What do you think of Ron Paul?

[Manic]

I've always found debates to be overall futile, as most people who engage in them already have their own viewpoint set in stone, and the debate itself only really helps ambivalent spectators.

However, since you nudged me on...

Yes, illegal immigrants are a problem. But there's a blanket of xenophobia hovering over this country that forces some people to lump the legal immigrants in with the illegal ones. Legal immigrants aren't a problem. They're part of what made this country great. They plowed our fields, built the railroads, became our doctors, our bankers, our lawyers. Many of them came from places where they couldn't express themselves, and when let loose in the United States, they blossomed, and added to this great country.

But all that aside, a great many of you wouldn't be here if your ancestors weren't allowed to stay in this country because they were born before their own parents became citizens. Imagine being born in this country, but as soon as you turned 18 and were no longer under the guardianship of your visa'd/naturalized parents, you were under the risk of being deported to a country you'd never even been to. Your parents are from Afghanistan, but who gives a F if you were born and raised in Cleveland-- you're going to Afghanistan.

Taking away birthright citizenship would force the United States to turn its back on its own people. People born in the US deserve to stay in the US. It's called "birthright citizenship" for a reason: because it is a right of birth. Don't take that fundamental right away from people who deserve it simply because some border-jumping preggos are abusing it. Change the law; don't get rid of it outright.

 

[AllThingsComic]

Wait... you're against immigrants coming into this country on visas? God damn, I give up.

I don't think you fully understood what that comment was inferring. If a person has all the intentions of becoming a citizen through the proper channels, then i'm all for it. My comment about the visas was referring to those who are trying to cheat the system(back door cheats) and come here on a visa intentionally give birth to a child, and then say ok America now take care of me and my child(ren). That's not right. If a parent hasn't done the right thing by the time the kid is 18, then he deserves to be shipped off and has noone but his neglegent parents to blame for it. How would you feel if a complete stranger broke into your home, laid up on the couch brought in his/her kids and said ok go bust your ass at work and don't forget to bring home dinner for me and my kids? I don't think you'd be to happy. As for the visa, think of it as a house guest that has long overstayed thier welcome, had a child in your house and now says you have to provide because it happened under your roof, don't think you'd be to happy with that either.

 

[Manic]

I don't think you fully understood what that comment was inferring. If a person has all the intentions of becoming a citizen through the proper channels, then i'm all for it. My comment about the visas was referring to those who are trying to cheat the system(back door cheats) and come here on a visa intentionally give birth to a child, and then say ok America now take care of me and my child(ren). That's not right. If a parent hasn't done the right thing by the time the kid is 18, then he deserves to be shipped off and has noone but his neglegent parents to blame for it. How would you feel if a complete stranger broke into your home, laid up on the couch brought in his/her kids and said ok go bust your ass at work and don't forget to bring home dinner for me and my kids? I don't think you'd be to happy. As for the visa, think of it as a house guest that has long overstayed thier welcome, had a child in your house and now says you have to provide because it happened under your roof, don't think you'd be to happy with that either.

I think I came up with two different ways to deal with that. Either kick them all out of the country and welcome the kids back when they're adults, or extend the visas until the children turn 18. Hell, what I'm about to say might be cruel, but maybe threaten to make the children wards of the state if the parents don't get their s*** together. Those children born here deserve to be here. The parents with expired visas don't.

I, however, do not condone the deporting of children born on American soil. The US will grant instant citizenship to the children of American citizens, even if they were born and raised in another country. But you're saying we should deport those born in the US because their parents are too damn stupid to either get an extension or get naturalized.

 

[AllThingsComic]

I think I came up with two different ways to deal with that. Either kick them all out of the country and welcome the kids back when they're adults, or extend the visas until the children turn 18. Hell, what I'm about to say might be cruel, but maybe threaten to make the children wards of the state if the parents don't get their s*** together. Those children born here deserve to be here. The parents with expired visas don't.

I, however, do not condone the deporting of children born on American soil. The US will grant instant citizenship to the children of American citizens, even if they were born and raised in another country. But you're saying we should deport those born in the US because their parents are too damn stupid to either get an extension or get naturalized.

Ummmm, yeah. If the parents are to negligent to assure the childs future, the child has noone to blame but his parents. In a way it forces illegals or over extended visas to do the right thing. I'm sorry, I don't believe just because you were born here under false pretenses you deserve the same rights as a person whose parents came here legally. It's a spit in the faces of those in the past AND the present that came here and gained legal citizenship.

 

[Memphis Slim]

Ditto!

 

[justinlancaster]

I just wanted to post this writing by Ron Paul regarding the income tax. A lot of people seem to have a problem with this and I haven't heard a good argument as to why. I want to get your thoughts on this.

-
The Case Against the Income Tax

Could America exist without an income tax? The idea seems radical, yet in truth America did just fine without a federal income tax for the first 126 years of its history. Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker's paycheck. In the late 1800s, when Congress first attempted to impose an income tax, the notion of taxing a citizen's hard work was considered radical! Public outcry ensued; more importantly, the Supreme Court ruled the income tax unconstitutional. Only with passage of the 16th Amendment did Congress gain the ability to tax the productive endeavors of its citizens.
Yet don't we need an income tax to fund the important functions of the federal government? You may be surprised to know that the income tax accounts for only approximately one-third of federal revenue. Only 10 years ago, the federal budget was roughly one-third less than it is today. Surely we could find ways to cut spending back to 1990 levels, especially when the Treasury has single year tax surpluses for the past several years. So perhaps the idea of an America without an income tax is not so radical after all.
The harmful effects of the income tax are obvious. First and foremost, it has enabled government to expand far beyond its proper constitutional limits, regulating virtually every aspect of our lives. It has given government a claim on our lives and work, destroying our privacy in the process. It takes billions of dollars out of the legitimate private economy, with most Americans giving more than a third of everything they make to the federal government. This economic drain destroys jobs and penalizes productive behavior. The ridiculous complexity of the tax laws makes compliance a nightmare for both individuals and businesses. All things considered, our Founders would be dismayed by the income tax mess and the tragic loss of liberty which results.
America without an income tax would be far more prosperous and far more free, but we must be prepared to fight to regain the liberty we have lost incrementally over the past century. I recently introduced "The Liberty Amendment," legislation which would repeal the 16th Amendment and effectively abolish the income tax. I truly believe that real tax reform, reform that so many frustrated Americans desperately want, requires bold legislation that challenges the Washington mind set. Congress talks about reform, but the current tax debate really involves nothing of substance. Both parties are content to continue tinkering with the edges of the tax code to please various special interests. The Liberty Amendment is an attempt to eliminate the system altogether, forcing Congress to find a simple and fair way to collect limited federal revenues. Most of all, the Liberty Amendment is an initiative aimed at reducing the size and scope of the federal government.
Is it impossible to end the income tax? I don't believe so. In fact, I believe a serious groundswell movement of disaffected taxpayers is growing in this country. Millions of Americans are fed up with the current tax system, and they will bring pressure on Congress. Some sidestep Congress completely, bringing legal challenges questioning the validity of the tax code and the 16th Amendment itself. Ultimately, the Liberty Amendment could serve as a flashpoint for these millions of voices.

 

[Kritish]

I just wanted to post this writing by Ron Paul regarding the income tax. A lot of people seem to have a problem with this and I haven't heard a good argument as to why. I want to get your thoughts on this.

-
The Case Against the Income Tax

Could America exist without an income tax? The idea seems radical, yet in truth America did just fine without a federal income tax for the first 126 years of its history. Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker's paycheck. In the late 1800s, when Congress first attempted to impose an income tax, the notion of taxing a citizen's hard work was considered radical! Public outcry ensued; more importantly, the Supreme Court ruled the income tax unconstitutional. Only with passage of the 16th Amendment did Congress gain the ability to tax the productive endeavors of its citizens.
Yet don't we need an income tax to fund the important functions of the federal government? You may be surprised to know that the income tax accounts for only approximately one-third of federal revenue. Only 10 years ago, the federal budget was roughly one-third less than it is today. Surely we could find ways to cut spending back to 1990 levels, especially when the Treasury has single year tax surpluses for the past several years. So perhaps the idea of an America without an income tax is not so radical after all.
The harmful effects of the income tax are obvious. First and foremost, it has enabled government to expand far beyond its proper constitutional limits, regulating virtually every aspect of our lives. It has given government a claim on our lives and work, destroying our privacy in the process. It takes billions of dollars out of the legitimate private economy, with most Americans giving more than a third of everything they make to the federal government. This economic drain destroys jobs and penalizes productive behavior. The ridiculous complexity of the tax laws makes compliance a nightmare for both individuals and businesses. All things considered, our Founders would be dismayed by the income tax mess and the tragic loss of liberty which results.
America without an income tax would be far more prosperous and far more free, but we must be prepared to fight to regain the liberty we have lost incrementally over the past century. I recently introduced "The Liberty Amendment," legislation which would repeal the 16th Amendment and effectively abolish the income tax. I truly believe that real tax reform, reform that so many frustrated Americans desperately want, requires bold legislation that challenges the Washington mind set. Congress talks about reform, but the current tax debate really involves nothing of substance. Both parties are content to continue tinkering with the edges of the tax code to please various special interests. The Liberty Amendment is an attempt to eliminate the system altogether, forcing Congress to find a simple and fair way to collect limited federal revenues. Most of all, the Liberty Amendment is an initiative aimed at reducing the size and scope of the federal government.
Is it impossible to end the income tax? I don't believe so. In fact, I believe a serious groundswell movement of disaffected taxpayers is growing in this country. Millions of Americans are fed up with the current tax system, and they will bring pressure on Congress. Some sidestep Congress completely, bringing legal challenges questioning the validity of the tax code and the 16th Amendment itself. Ultimately, the Liberty Amendment could serve as a flashpoint for these millions of voices.

Sounds like it’s time for a reality check, the world’s a lot different then it was back then. The things we take for granted like social security and welfare would go down the toilet along with a strong military.

How exactly have taxes oppressed America? I hate to break the tragic news to you this isn’t the year 1776, the world’s a hell of a lot more complicated.

I’ll grant the fact that there’s a lot of people tired of paying taxes, but you’ll find that most of them are *****ing about taxes as they’re living off of the fruits of them.

“Nothing’s certain but Death and Taxes.” - Benjamin Franklin.

 

[justinlancaster]

Sounds like it’s time for a reality check, the world’s a lot different then it was back then. The things we take for granted like social security and welfare would go down the toilet along with a strong military.

How exactly have taxes oppressed America? I hate to break the tragic news to you this isn’t the year 1776, the world’s a hell of a lot more complicated.

I’ll grant the fact that there’s a lot of people tired of paying taxes, but you’ll find that most of them are *****ing about taxes as they’re living off of the fruits of them.

“Nothing’s certain but Death and Taxes.” - Benjamin Franklin.

-In the article it states that income tax accounts for 1/3 of federal income. If we cut federal spending to the levels they were at in the year 2000, we could abolish the income tax. Last I checked we still had a strong military, SS, welfare and more social programs than you can shake a stick at.

What do you mean how have taxes oppressed America? Everytime they dip into your check they are affecting your capability to provide a better quality of life for you and your family.

 

[SuperMonkey]

I don't care for him much


...

 

[justinlancaster]

Sounds like it’s time for a reality check, the world’s a lot different then it was back then. The things we take for granted like social security and welfare would go down the toilet along with a strong military.

How exactly have taxes oppressed America? I hate to break the tragic news to you this isn’t the year 1776, the world’s a hell of a lot more complicated.

I’ll grant the fact that there’s a lot of people tired of paying taxes, but you’ll find that most of them are *****ing about taxes as they’re living off of the fruits of them.

“Nothing’s certain but Death and Taxes.” - Benjamin Franklin.

And I'm not talking about taxes in general as your post implies. I'm just talking about 1 tax.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCgHRoB6xUw

 

[Man-Thing]

I'm voting for him.

He seems to know what the constitution says. That says a lot about a politician. He seems to really care for the country. Just wish his campaign would catch steam.

 

[Matt]

Put it this way:

When you are the candidate that Dennis Kucinich is going to beat, you have a problem.

 

[Showtime]

I hate Rue Paul!

 

[bell110]

Sure, lets do it. **** it, lets go balls to the wall crazy and get rid of income tax. Everybody talks about how they want change, but when someone actually brings change up, everyone cringes at it. I'd rather have Ron Paul in office with his "wacky" ideas then another Bush or Clinton. Besides, I think he knows what he's talking about, that's why no one supports him.

 

[Arkady Rossovich]

It's pretty sad that if your campain doesn't have a lot of money.You don't get noticed.

 

[justinlancaster]

It's pretty sad that if your campain doesn't have a lot of money.You don't get noticed.

Yeah that is chicken s but Ron Paul is the third highest funded Republican. Also, he is the canidate that most active military personnel donate to. Look it up.

 

[justinlancaster]

Put it this way:

When you are the candidate that Dennis Kucinich is going to beat, you have a problem.

I don't agree with that. He does have a lot of support. He's ranked in first or in the top three in most of the straw polls.

 

[BlackLantern]

I admire the "specialized" following that Ron Paul has regarding the internet....but if you just ask a random person on the street who Ron Paul is, they will probably look at you like you are a ******. He isn't going to get the nomination because his party wont support him, and a majority of people just don't care.....

 

[justinlancaster]

I admire the "specialized" following that Ron Paul has regarding the internet....but if you just ask a random person on the street who Ron Paul is, they will probably look at you like you are a ******. He isn't going to get the nomination because his party wont support him, and a majority of people just don't care.....

That "specialized" following also voted for him in the debates totally smashing the other canidates. I think more and more people are catching on to his message as it gears closer to the election. The GOP will not support him now but he is garnering support from the religious right, republicans, democrats and independents but if he keeps moving forward they have no choice because they want to have a republican in power. I understand the majority of people don't care and thats the problem. The majority of people don't care about politics period as you can see by voter turn out but if he is able to get through to the majority of I think he will have massive support.

This thread isn't about support though its about Ron Paul's views on government, monetarty policy, foreign policy, etc. What do you think about his views?

 

[hammy]

I think a lot of people still don't know anything about him but they will get to know him more over these next several months. I know very little, myself, but what I have heard, I like. It would be refreshing to have someone other than a career politician in office.

 

[justinlancaster]

I think a lot of people still don't know anything about him but they will get to know him more over these next several months. I know very little, myself, but what I have heard, I like. It would be refreshing to have someone other than a career politician in office.

I agree. I urge everyone to look him up on youtube and just view some of the videos I have posted on this thread. I don't see how people disagree or not pay attention to him just because major media outlets don't. Let's move away from that. How can more freedoms for individuals and a return to our constitutional base be a bad think?

 

[justinlancaster]

I just wanted to post this writing by Ron Paul regarding the income tax. A lot of people seem to have a problem with this and I haven't heard a good argument as to why. I want to get your thoughts on this.

-
The Case Against the Income Tax

Could America exist without an income tax? The idea seems radical, yet in truth America did just fine without a federal income tax for the first 126 years of its history. Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker's paycheck. In the late 1800s, when Congress first attempted to impose an income tax, the notion of taxing a citizen's hard work was considered radical! Public outcry ensued; more importantly, the Supreme Court ruled the income tax unconstitutional. Only with passage of the 16th Amendment did Congress gain the ability to tax the productive endeavors of its citizens.
Yet don't we need an income tax to fund the important functions of the federal government? You may be surprised to know that the income tax accounts for only approximately one-third of federal revenue. Only 10 years ago, the federal budget was roughly one-third less than it is today. Surely we could find ways to cut spending back to 1990 levels, especially when the Treasury has single year tax surpluses for the past several years. So perhaps the idea of an America without an income tax is not so radical after all.
The harmful effects of the income tax are obvious. First and foremost, it has enabled government to expand far beyond its proper constitutional limits, regulating virtually every aspect of our lives. It has given government a claim on our lives and work, destroying our privacy in the process. It takes billions of dollars out of the legitimate private economy, with most Americans giving more than a third of everything they make to the federal government. This economic drain destroys jobs and penalizes productive behavior. The ridiculous complexity of the tax laws makes compliance a nightmare for both individuals and businesses. All things considered, our Founders would be dismayed by the income tax mess and the tragic loss of liberty which results.
America without an income tax would be far more prosperous and far more free, but we must be prepared to fight to regain the liberty we have lost incrementally over the past century. I recently introduced "The Liberty Amendment," legislation which would repeal the 16th Amendment and effectively abolish the income tax. I truly believe that real tax reform, reform that so many frustrated Americans desperately want, requires bold legislation that challenges the Washington mind set. Congress talks about reform, but the current tax debate really involves nothing of substance. Both parties are content to continue tinkering with the edges of the tax code to please various special interests. The Liberty Amendment is an attempt to eliminate the system altogether, forcing Congress to find a simple and fair way to collect limited federal revenues. Most of all, the Liberty Amendment is an initiative aimed at reducing the size and scope of the federal government.
Is it impossible to end the income tax? I don't believe so. In fact, I believe a serious groundswell movement of disaffected taxpayers is growing in this country. Millions of Americans are fed up with the current tax system, and they will bring pressure on Congress. Some sidestep Congress completely, bringing legal challenges questioning the validity of the tax code and the 16th Amendment itself. Ultimately, the Liberty Amendment could serve as a flashpoint for these millions of voices.

anyone else have an opinion of this?

 

[BlackLantern]

I think Ron Paul would be refreshing, he has great ideas and would be great to have in power, but he isn't going anywhere as far as the presidential campaign. he'll get a few votes here and there and winning debates doesnt mean you can be president....his party will make sure he is kept in check and not making any waves......its sad, but its the truth

 

[justinlancaster]

I think Ron Paul would be refreshing, he has great ideas and would be great to have in power, but he isn't going anywhere as far as the presidential campaign. he'll get a few votes here and there and winning debates doesnt mean you can be president....his party will make sure he is kept in check and not making any waves......its sad, but its the truth

If he is refreshing then we should be supporting him more. He is going to go further in the campaign then you think. If at the very least he brings up some questions then I think that is good for Americans. If his party sees there is support for him they will back him bank on it. Bill Clinton had 2% support when he started and look what happened.

 

[justinlancaster]

Sure, lets do it. **** it, lets go balls to the wall crazy and get rid of income tax. Everybody talks about how they want change, but when someone actually brings change up, everyone cringes at it. I'd rather have Ron Paul in office with his "wacky" ideas then another Bush or Clinton. Besides, I think he knows what he's talking about, that's why no one supports him.

The thing is that its not that far out of an idea. We didn't have an income tax until 1913. So whats the big deal. I agree with you but I don't think his ideas are any more "wacky" then the founders talked about.