized in the bill from being used to assist, cooperate with, or provide any support to the International Criminal Court.
H.R.4169: To provide that the International Criminal Court is not valid with respect to the United States, and for other purposes.
H.CON.RES.23: Expressing the sense of the Congress that President George W. Bush should declare to all nations that the United States does not intend to assent to or ratify the International Criminal Court Treaty, also referred to as the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and the signature of former President Clinton to that treaty should not be construed otherwise.
H.RES.416: Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the International Criminal Court.
-- He has promoted the Bricker Amendment to the Constitution, and otherwise sought limit the protections of international law. He would also prohibit U.S. courts from citing foreign laws or policies (other than English ones) in their decisions:
H.J.RES.1028: A resolution proposing the Bricker amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to force and effect of treaties and executive agreements.
H.J.RES.492: A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to force and effect of treaties and Executive agreements.
H.CON.RES.49: Expressing the sense of Congress that the Treaty Power of the President does not extend beyond the enumerated powers of the Federal Government, but are limited by the Constitution, and any exercise of such Executive Power inconsistent with the Constitution shall be of no legal force or effect.
H.R.4118: To ensure that the courts interpret the Constitution in the manner that the Framers intended.
H.R.1658: To ensure that the courts interpret the Constitution in the manner that the Framers intended.
-- He would end U.S. participation in the United Nations. Failing that he would prohibit or severely curtail appropriations for U.S. payments to the U.N. or its affiliated agencies. Please note that isolationism is not the same as anti-imperialism:
H.R.1146: To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
H.R.1146: To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
H.AMDT.285 (A038): An amendment numbered 11 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit use of funds in the bill to pay any United States contribution to the United Nations or any affiliated agency of the United Nations
H.R.1146: To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
H.AMDT.190 (A024): Amendment sought to prohibit use of funds for any U.S. contribution to the UN or any affiliated agency of the UN.
H.AMDT.191 (A025): Amendment sought to prohibit use of funds for use toward any U.S. contribution for UN peacekeeping operations.
H.R.1146: To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
H.AMDT.306 (A006): Amendment sought to eliminate the authorization of funding for any United Nations program.
H.R.1146: To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
H.AMDT.138 (A010): Amendment sought to provide for the withdrawal of the United States from the United Nations.
H.R.1146: To provide for complete withdrawal of the United States from the United Nations.
H.R.3890: A bill to limit United States contributions to the United Nations.
H.R.3891: A bill to terminate all participation by the United States in the United Nations, and to remove all privileges, exemptions, and immunities of the United Nations.
H.R.6358: A bill to limit United States contributions to the United Nations.
H.R.14788: A bill to limit U.S. contributions to the United Nations.
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND MILITARY ISSUES
-- This "champion of peace" wanted to prohibit the dismantling of ICBM silos in the U.S.:
H.R.1665: To prohibit the destruction during fiscal year 2002 of intercontinental ballistic missile silos in the United States.
H.R.3769: To prohibit the destruction during fiscal year 2001 of intercontinental ballistic missile silos in the United States.
-- He would continue U.S. opposition to the International Criminal Court, despite the usefulness of this body for prosecuting war-crimes that are not challenged domestically.
H.R.1154: To provide that the International Criminal Court is not valid with respect to the United States, and for other purposes.
H.AMDT.480 (A010): An amendment numbered 9 printed in part A of House Report 107-450 to prohibit funds authorized in the bill from being used to assist, cooperate with, or provide any support to the International Criminal Court.
H.R.4169: To provide that the International Criminal Court is not valid with respect to the United States, and for other purposes.
H.CON.RES.23: Expressing the sense of the Congress that President George W. Bush should declare to all nations that the United States does not intend to assent to or ratify the International Criminal Court Treaty, also referred to as the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and the signature of former President Clinton to that treaty should not be construed otherwise.
H.RES.416: Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the International Criminal Court.
-- He has promoted the Bricker Amendment to the Constitution, and otherwise sought limit the protections of international law. He would also prohibit U.S. courts from citing foreign laws or policies (other than English ones) in their decisions:
H.J.RES.1028: A resolution proposing the Bricker amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to force and effect of treaties and executive agreements.
H.J.RES.492: A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to force and effect of treaties and Executive agreements.
H.CON.RES.49: Expressing the sense of Congress that the Treaty Power of the President does not extend beyond the enumerated powers of the Federal Government, but are limited by the Constitution, and any exercise of such Executive Power inconsistent with the Constitution shall be of no legal force or effect.
H.R.4118: To ensure that the courts interpret the Constitution in the manner that the Framers intended.
H.R.1658: To ensure that the courts interpret the Constitution in the manner that the Framers intended.
-- He would end U.S. participation in the United Nations. Failing that he would prohibit or severely curtail appropriations for U.S. payments to the U.N. or its affiliated agencies. Please note that isolationism is not the same as anti-imperialism:
H.R.1146: To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
H.R.1146: To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
H.AMDT.285 (A038): An amendment numbered 11 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit use of funds in the bill to pay any United States contribution to the United Nations or any affiliated agency of the United Nations
H.R.1146: To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
H.AMDT.190 (A024): Amendment sought to prohibit use of funds for any U.S. contribution to the UN or any affiliated agency of the UN.
H.AMDT.191 (A025): Amendment sought to prohibit use of funds for use toward any U.S. contribution for UN peacekeeping operations.
H.R.1146: To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
H.AMDT.306 (A006): Amendment sought to eliminate the authorization of funding for any United Nations program.
H.R.1146: To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.
H.AMDT.138 (A010): Amendment sought to provide for the withdrawal of the United States from the United Nations.
H.R.1146: To provide for complete withdrawal of the United States from the United Nations.
H.R.3890: A bill to limit United States contributions to the United Nations.
H.R.3891: A bill to terminate all participation by the United States in the United Nations, and to remove all privileges, exemptions, and immunities of the United Nations.
H.R.6358: A bill to limit United States contributions to the United Nations.
H.R.14788: A bill to limit U.S. contributions to the United Nations.
-- Not having any success there, he has worked to block U.S. membership in the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization:
H.CON.RES.132: Expressing the sense of the Congress that the United States should formally withdraw its membership from the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
H.CON.RES.4: Expressing the sense of the Congress that the United States should not rejoin the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.
H.CON.RES.443: Expressing the sense of the Congress that the United States should formally withdraw its membership from the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
H.CON.RES.489: Expressing the sense of the Congress that the United States should not rejoin the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
-- Would he pull the U.S. out of the ABM Treaty?
H.J.RES.566: A joint resolution withdrawing the United States of America from the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems, and the Interim Agreement Protocol, and Agreed Interpretations of the Treaty, signed of May 26, 1972.
-- Oh, but he would "protect" U.S. soldiers from wearing any insignia of another country or the U.N.
H.R.4797: To protect America's citizen soldiers.
-- Would he try to re-establish U.S. "sovereignty" over the Panama Canal? As I recall, the Canal Treaty was a major concern of the far Right back in the 1970's and 1980's:
H.CON.RES.231: Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Panama Canal and the Panama Canal Zone should be considered to be the sovereign territory of the United States.
H.RES.1410: A resolution in support of continued undiluted U.S. sovereignty and jurisdiction over the U.S.-owned Canal Zone on the Isthmus of Panama.
H.R.2522: A bill to prohibit the use of any United States funds to implement the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977 unless the use of those funds for that purpose is hereafter expressly provided for by the Congress and to prohibit the transfer to the Republic of Panama any territory or other property of the United States in the Canal Zone unless the Congress hereafter enacts legislation which expressly authorizes such transfer.
A GUN FREE-FOR-ALL
-- He would allow more guns in schools and National Parks, repeal requirements for background checks and gun-locks, use Federal authority to nullify state laws regarding concealed weapons, and eliminate many other regulations including prohibitions on gun possession by minors, recent felons, fugitives, addicts, and domestic abusers, and prohibitions relating to semiautomatic weapons:
H.R.2424: To repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 and amendments to that Act.
H.R.1897: To protect the second amendment rights of individuals to carry firearms in units of the National Park System, and for other purposes.
H. R. 1096: To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans.
H.R.1703: To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans.
H.R.3125: To protect the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.
H.R.153: To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans.
H.R.1762: To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans.
H.R.1179: To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans.
H.R.407: To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for reciprocity in regard to the manner in which nonresidents of a State may carry certain concealed firearms in that State.
H.R.2721: To restore the Second Amendment rights of all Americans.
H.R.2722: To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for reciprocity in regard to the manner in which nonresidents of a State may carry certain concealed firearms in the State.
H.R.1147: To repeal the prohibitions relating to semiautomatic firearms and large capacity ammunition feeding devices.
H.R.3892: A bill to repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968.
H.R.3892: A bill to repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968.
H.R.2311 A bill to repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968.
H.R.14768: A bill to repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968.
Ron Lawl on ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
-- He would limit or try to repeal various environmental protection laws and regulations, including the Clean Air Act, the Soil and Water Conservation Act, and the use of devices that protect the "bycatch" of sea life:
H.J.RES.104: To disapprove a rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to proposed revisions to the national pollutant discharge elimination system program and Federal antidegradation policy and the proposed revisions to the water quality planning and management regulations concerning total maximum daily load.
H.R.3735: To disapprove a rule requiring the use of bycatch reduction devices in the shrimp fishery of the Gulf of Mexico.
H.R.4423: To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to provide that the Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery shall be managed in accordance with such fishery management plans, regulations, and other conservation and management as applied to that fishery on April 13, 1998.
H.R.2504: A bill to amend the Clean Air Act to postpone for one year the application of certain restrictions to areas which have failed to attain national ambient air quality standards and to delay for one year the date required for adoption and submission of State implementation plans applicable to these areas, and for other purposes.
H.R.7079: A bill to repeal the Soil and Water Conservation Act of 1977.
H.R.7245: A bill to amend section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to restrict the jurisdiction of the United States over the discharge of dredged or fill material to discharges into waters which are navigable and for other purposes.
Ron Lawl also has a lot of bills relating to the shrimp industry and trying to block competition. Maybe he's in their pocket?
-- He would promote offshore oil-drilling, the construction of more refineries, coal-mining on Federal lands, and block conservation measures. This would further threaten our coastal and internal environments, and further trap our economy in fossil-fuel dependency:
H.R.2415: To reduce the price of gasoline by allowing for offshore drilling, eliminating Federal obstacles to constructing refineries and providing incentives for investment in refineries, suspending Federal fuel taxes when gasoline prices reach a benchmark amount, and promoting free trade.
H.R.4004: To reduce the price of gasoline by allowing for offshore drilling, eliminating Federal obstacles to constructing refineries and providing incentives for investment in refineries, suspending Federal fuel taxes when gasoline prices reach a benchmark amount, and promoting free trade.
H.R.393: A bill to amend section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to restrict the jurisdiction of the United States over discharge of dredged or fill material to discharges into waters which are navigable and for other purposes.
H.R.4639: A bill to repeal all Federal regulations and taxes on the production of fuel.
H.R.5293: A bill to prohibit the imposition of unreasonable severance taxes or fees on coal or lignite mined from Federal lands.
H.R.6936: A bill to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from promulgating any federal emergency energy conservation plan which would restrict recreational boating.
-- He has fought ratification of the Law of the Sea. As President would he "un-sign" it? [More here.]
H.CON.RES.56: Expressing the sense of the Congress that the United States should not ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty.
To Greedkills,
How again is RonPaul, Boeing's top recepient of funds?
Stop twisting facts dude when Obama had received double that of what bush got in 2004 and 10 times more than RP.
it must be embarrassing to twist facts and then to post a whole bunch of supposed posts which only are consistent to his libertarian views of limiting the federal government's jurisdiction.
And just for your note, I'm not a Ron Lawl supporter like how his base is.. but he, Dennis K, and Ralph Nader seem to be the only one willing to change things in Washington... thats why they got my support.
I advocate for a 1 tier public health care system and I think the State should increase taxes in order to provide health care for all.
If you are not a Ron Lawl supporter why are you pretending this man is a friend of the liberals??? As you can see I posted the truth but the Cultists like yourself try to hide the facts. Spin masters and frauds the whole lot of you.
You're the reason why people get apathetic. I don't know why you would be against RonPaul as hard as you are. I am not a libertarian. I'd support a public option, but at this moment, we can't do anything because we go 1 trillion in defecit per year in spending on the wars.
Then here you come and see him as a threat. I'm curious, who would you rather vote for then?
Ron Lawl is getting more money than Obama from the Defense sector in 2011 ;) look it up people it's there.
I just did look it up man. RonPaul got hardly nothing in 2011 from the defense sector, when his top 6 campaign funders in 2011 were:
Stop lying dude. http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cid=N00005906&cycle=2012#ind
But it is the most isn't it?? sheesh
are you that stupid?
Again you twist facts. Why do I even waste my time with you. Dude, how can you pick and choose like this. Look at 2008, Obama got nearly 200,000 dollars. and even in 2012, Obama's gotten more than most other candidates.
Overall, Obama has received the most funds from the defence sector than any other president in history, over a million.
How can you claim any other candidate, let alone RP has been the top recepient.
If you're still on this rampage to attack RP and not represent his views and make him out to be a war monger from the Chrsitian right.. you're simply wrong. RonPaul is not a WAR MONGER as you think he is. Sheesh...
He was in the Air Force yet against war. This guy is more mixed up than his supporters sheesh
He was in the Air Force yet against war. This guy is more mixed up than his supporters sheesh
Ron Lawl wants to erase the distinction in U.S. law between a zygote and a person
H.R.2597: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.
H.R.1094: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.
H.R.776: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception
H.R.392: A bill proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States guaranteeing the right to life.
-- He would deny the use of the Federal court system -- and even Federal precedent -- to people discriminated against because of their religious beliefs or sexual orientation. This would also limit the cross-state recognition of same-sex marriages. Some of these bills he cynically calls this the "We the People Act".
H.R.300: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.
H.R.4379: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.
H.R.5739: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.
H.R.3893: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.
H.R.1547: To restore first amendment protections of religion and religious speech.
H.R.4922: To restore first amendment protections of religion and speech.
H.R.5078: To restore first amendment protections of religion and speech.
Hey tell me against how Ron Lawl is Boeing's top recipient of funds? when clearly it's Obama.
You liar.
Anyway, if you think RP's guided by his religious beliefs, you're wrong. He wants to decrease the power of the federal government because he's a libertarian. He doesn't believe that a federal government should be in the jurisdictions of things that the State should take care of such as education and wants to even take marriage out of government hands and let it be a religious thing.
And man, can you stop lying and twisting facts.
No Ron Lawl is the liar thanks for the opportunity to expose this hypocrite.
Notably, Paul has relied on defense sector interests more than Romney, Bachmann or Obama.
Paul has collected at least $17,700 from defense sector interests. That's only about 0.8 percent of his itemized receipts -- but that percentage is still about four times larger as the percent of either Romney or Obama's war chest that has come from the defense sector.
I agree.
And with the media blackout of Ron P.aul this may be an eventuality.
edit -
There is so much uninformed Ron Pa.ul hate on this forum I doubt this is the place for such a rational idea to be discussed. The bias defamation of his name could be a good indicator of this.
Currently, we have a government for Wall Street and the MIC paid by Wall Street and the MIC who have the power to regulate corporations and business in such a way as to use our tax money for more Wall Street bailouts, oppress the 99%, and for foreign occupations that lead to civilian deaths.
The most feared and most hated enemy by both self claimed socialists and capitalists is fascism.. a government-corporate complex that we currently have.
I don't fully understand the bias against Ron Lawl's voting record. I think it may seem a little blurry because the topic of the vote if it's related to abortion or immigration and the fact that he is voting against them it sounds and feels bad but when you look at the vote again and examine them, just about every time if not every time, it's not that he's against these items it's just that he is voting to get the federal government out of those aspects of business. he votes against federal intervention, he votes to limit the size of government. I certainly don't agree on everything he says, but in consideration of the long history of absolute failure in just about everything federally mandated it would probably be in our bets interest to get the government out of our lives and Ron Lawl also would pull the patriot act and homeland security, essentially restoring a vast amount of civil rights, including being able to lawfully assemble without being treated like a terrorist. He would also end the war on drugs. Besides all that, if someone will get elected in 2012, who would you prefer it be? It's going to happen, someone will be elected. I live in Germany and I teach English and many people feel the same way about Ron Lawl because they see Democrats and Republicans as the same and they see Ron Lawl as a LIbertarian which they say is the only chance for actual change. So if someone has to be elected, do you have a preference?
Ron Lawl INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS -- He opposes the right of women to be free to control their own reproductive systems if they happen to live in particular states or other countries, or if they work for the Peace Corps.
Ron Lawl introduces three pro-life bills
H.R.1095: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.
H.R.777: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.
H.R.1548: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.
H.AMDT.1003 (A024): Amendment no. 17 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit the use of funding for abortion, family planning, or population control efforts.
H.AMDT.380 (A022): An amendment no. 9 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit funding for population control or population planning programs; family planning activities; or abortion procedures.
H.AMDT.312 (A011): An amendment, printed as amendment No. 32 in the Congressional Record of July 16, 1997, to prohibit the use of funds appropriated in the bill for Family Planning, birth control or abortion.
H.R.4984: A bill to prohibit the use of funds for the Peace Corps to be used for travel expenses of individuals in order for abortions to be performed on those individuals.
Ron Lawl on DISCRIMINATION
-- He has tried to make it easier for racial and ethnic discrimination in our society:
H.R.3863: A bill to provide that the Internal Revenue Service may not implement certain proposed rules relating to the determination of whether private schools have discriminatory policies.
H.R.5842: A bill to make all Iranian Students in the United States ineligible for any form of federal aid.
H.R.4982: A bill to provide for civil rights in public schools.
-- He would propose an amendment to the Constitution to gut the Fourteenth Amendment by denying citizenship to people born here whose parents aren't already citizens "nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States". That latter part could produce some serious political discrimination, especially if radicals can have their citizenship revoked:
H.J.RES.46: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.
H.J.RES.46: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.
H.J.RES.42: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.
Ron Lawl INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS -- He opposes the right of women to be free to control their own reproductive systems if they happen to live in particular states or other countries, or if they work for the Peace Corps.
Ron Lawl introduces three pro-life bills
H.R.1095: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.
H.R.777: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.
H.R.1548: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.
H.AMDT.1003 (A024): Amendment no. 17 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit the use of funding for abortion, family planning, or population control efforts.
H.AMDT.380 (A022): An amendment no. 9 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit funding for population control or population planning programs; family planning activities; or abortion procedures.
H.AMDT.312 (A011): An amendment, printed as amendment No. 32 in the Congressional Record of July 16, 1997, to prohibit the use of funds appropriated in the bill for Family Planning, birth control or abortion.
H.R.4984: A bill to prohibit the use of funds for the Peace Corps to be used for travel expenses of individuals in order for abortions to be performed on those individuals.
Ron Lawl on DISCRIMINATION
-- He has tried to make it easier for racial and ethnic discrimination in our society:
H.R.3863: A bill to provide that the Internal Revenue Service may not implement certain proposed rules relating to the determination of whether private schools have discriminatory policies.
H.R.5842: A bill to make all Iranian Students in the United States ineligible for any form of federal aid.
H.R.4982: A bill to provide for civil rights in public schools.
-- He would propose an amendment to the Constitution to gut the Fourteenth Amendment by denying citizenship to people born here whose parents aren't already citizens "nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States". That latter part could produce some serious political discrimination, especially if radicals can have their citizenship revoked:
H.J.RES.46: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.
H.J.RES.46: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.
H.J.RES.42: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.
Ron Lawl on CORPORATE POWER
-- He would repeal significant portions of antitrust law, including the Sherman Antitrust Act, the Clayton Antitrust Act, and others.
H.R.1247: To ensure and foster continued patient safety and quality of care by exempting health care professionals from the Federal antitrust laws in their negotiations with health plans and health insurance issuers.
H.R.1789: To restore the inherent benefits of the market economy by repealing the Federal body of statutory law commonly referred to as "antitrust law", and for other purposes.
-- He would gut the regulatory power of Federal agencies, forcing Congress to micromanage all decisions:
H.R.1204: A bill to an Act to restore the rule of law.
Ron Lawl on VOTER ISSUES
-- He has come out against attempts to make the United States more democratic, including the idea of eliminating the Electoral College, even after the debacle in the 2000 Presidential election:
H.CON.RES.48: Expressing the sense of the Congress in reaffirming the United States of America as a republic.
H.CON.RES.443: Expressing the sense of the Congress in reaffirming the United States of America as a republic.
-- He wants to repeal the "Motor Voter" Act, which has made it easier for people to register to vote.
H.R.2139: To repeal the National Voter Registration Act of 1993.
Ron Lawl against LAWS IMPROVING THE LOT OF THE WORKING CLASS
-- He has tried to repeal the Occupational Safety and Health Act:
H.R.2310: A bill to repeal the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.
H.R.13264: A bill to repeal the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
-- He would like to make it much easier to decertify labor unions:
H.R.694: To amend the National Labor Relations Act to permit elections to decertify representation by a labor organization.
-- He opposes the Minimum Wage:
H.R.2962: A bill to repeal all authority of the Federal Government to regulate wages in private employment.
-- He would deny the prevailing wage to employees of federal contractors, and remove prohibition on kickbacks in Federal projects:
H.R.736: To repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act.
H.R.2720: To repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act.
-- He wants to severely weaken Social Security:
H.R.2030: A bill to amend the Social Security Act and the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to make social security coverage completely optional for both present and future workers, to freeze benefit levels, to provide for the partial financing of future benefits from general revenues subject to specified conditions, to eliminate the earnings test, to make changes in the tax treatment of IRA accounts, and for other purposes.
H.R.4604: A bill to repeal the recently enacted requirement of mandatory social security coverage for employees of nonprofit organizations.
Even though he claims to be a "libertarian", he opposes people's freedom to burn or destroy their own copies of the design of the U.S. flag
H.J.RES.80: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing the States to prohibit the physical destruction of the flag of the United States and authorizing Congress to prohibit destruction of federally owned flags.
H.J.RES.82: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing the States to prohibit the physical destruction of the flag of the United States and authorizing Congress to prohibit destruction of federally owned flags.
Excuse me but then how would the government and the military arm of the government dispose of worn out flags? Currently they incinerate them.
How again is RonPaul, Boeing's top recepient of funds?
Stop twisting facts dude.
Ask Ron why he voted against it not me. Learn about this man don't just blindly follow anyone.
I posed a generic question and supplied a fact...feel good legislative proposals are just that feel good, they have no substance.
I do not follow RP and don't understand those who seem to so blind do.
Sorry if I was rude, been attacked so many times by Ron Lawl supporters over the last few months I must suffer from PTSD.
I was not seeking an apology, but I appreciate it anyway. I do understand the RP supporters being overly enthusiastic in 'defending' their candidate.
I just wish those who are attempting to use the forum as a promotional tool for any particular candidate would cease and desist, it serves no purpose toward a common goal as defined by the parameters of the forum.
Ron Lawl wants includes limits on courts' hearing cases related to abortion, and he has introduced bills specific to these kinds of cases. He also uses the deceptive term "partial-birth abortion".
H.R.1545: To prohibit Federal officials from paying any Federal funds to any individual or entity that performs partial-birth abortions.
H.R.1546: To provide that the inferior courts of the United States do not have jurisdiction to hear abortion-related cases.
H.R.2875: To provide that the inferior courts of the United States do not have jurisdiction to hear abortion-related cases.
H.R.3400: To provide that the inferior courts of the United States do not have jurisdiction to hear abortion-related cases.
H.R.3691: To provide that the inferior courts of the United States do not have jurisdiction to hear partial-birth abortion-related cases.
H.R.15169: A bill to eliminate the appellate jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme Court with respect to certain abortion cases.
Yeah but he wants to end corporatism. So he may have ideas you dont agree with, but is this any reason not to support his views on the corporate state?
We all have our differences as Americans but, to set them aside in order to combat a common enemy, the "1%", is more important than playing partisan politics in an age of increasing corporate reign.
He will boost corporatism with his deregulation not end. SMH
Specify deregulation. the word is thrown around quite a bit but with little specifics.
Regulation hurts small business the most. Big corporations can deal with regulations because they have lots of money. If anything Big corporations gain from regulation in some instances. But of course its not so black and white. There is such a thing as smart regulation too. Glass-Steagall is a great example of regulation. The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, which repealed Glass-Steagall or deregulated , was bad deregulation. For the record Ron Lawl was against Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, however he did not vote yes or no.
And the big corporations will gain the MOST from deregulation not small businesses.
be specific. what deregulation?
How about pollution like his son Rand Paul tried to pass last week...
Senate Rejects Rand Paul Pollution Bill, 56 – 41 | Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-KY) bill to kill a new Environmental Protection Agency rule that will reduce cross-state air pollution from coal-fired power plants in Kentucky and 26 other states was resoundingly defeated by a bipartisan 56 to 41 vote. Democrats Joe Manchin (WV) and Ben Nelson (NE) supported Paul’s radical bill. Republican senators Kelly Ayotte (NH), Scott Brown (MA), Olympia Snowe (ME), Susan Collins (ME), Mark Kirk (IL), and Lamar Alexander (TN) opposed the Congressional Review Act resolution. “Nine million people a year come to see the Great Smoky Mountains, not the Great Smoggy Mountains,” Alexander said. The 41 supporters each received an average of $361,370 from the mining and utility industries, 188 percent greater than the average contributions to the 56 opponents. Sens. Daniel Inouye (D-HI), John McCain (R-AZ), and Jeff Sessions (R-AL) did not vote.
Tags: Air Pollution Clean Air Act Environmental Protection Agency Lamar Alexander Rand Paul
Stay on topic. Rand is not Ron. be specific. what regulation?
Ron supports the end of the EPA so does his son Rand. Their views are one in the same. That is why Ron used his campaign donations from 2008 to start Campaign for Liberty to promote Rand and other Koch like henchmen to government they love to hate.
for the record I think its pathetic that the average donation for the 41 supporters was 300,000 dollars. I think this needs to stop. This is how corporations get their way. Money is not speech! Money is not reason, its greed!
Federal funds are already not allowed to contribute toward the payment of ANY abortion at any stage of development.
LOL the truth hurts the Paulites I see. Talk about censorship ;) Crush videos look it up. Open Secrets defense sector donations look it up. 1996 Ron admits to writing racist newsletters look it up. OWS supporters afraid of losing handouts look it up. :)
"Crush videos look it up."
Why did you write that??
I did look it up. It was so gross.
Ron Lawl voted against outlawing those sick videos...
I hate to sound harsh, but at least that view is consistent with all his slogans about free speech and freedom..
His Pro-Life views, however, prove that he's just a shameless right-wing republican that has no concern for minimizing government power.
I'm sorry but allow women in high heels to crush a mouse or a gerbil so some sick person can get off only leads tp sicker things. Serial killers start off torturing defenseless animals then move up the food chain. But of course Ron's buddy Ayn Rand also worshiped serial killers and such selfish sick behavior so it is no surprise to me.
As you know military and defense spending has increased under Obama so far... and the reason why is now clear:
Guess who received the most funds from Boeing nearly double the amount Bush got in 2004. No other than the nobel peace prize winner, Obama http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?id=D000000100&type=P&cycle=2008&state=&sort=A
And if you're interested.. here are the top 20 recepients of Wall Street funds. The guy who promised to take on the big banks is number 1. http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U
Ron Lawl has stated that the OWS movement are just afraid of not getting their handouts. Ron Lawl hates the poor with a passion and in his Value Voters speech he even twisted Jesus' words of helping the poor. He is so nuts that he voted against outlawing crush videos ( torturing animals ) because it is against someone's right to be a sick psychopath.
To add to all that his deregulation is in lockstep with the Koch Brothers who already own his son Rand and I'm sure they are funneling money to Ron's campaign, This man is DANGEROUS!!!
Hey man, you're right! RonPaul did receive money from the defence sector specifically Boeing in the last election... which strikes me at somewhat surprising since RonPaul campaigned on ending all wars.
But as you know military and defense spending has increased under Obama's term so far... and the reason why is now clear:
Guess who received the most funds from Boeing nearly 10 times more! No other than the nobel peace prize winner. http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?id=D000000100&type=P&cycle=2008&state=&sort=A
And if you're interested.. here are the top 20 recepients of Wall Street funds. The guy who promised to take on the big banks is number 1. Top 20 recipients of Wall Street Funds: http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U
But I suppose your bias will speak louder than the facts.
I would also ask you to find me the source where RonPaul said that of the OWS movement. He has continually defended it from even his Repubican counterparts. Look, we all want to be right and never admit when we were wrong and it's much easier to attack a caricature, but how much do you really want change cuz if you did, you'll do what it takes to join forces with those who would challenge the Establishment.
Your source is below but of course Ron did not say that, he was misquoted, he was having a bad day. He was distracted texting the Mason lodge asking what time was the pancake breakfast. Wake up wake up.
Paul also lied that half the people protesting are against helping their fellow man. The only ones that want to see the poor suffer and the sick to die are the Ayn Rand Paulites which are few and far between at OWS. He is a 30 year hypocrite Republican that should be thrown to the curb. Plain and simple.
BS he is trying to suck votes from OWS and that is all he is doing. Just as Alex Jones tried to co-op the movement but when rejected he turned on them like the rabid dog that he is. WAKE UP
Ron Lawl Tea Party Godfather, Says ‘Occupy’ All About ‘Handouts'
by Anthony Terrell and Domenico Montanaro
CARROLL, Iowa -- Ron Lawl outlined what he believed was the difference between “Occupy Wall Street” and the “Tea Party.”
Rightwinger Ron Lawl on the Occupy Wall Street protesters: "They’re scared to death they won’t get their handouts." “Some are demonstrating, because they’re scared to death they won’t get their handouts,” Paul said yesterday. “And the other half are demonstrating, because they’re sick and tired of paying for it. I’m on the side of sick and tired of paying for it.”
Yeah, well it could be true. Half of those protesting may want more governmental benefits. But a quote liek that as you said may have been misquoted should be weighed against what Ron Lawl also said on a national stage in front of a Republican audience which he has been booed several times... that he's against Wall Street receiving benefits and that they should be either taxed or their benefits should be removed. When Herman Cain attacked the OWS movement, Ron Lawl came to the OWS's defense.
It's easy to pick and choose and caricature a person because you don't want to associate with them because of where they were born and raised or their religion, but let's be somewhat fair in representing them. What's your criteria for judging a person and saying one quote is bullshit from another.. religion? what state they were born? If so, that's discrimination and stereotyping my friend.
And again, what's more important to me is about this news that Ron Lawl is the biggest recipient of funds from the defence sector that you said is true.. give me the source.. I'd be interested in reading that.
I'll read them right now. Can you also give me your source about Ron Lawl receiving the most fund from the defense sector.
There goes the harsh talk without really understanding. George Bush enacted more regulations on Wall Street than any other President. Obama's regulations thus far were packaged with further Wall Street bailouts. If guys like Dennis Kucnich and Ralph Nader can find common ground with RonPaul, then I'm not sure why they don't call him DANGEROUS!
As for twisting Jesus' words... RonPaul said you can't create laws that will change people's hearts and morals. This applies to gay marriages or helping the poor.
As for the issue of poverty, how has it been going by electing the Democrats into office? Was poverty their top priority agenda or did they increase spending on the military?
If the government is supposed to help the poor, how come they haven't? In fact why was it only under George W. Bush that foreign aid increased?
All to say, that Bush was terrible in his dealings and the government is still broken and going bankrupt with all this crazy spending on wars and corruption in government by both Republicans and Democrats.
Humility asks us to find common ground to put a stop to the things we can find common ground against. The poor will not be helped when each year, we go into deficit by spending trillions on the military enabled by corrupting influences.
If you can not see the danger then I can't help you. By trying to pretend that Ron Lawl is the Liberals' best friend is only pissing people off because he is a member of the religious right enforced by his long standing ties to the John Birch Society. His views are in Lockstep with Koch and all the other Repubs. Tell us why the Defense sector is donating the most to the Paul campaign?? What does Boeing know that you don't?
By the way you skipped the Crush videos in your reply. I guess the Ron Lawl camp has not be able to put out a propaganda talking point yet for the Paulites to parrot...I'm sure there's one coming like the Newsletter which he did admit to writing in 1996 then to only deny writing them a couple of years later.
One thing we seem to agree on NO MORE MESSES FROM TEXAS!!!
So now let's see who's twisting and lying: You said referring to Boeing..."tell us why the Defense sector is donating the most to the Paul campaign??"
Should I now call you a liar and ignorant?
However the truth is: Obama has received nearly 10 times more from Boeing in 2008, which is even doubled that of what Bush got in 2004. It also highlights how Boeing has funded both parties equally throughout the years with some variation to year to year. Hence why Obama increased spending on the military. http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?id=D000000100&type=P&state=&sort=A&cycle=2008
Again, you love to caricature the religious.. that's your heart isn't it? So I suppose Obama who attended a church in Chicago who's mentor was a Christian doesn't change things. Are we to blame Obama for his religion.
Even RonPaul promotes how he has had the most funding from war veterans. (It's NOT the defence sector). WHY? b/c those war veterans know the price of war and they want to put a stop to these needless foreign occupations.
Oh yeah, attack Texas eh? Those stupid Southern religious fuck nuts.. really? It's getting boring now. Yes yes.. we know that those of us who are from the North East (where I'm from) such as New York and Boston, are better than those down south.
Please first get your facts straight and separate it from opinion. Put yourself into another person's shoes before you caricature and criticize.
A lot words that really don't amount to anything of substance. The religious right do not represent the words of Jesus. Bush was a mess Perry is a mess and Ron is a mess. So I stand by my words NO NEW MESSES FROM TEXAS.
And Obama's better? Come on man.
You said RonPaul has received the most funds from the defense sector.. can you give me a source and I'll end my advocacy of RonPaul.
Daily Paul - when backed into corner mention Obama even though the person you are debating never showed any support for Obama.
If you dont' support Obama, it shows you're not a hypocrite then. These are some of the facts:
If you're against Bush for his military spending then we got to look at Obama's military spending which increased even more and as I just learned got twice as more funds than Bush by Boeing, one of the biggest weapons producers.
If you're against Bush because of the defecit he ran, Obama nearly doubled that within just 2 years.
If you're against Bush being Wall Street's best friend, Obama gave 2 more bailouts to Wall Street.
If you're against Bush because of his religion thinking he's some sort of religious lunatic or some devout Christian (clearly, he's not if you see his off-camera behavior), then what about Obama's mentor? and the prayers he received from church to church where one of them they prayed over him by laying their arms on him as though he's some sort of prophet or something like how they did for Sarah Palin.
If you think Bush is stupid, then yes I agree that Obama's smarter in being the only president who uses a teleprompter for nearly all his speeches. But look at what happens when he doesn't have one or if it breaks down.
All to say why we need to support politicians like Dennis K, RonPaul, and Ralph Nader.
Go search open secrets it's there. I thought you guys know everything about Paul....or you guys just know what Paul wants you to know is more like it.
I just did search open secrets and RonPaul is not the biggest recepient of the defense sector and Boeing as you claimed. It's no other than Obama by nearly 10 times more especially in 2008, double that of what bush got in 2004. It explains why Obama's got trigger happy with the drone attacks produced by Boeing. http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?id=D000000100&type=P&state=&sort=A&cycle=2008
And it's surprising that they funded the Democrats nearly or more than 50% and that Obama's 2008 campaign he got double that of what George Bush got in 2004.
[Removed]
Kucinich sold out on health care. Remember the plane ride???
[Removed]
Ron Lawl INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS -- He opposes the right of women to be free to control their own reproductive systems if they happen to live in particular states or other countries, or if they work for the Peace Corps.
Ron Lawl introduces three pro-life bills
H.R.1095: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.
H.R.777: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.
H.R.1548: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.
H.AMDT.1003 (A024): Amendment no. 17 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit the use of funding for abortion, family planning, or population control efforts.
H.AMDT.380 (A022): An amendment no. 9 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit funding for population control or population planning programs; family planning activities; or abortion procedures.
H.AMDT.312 (A011): An amendment, printed as amendment No. 32 in the Congressional Record of July 16, 1997, to prohibit the use of funds appropriated in the bill for Family Planning, birth control or abortion.
H.R.4984: A bill to prohibit the use of funds for the Peace Corps to be used for travel expenses of individuals in order for abortions to be performed on those individuals.
Where's the "Right" in this example? RP isn't what you could call a full on Conservative.
If you think hanging around the John Birch Society and Christian Reconstructionists isn't far right....
Here's a word for you. It's not the religious right who you need to be scared of. They're just being played as are you.
Maybe one day, you'll realize the truth.
Oh yea..The Kucinich / Chomsky ticket in 2012. That should win...
Dennis couldn't win more than 30%of his OWN HOME DISTRICT during his last two fantasy camp runs for president.