GHook's possible 180 on Ron Paul

[GHook93]

Anyone who has read a lot of my post on RP knows that I have huge problems with him, but after the last debate I am not sure he is all that bad. My reasons:

(1) Immigration:
I have given him credit on this before. He has by far the best plan!

(2) Foreign Policy:
I am mixed on this. I see it as morally justice to help out weaker people when they are faced with genocide: Rwanda, Kosovo, Holocaust and today in Somolia and Danfur. However, I don't think the US needs expensive military bases all over the world, nor do I think its smart to fight nation building wars. They don't work.

We need the money for domestic issues. I believe the blowback is a reality not a 9/11 truther conspiracy.

(3) Mortgage Meltdown:
I started my career for 4 years as a mortgage broker and now work for one of the credit bureaus I saw first hand what was happening and had personally done a ton of loan I didn't know how the borrowers were going to pay for them. He specifically identified the cause, the artificial raising and lowering of interest rates, which obviously attributed to other factors. At the debate how he spoke how the market would keep them stable, not too high or too low, just makes sense. The mortgage crisis has spilled over to auto and credit card, my friends it has lead to a recession.

(4) Iraq:
For the record I was against the war once I found out it was not to get Sadam and Iraq had to WMDs. I thought as long as the surge is working we should stay. But I now believe the success of the surge is temporary. It can be attributed only to the large America presence. When we leave the Iraq puppet government will collaspe and the REAL civil war will start. Not so sure what to do, but screaming the surge is working is not the something I truely believe in. Not to mention that its very expensive.

(5) The Trade War:
We are losing the trade war to China and India. The over-regulation of American companies and the unbalanced free trade agreements have had an impact. More job have gone over-seas under the big brother government style, maybe RP's deregulation is what we need.

(6) Lower Taxes:
I got very excited about the Guiliani proposed biggest tax cut in American history, I should give RP the same respect, because his tax cuts will dwarf the Mayors.

(7) Israel:
Again anyone who reads my posts knows that I am pro-Israel, some might call it blinding pro-Israel. However, up until the last debate, I believe RP's views towards Israel were that they were a parasite. These views swayed me away from him more than I would like to admit. However, he makes great points on them. He is not singling Israel out in anyway. He plans to cut everyone off. Basically we give 3x the amount to the Arabs that is given to Israel. $3.5 billion in aid might sound like a lot (the aid we give to Israel), but it makes up only 2% of its GDP. Arab countries like Egypt and Pakistan would be hurt 10 fold. I also agree that Iran is not that much of a threat. Alamanutjob's party will probably lose votes in the next election and he will probably be voted out of office during the next election for a reformer. Iran's bark is truely greater than its bite. Especially now with the news about its stoppage of the nuke program.Without the 2% GDP Israel might take a hit, but I think it would still flourish and its military would still be strong, just not as strong. I also like that fact that Israel won't need to check with the US for its operations. The move would also make the US safer and it would decrease anti-semitism in America and anti-americanism aboard.

Blossoming Jewish Support for Ron Paul in Israel? - Free Market News Network

(8) Best debator I have ever seen:
Like him or hate him you must give him his props, the man knows how to debate and win. He is impressive. It was a huge shame that foxs news didn't include him in the NH debate (very unimpartial if you ask me) and he was the only candidate H & C didn't interview after the SC debate. That is very unfair and not balance, but that is another topic.

(9) Believable and compassionate:
Like him or hate him, but this is something I always respected about RP. You can take him at his word.
____________________________________________________________
Why I am not quite ready to convert over!
(1) Getting rid of the EPA?
I studied environmental law last semester. The EPA and the environmental laws have had a huge impact on the environment in a positive way. I do not believe more decisions should be left up to the big businesses. We have seen what a very conservative can have on the EPA, Reagan had a horrible impact on the EPA.

(2) Global Warming:
I believe it, he doesn't and won't do much to stop it.

(3) Removal of the FBI, CIA and DHLS:
I think this would leave us vulnerable and not a good move.

(4) Getting rid of the federal reserve?
He made some compelling points at the last debate on why he believes it and he did make sense. However, I am not so sure whether this is a good thing or not.

(5) Vast deregulation of businesses?
Yep this is contradictory to what I stated above, but not sure this is a great idea either, especially in regard to OSHA. This scares me, but not as much as it did after the last debate.

(6) Israel?

During the Holocaust I lost 60% of my very large family! All my family in Europe (which included 50-60 members in Germany, France and Poland) and Russia (which included over 100 members) died in the Holocuast. The only members that lived were the ones in America (only my great grandparents and his 4 sisters - my grandmother lived) and the few that made it to Palestine (and of course later Israel). It would kill me to see Israel fall or a 2nd Holocaust occur. Not sure I could live with that. As stated above his points did make sense, but cutting off Israel and my Israeli relatives scares me.

(7) Large part of his backers are 9/11 truthers!
I won't sugar-coat it, I hate them. I would never want to be associated with the group. The piss me off royally.

I am still on the fense with Ron Paul, but I have to admit my views changed immensely with the last debate. Probably was when I heard his rationale behind Israel and how he bi!ch slapped McCain in the debates.

[Clarence]

congratulations, you've started the 1millionth ron paul thread.

So do you think he's a racist?

[GHook93]

Quote by: Clarence congratulations, you've started the 1millionth ron paul thread.

And there are probably a billion more throughout the web, vastly more than any other candidate.

My reason for the new thread is that I have started to see RP in another light after the last debate.

So do you think he's a racist?

Never did! His views on the border are not racism and they right in line with mine. His views against affirmative action are right in line with his libertarian/deregulation viewpoint. Also, during Con Law its taught that affirmative action is a strange animal. In all reality its unconstitutional, since it goes against the privilege and immunity clause and commerce clause (14th A).

But the article posted in another thread about some of his articles that he posted were concerning. However, as the holocaust denial websites have taught me, You can't believe everything you read on the internet!

[Clarence]

You've read about his immigration ideas. What is his plan as far as a wall goes? I mean, is it a real wall or just proverbial wall? Keeping people from illegally crossing (within reason of course) would help with the problem of citizenship jobs/taxes/entitlement.

What are the best suggestion IYO concerning border control?

[GHook93]

Quote by: Clarence You've read about his immigration ideas. What is his plan as far as a wall goes? I mean, is it a real wall or just proverbial wall? Keeping people from illegally crossing (within reason of course) would help with the problem of citizenship jobs/taxes/entitlement.

(1) From what I understand he was a strong supporter of the Secure Fence Act of '06, which called for:
Secure Fence Act of 2006 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

over 700 miles of double-reinforced fence to be built across cities and deserts alike between California and Texas in areas that have been prone to illegal drug trafficking and illegal immigration. It authorizes the installation of more lighting, vehicle barriers, and border checkpoints, while putting in place more advanced equipment like sensors, cameras, satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles in an attempt to watch and control illegal immigration into the United States.

(2) He is a strong support of abolishing the birthright provision of the 14th Amendment, which is highly justified. If you look at the legislative history of the birthright provision of the 14th amendment, it was to protect the newly freed slaves from the whites trying to deny their children US citizenship. It was never intended to protect the children of illegal aliens. The provision should be changed to "children of citizens to the US get automatic citizenship."

(3) He is against amnesty

(4) From what I read he is for punishing the business owner for hiring illegals

What are the best suggestion IYO concerning border control?

Here is my suggestion:
(1) Penalize the employers who hire illegals big time. For the first infraction its $10,000. The second its $50,000 fine. And the 3rd infraction and your license goes to a panel that can decide whether to revoke your business license. Require reasonable, but high-end background checks. There are so many great companies that do this its sick.

(2) Penalize the renters. Do a similar system. $10,000 fine for 1st infraction. $50,000 for the 2nd infraction. The 3rd infraction could possibly be ceasing your property. Again goes in through a tribunal for this.

(3) Build a 2 layer fence along the Mexican border. Which includes motion sensors, cameras, barb wire, vehicle road blocks and even a mine field in some remote parts (block it of completely and set warming signs in many different languages).

(4) Close the US bases all over the world and put these troops along the border. Use the drones and have them monitor the border.

(5) Give some of the illegals here amnesty. Set a specific cap, meaning we don't have to reach it, but we won't go over it. Go off a point system. Ex.:
[] Criminal conviction is an automatic disqualification
[] Any ties to radicalism, such as to the Reconquistador, Aztlan, Al Qaeda, Radical Islam etc. = disqualification
[] A current or ex gang-banger = automatic disqualification
[] Speak English is a + and a requirement(no speaka any english is a disqualifier)
[] More skilled you job is, is ranked higher
[] More education you have is a +
[] Duration of time in America, longer the better
[] Higher the generation + (example 3rd generation is a + over 2nd)
[] If you served in the military is a +++ (nearly an automatic qualifier)
[] What country your from. If the country is hostile to the US, then its a -, if its Mexico, which has a high portion of illegals, then that is a -

(4) Write into law that that only the babies born in America of American citizens are automatically made citizens. Kill the birthright provision of the 14th A., it wasn't intended for this.

(5) Created a guest-workers program, that fits within employment law. As the short-term solution. For some industries, such as agricultural, its needed.

(6) Create the point system people that want to legally immigrate into America

(7) I am adding more - PROTECT THE PORTS! This might be difficult but not impossible. A change is needed. A stagering percent of imports to this country are checked. Use the military for this. Create off shore inspection sites. Meaning every cargo ship has to pass through them. Use heat sensors, dog sniffs, bomb detectors etc. The ports are where we are most vulnerable. Make it so every cargo ship is required to pass through one!

(8) End the war on drugs (repeal the Harrison Act). Then concentrate specifically on illegal immigrants, terrorist and WMDs smuggled in. This would help the inner cities, latin America etc. 10 fold.

[Stizzles]

(4) Close the US bases all over the world and put these troops along the border. Use the drones and have them monitor the border.

Yes, let's give up our strategic military positions around the globe.

Just f'n brilliant. How do you come up with this stuff? 101 Ways To Lose the Next World War?

[triad]

Quote by: Stizzles Yes, let's give up our strategic military positions around the globe. Just f'n brilliant. How do you come up with this stuff? 101 Ways To Lose the Next World War?

Well, lets take a look stizzles:


Give up your strategic military positions around the globe and save your country from driving itself into the ground and into a recession, OR, keep doing what you have been since you've become the most powerful country in the world and that will let you "win" the next world war.

To me, anticipating a world war is stupid. You can't predict war, unless you are the one that causes them *intentional cough*. So unless you are prepared to spend trillions of dollars a year on being ready for the next world war - which could be never, or who knows when, RP has it down. Once you destroy a countries financial structure, the military structure will soon follow. What would you rather have? Strong finances to have strong military when needed, or strong military and slowly deteriorate?

[Stizzles]

Give up your strategic military positions around the globe and save your country from driving itself into the ground and into a recession, OR, keep doing what you have been since you've become the most powerful country in the world and that will let you "win" the next world war.

We had the same military positions around the globe during bull markets and bear markets.

What evidence do you have that stationing military personnel in bases strategically positioned around the world causes recessionary forces in the market?

...keep doing what you have been since you've become the most powerful country in the world and that will let you "win" the next world war.

I just want fewer Americans to die next time. That's all.

To me, anticipating a world war is stupid. You can't predict war, unless you are the one that causes them *intentional cough*.

There's always going to be another war. There's gonna be some crazy dictator, or some ideological crusade. The question is whether you're prepared for it.

So unless you are prepared to spend trillions of dollars a year on being ready for the next world war - which could be never, or who knows when, RP has it down. Once you destroy a countries financial structure, the military structure will soon follow. What would you rather have? Strong finances to have strong military when needed, or strong military and slowly deteriorate?

Uh, I'd rather have strong finances and a strong military. One leads to the other.

What evidence do you have that we're even facing a recession?

[triad]

Quote by: Stizzles We had the same military positions around the globe during bull markets and bear markets. What evidence do you have that stationing military personnel in bases strategically positioned around the world causes recessionary forces in the market? I just want fewer Americans to die next time. That's all. There's always going to be another war. There's gonna be some crazy dictator, or some ideological crusade. The question is whether you're prepared for it. Uh, I'd rather have strong finances and a strong military. One leads to the other. What evidence do you have that we're even facing a recession?

Fed ready to slash rates to stave off a crash | Business | guardian.co.uk

The US Federal Reserve chairman, Ben Bernanke, today said he was ready to make aggressive cuts in US interest rates to in effort to stop the world's largest economy from sliding into recession, and that he would support a fiscal package to stop a slowdown. Bernanke said the Fed is not forecasting a recession, although growth will slow this year and into 2009. "The US economy remains extraordinarily resilient," he said.

Although they are not "forecasting a recession", they are "ready to make aggressive cuts to stop the world's largest economy from sliding into recession".

Huh? Why would you slash interest rates if you're not forecasting a recession? Because they are lying. The inflation in the USA is on a runaway train. Your economy is controlled more and more everyday by China, since you finance a large amount of your military spending through them. Also, Japan and China, come in first and second place as foreign holders of U.S. securities.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34314.pdf


The US depends greatly on China for many things - this will destroy any of your strategic military positions because China has leverage on your decision making in war.


Whether you like it or not, the US is broke, a broke super power that keeps printing money to pay for it's obsessive military spending.

[Stizzles]

Although they are not "forecasting a recession", they are "ready to make aggressive cuts to stop the world's largest economy from sliding into recession". Huh? Why would you slash interest rates if you're not forecasting a recession? Because they are lying. The inflation in the USA is on a runaway train. Your economy is controlled more and more everyday by China, since you finance a large amount of your military spending through them. Also, Japan and China, come in first and second place as foreign holders of U.S. securities.

...and what does any of this have to do with troop deployment?

[triad]

Quote by: Stizzles ...and what does any of this have to do with troop deployment?

....

What evidence do you have that we're even facing a recession?

[Sandy]

I too have been up and down about Ron Paul. His programs are wonderful but his numbers are not. I will vote for him in the Arizona Primary but came up with an idea after staying up all night worrying about our freedoms. This is my Blog entry from CHB.
-------------------------------------------------------------
2012 is where our focus should be as we should realize that 2008 is so wrapped up in Religion and Corruption that it should be ignored after the election. It matters little who wins the White House as no changes will be made. I’m willing to see what the Democrats can do with the mess with the war, the economy, immigration, foreign involvement and the uniting of Canada, the USA and Mexico which will go through unless we revolt. Neither party will stand up to it. Neither party will improve the academic mess unless it is pumping more money in a failed system.

My plan is two-fold: Many here will be pleased with the Democrats who will redistribute the wealth and bring socialism into controlling the corporations and making Constitutional changes banning the lobbyists. The GOP has no one who can beat the Democrats because of the total corruption found all over the religious right and the social conservatives.

At this time there is only one man who campaigns on the Constitution and limiting its intrusive growth into all our lives. I had hoped that Dr. Paul would lay out his plans to return to the Constitution and ease out of the welfare programs that many of us have put lots of money into the system.

He has said that he will not cancel S.S. or Medicare at one time but would allow the younger workers to opt out of the plan if they wish. He has not been able to sell this new plan and his voting numbers are very low.

We must not try to run any candidate who wants a limited government, individual freedoms and personal responsibilities as the GOP gave these up in 1992. Dr. Paul may be too old in 2012 but his agenda could attract many competent candidates who have followed his messages of liberty. We need an Independent as the LP is split far too wide to being nothing much more than a weak GOP.

Dr. Paul would be much more attractive to the voters if he would throw off the mantle of corruption in the GOP.

Sandra Price

[Stizzles]

Triad--be obtuse if you must. I should expect no more.

You said that we should return every single American soldier to American soil, and suggested that this would somehow alleviate current recessionary pressures. When asked to specify, you did not provide any evidence that the concerns about recession were based in any way on troop deployment.

In other words, it's a giant red herring. Prove your claims or retract them.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Stizzles Yes, let's give up our strategic military positions around the globe. Just f'n brilliant. How do you come up with this stuff? 101 Ways To Lose the Next World War?

That is one valid way to look at it!

[GHook93]

Quote by: triad Well, lets take a look stizzles: Give up your strategic military positions around the globe and save your country from driving itself into the ground and into a recession, OR, keep doing what you have been since you've become the most powerful country in the world and that will let you "win" the next world war.

That is not true, these bases won't sink our economy!

To me, anticipating a world war is stupid. You can't predict war, unless you are the one that causes them *intentional cough*. So unless you are prepared to spend trillions of dollars a year on being ready for the next world war - which could be never, or who knows when, RP has it down. Once you destroy a countries financial structure, the military structure will soon follow. What would you rather have? Strong finances to have strong military when needed, or strong military and slowly deteriorate?

A war can be predicted. And America should always strive for a strong military!

[triad]

Quote by: Stizzles Triad--be obtuse if you must. I should expect no more. You said that we should return every single American soldier to American soil, and suggested that this would somehow alleviate current recessionary pressures. When asked to specify, you did not provide any evidence that the concerns about recession were based in any way on troop deployment. In other words, it's a giant red herring. Prove your claims or retract them.

The Federal Pie Chart


According to the given website, the US has budgeted, on military alone, $727 billion for 2008. That number is expected to continue growing over the next 5 years (at least). I believe that number will continue to grow indefinitely. A country that spends more than 1/4 of their national budget on military will not remain a super power for long. Just look at the history of war throughout every era. You'd be fooling yourself if you think spending obsessively on war will better your country for the future. Currently, your debt is sitting at $9.1 trillion, and you keep borrowing to fuel your military. The US will pay for this later, heavily, and their economy will suffer dramatically.

Don't kid yourself, the runaway train your government is spending all your money on - is going to crash soon enough. Whether its for military bases, or an invasion in Iran, your economy isn't supporting it, hence $9.1 trillion. Who is going to pay for that?

[Objectivist]

Quote by: GHook93 Why I am not quite ready to convert over! Global Warming: I believe it, he doesn't and won't do much to stop it.

There are a few, great ways that deregulation of government would be beneficial and helpful in relieving global warming. Here is a link to a paper with some "free market" solutions to global warming.

Greenhouse Policy Without Regrets

I also think it is important to note that, in terms of global warming, our government has two options: restrict emissions & kill the economy, change nothing & kill the environment.

Read the paper. It has some very good ideas.

Getting rid of the federal reserve? He made some compelling points at the last debate on why he believes it and he did make sense. However, I am not so sure whether this is a good thing or not.

Look at what caused the Great Depression. It was the Federal Reserve experimenting with the economy. Look at our oncoming recession today: it's caused by our Federal Reserve. Look at our failing dollar: Federal Reserve.

What are the cons of eliminating the Federal Reserve? Poor investors, and people with risky finances will not be able to get a low-interest loan? The dollar will stabilize and be backed with a hard currency? The government will no longer be able to have as much direct control on our economy?

Vast deregulation of businesses? Yep this is contradictory to what I stated above, but not sure this is a great idea either, especially in regard to OSHA. This scares me, but not as much as it did after the last debate.

Look at the history of government interference with the economy and decided what the pros and cons are. I'll let history speak for itself. The only reason why America became as powerful as it is today... the only reason why India and China and other countries are surpassing America in economic power, is that their government (for the most part) stays out of business.

Let me give you this to think about. According to The Heritage Foundation's: Economic Freedom Report... America has a Freedom From Government rating of 59.8%. China on the other hand has a rating of 89.7%. What does this mean? This means that the American government is huge. Our US gov't uses up a higher percentage of American GDP than China does... Our government is too big for it's own good and it continues to grow.

Israel?

Israel doesn't need our interference with their political system. They can take care of themselves. As you have already noted, his foreign policy would hurt Israel's enemies more than Israel.

Large part of his backers are 9/11 truthers! I won't sugar-coat it, I hate them. I would never want to be associated with the group. The piss me off royally.

How does that associate you with that group? You are an independent voter voting for who/what you believe in. Just because your neighbor is voting for the same guy you are, doesn't mean that you believe in exactly the same things.

[Compugasm]

Quote by: GHook93 Anyone who has read a lot of my post on RP knows that I have huge problems with him, but after the last debate I am not sure he is all that bad...

Good post. Myself, I've always wondered how government services would be "removed" as he says. Would it be a phase out over 5-10yrs, or lock the doors and hit the bricks, senario?

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Compugasm Good post. Myself, I've always wondered how government services would be "removed" as he says. Would it be a phase out over 5-10yrs, or lock the doors and hit the bricks, senario?

You say that like it's a bad thing.


I'd wager those cushy jobs are filled with leaches, barnacles, and parasites who are mostly related to the creators of the vast bureaucracy.


The sooner I can kick these people out of my life the better.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Milton Bradley You say that like it's a bad thing. I'd wager those cushy jobs are filled with leaches, barnacles, and parasites who are mostly related to the creators of the vast bureaucracy. The sooner I can kick these people out of my life the better.

How does the old saying go, "Be careful what you wish for!"

I am more skeptical that removing a government agency because its not as effective as it could be is the only solution. I strongly feel this way after taking am environmental law class.