What is Digg?9 Comments
- Elwood19k20, on 11/15/2007, -1/+4I agree with RP on many of his beliefs, except for maybe his views on seperation of church and state, but hey, nobody is perfect, and at least he doesnt lie about his views just to appease the masses. He still has my vote regardless of this attempt to discredit him.
- Ratteler, on 11/15/2007, -1/+3Separation of Church and State doesn't appear in our Constitution.
Our Constitution says... "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;".
Under the Constitution... ONLY congress can make laws. There is no regulatory law from the executive branch, and no pseudo law judicial precedent.
There for... the ONLY group that can make law, can not recognize any religious view, or deny some one from practicing their faith.
It's a catch 22 that makes Separation of Church and State is irreverent. - makuyk00, on 11/17/2007, -1/+2Okay,here it is slowly, in English, in small words... I had thought I was pretty clear already, but let's do this one for the cheap seats, shall we?
A few simple points. It's not ad hominem "child" arguments (thanks for the disrespect, by the way, nice to make your acquaintance, too) but I'd love an answer.
Dr. Paul wants to abolish the FBI and the CIA. In these troubled times when security is so necessary, why is such an action needed now? What would you put in their places? If you don't support this radical position, why would you support the guy who thought it up?
That alone is enough. If you publicly say this is your goal, then you should not be President. I have not heard one argument since writing this post, not on here or any other site I comment on, that even comes close to justifying this.
He has some great ideas- as I have said repeatedly, that is always great for our country. I just don't think such a radical departure from years of reasoned governmental changes is good for us right now. We need to patch some things up before trying to reinvent the wheel.
These points are easy, no tricky logic. Refute them, please. Nobody has been able to yet. Oh, and by the way I do believe this qualifies as a well written, easily understood argument. Made by a veteran and a college graduate, not a child. I'll thank you to keep a civil tongue, or at least try to show objectivity. - Seabhacre, on 11/16/2007, -1/+2Your statement that "If after reading this those of you supporting or considering Ron Paul are not swayed that his Libertarian principles are a little kooky, or at the least require a tad more thought, then it's likely you supported Bush as well, and thus convincing you with reason was already impossible." gave me hope. Hope that maybe I would find someone who wants to write about Ron Paul's positions will actually provide a reasoned argument, either for or against. Yet all I found in your article was a well-known list of his positions with no details as to why you believe these 'ideas' to be bad or good. I have researched Paul's positions on these and other positions he takes and find that only Ron Paul and supporters provide any kind of substantive argument. Your only argument against his positions is that you believe they are Bad, Kooky, and out-there. And I'm suppose to believe you when that is all you have to say. Your argument is that of a spoiled child "His positions are bad because I say they are". If you really want to convince people that believe in Liberty and Freedom of the Individual then provide do some Real Research and provide some real substance to you argument. Otherwise you bring nothing to the table but your winy-cry-baby-attitude. And we all no that that has no value in the real political discourse this country needs right now.
- makuyk00, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2That's a pretty good rule, though simplistic of course.
I sure wish Ron Paul's positions were as groundbreaking and fantastic as his supporters make out. Unfortunately he seems to me to be a supply-sider in wolf's clothing, an elitist with an elaborate political philosophy to cloak less than honorable intentions. It seems Libertarians forgot the days of the robber barons, the Vanderbilts, Carnegies, Morgans, and Harrimans. That's exactly what we would get if we relied on people's good intentions to rein in a wild, completely free market.
Government has a purpose. The different branches of our current system evolved to take care of problems that popped up organically over the lifetime of our country. People don't just wake up and say "Let's go tax the hell out of someone and regulate everything in sight." When some kid loses an eye on a toy or somebody's balls are sucked off in a pool drain the free market doesn't swoop in to make it all better. Indeed the Bush administration proves this; during their tenure toy manufacturers greedily sold our children lead-laced toys, drug companies sent dangerously under-tested drugs through a corrupt FDA to hurt and kill lots of people (think Vioxx) and contaminated produce ends up on our tables.
American history clearly shows what deregulating industry does- it hurts the average joe and enriches the elites. Anyone who makes this concept a cornerstone of their governing philosophy must be treated like they are RADIOACTIVE and be quickly and quietly led well away from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. - makuyk00, on 11/15/2007, -2/+1Oh, and I call Dr. Paul an extremist because his views are far outside those of the populace at large. In other words, I call him an extremist because abolishing large chunks of the current US system would be radical and never before contemplated by a major presidential candidate.
- makuyk00, on 11/15/2007, -5/+1Aha! Here comes the Ron Paul brigade to save the day! Hey Elwood19k20, my post was not an attempt to discredit, it was education on Paul's writing. I reference his article directly. Other than Mister numbered points, I doubt you folks actually read the whole article, you just comment and vote based on a knee-jerk loyalty due to years of GOP training...
Let me also tell you guys up front I'm not even going to attempt a point-by-point refutation of your counter points- RP supporters use Rovian fallacies and circular logic. I'd rather pound my head on a brick wall.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is