If somebody could say this who's views I didn't agree with, at least I could respect him.
ron paul=awesome/kickass?
Collapse
X
-
Government Somalia style?
After seeing him in the debate and realising just how old he is it's a pointless argument anyway. Retirement age is 65 for a reason, it's absolutely crazy to vote someone into a 4 year post 10 years after they have passed the retirement age.
He may be fit for 76 but he's still 76. What other professions would you be happy about an 80 year old doing for you?Comment
-
That argument doesn't really resonate with me ... I support him for the ideas and philosophy, which is ageless...Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
They're in their 70s, and I know what you mean, I've seen it happen to 1 (who died) and another who stopped living in the present when the former died. It's very sad.Comment
-
I think his policy is best described as ... government can only make things less efficient. Without federal government and the bureaucracy, he feels that private charities, communities and local government can bridge the gap effectively. He is a practicing physician and believes that the people were better able to afford and attain care before the social programs were put in place, and that waste and inefficiency have made it much harder for people to get quality, affordable care.
I have no idea if it's true, having not been around before those programs were enacted. I personally believe there should be some form of safety net for the elderly.
I don't think Ron Paul believes that people in need should be abandoned, but rather that when government becomes the solution, and individuals become dependent on the state, that other, more reliable solutions are overlooked and ultimately not embraced, causing more problems than we could otherwise have had.
There are plenty of examples of when he was practicing medicine in the 60s where he donated his own time and money to provide free care for others, and that the hospital he worked at did the same routinely.Comment
-
Originally posted by vandeleurE- Jesus . Playing both sides because he didnt understand the argument in the first placeComment
-
Comment
-
I think his policy is best described as ... government can only make things less efficient. Without federal government and the bureaucracy, he feels that private charities, communities and local government can bridge the gap effectively. He is a practicing physician and believes that the people were better able to afford and attain care before the social programs were put in place, and that waste and inefficiency have made it much harder for people to get quality, affordable care.
I have no idea if it's true, having not been around before those programs were enacted. I personally believe there should be some form of safety net for the elderly.
I don't think Ron Paul believes that people in need should be abandoned, but rather that when government becomes the solution, and individuals become dependent on the state, that other, more reliable solutions are overlooked and ultimately not embraced, causing more problems than we could otherwise have had.
There are plenty of examples of when he was practicing medicine in the 60s where he donated his own time and money to provide free care for others, and that the hospital he worked at did the same routinely.
Are you that desperate, grasping at straws, that you'd throw common sense to the wind and believe..........or in a Lennon voice....."Imagine there's no government"
We are a nation of laws....they stated that at the beginning of this whole Crazy Thing we call Love
Truth be told...I only looked at your first paragraph
You may or may not had a point after that......50/50Last edited by kwame k; 01-29-2012, 01:55 AM.Originally posted by vandeleurE- Jesus . Playing both sides because he didnt understand the argument in the first placeComment
-
I was explaining how I understood Paul's point of view, and if you'd read the other half, I went on to point out that I didn't agree with it.
In any event, Paul has said more than a few times that he isn't going to push his ideology on the nation; He's pragmatic and would do what he could to safeguard our social systems and begin transitioning us away from government dependence.
I personally like that philosophy. We can afford our social programs if we change our imperialistic philosophy and militarism -- which is exactly what he's saying he would do.
Paul isn't campaigning on a platform of deregulation; He's campaigning on a platform that says we need to change our foreign engagements and get our own house back in order. Spend our resources here and not everywhere else. A lot of people get caught up on what he thinks would work well in theory and forget to look at what he's saying he would do in practice.
A lot of people here included.Comment
-
Ron Paul is a crusty old turd.ROTH ARMY MILITIA
Originally posted by EAT MY ASSHOLE
Sharky sometimes needs things spelled out for him in explicit, specific detail. I used to think it was a lawyer thing, but over time it became more and more evident that he's merely someone's idiot twin.Comment
-
The reason that Obama has largely failed in his agenda is that a) he is an outsider and b) the US system is built to stop any radicalism.
I don't see how Paul is going to get around that either even if he wins and then wins and then stays healthy.Comment
Comment