No, I merely questioned why we should make the EPA into a clusterfuck just for the sake of the Constitution.

I said none of the distorted hyperbole he presented, and frankly I don't know why he found that necessary.

But hold on here, where is the establishment of an environmental protection agency explicitly prohibited? Come to think of it, does the Constitution have anything to say about any government agency? I'd like to see proof that the EPA is unconstitutional.

9/23/2007 11:31:24 PM

The 10th Amendment:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Learn your Constitution, fool.

9/24/2007 12:36:57 AM

Tenth Amendment is so 19th Century.

seriously.

Lincoln put an end to that tomfoolery.



[Edited on September 24, 2007 at 12:59 AM. Reason : ]

9/24/2007 12:57:40 AM

lincoln was a fool, he also was one of the first to print beyond what we had in gold.

haha the constitution is funny

Quote :

"Amendment 18 - Liquor Abolished. Ratified 1/16/1919. 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited. "

Quote :

"Amendment 21 - Amendment 18 Repealed. Ratified 12/5/1933. History 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed. "

[Edited on September 24, 2007 at 1:06 AM. Reason : .]

9/24/2007 1:05:53 AM

Well, I guess we better get rid of all the government agencies then. FBI, CIA, all the hundreds of crucial agencies out there. Can't just pick and choose, right? See what I'm getting at?

Absurd.

Thats the one thing I don't like about Ron Paul's platform.

9/24/2007 1:25:43 AM

^^ Lafta get back to Chit Chat before you make me break out my Jesus picture on you.



[Edited on September 24, 2007 at 1:34 AM. Reason : ]

9/24/2007 1:33:21 AM

yeah because breaking out a picture of a jesus because a guy that lolled at prohibition is soooo proving a point




joe





you can be a huge tool sometimes






I heard you live in seattle












































fag





























jk




























sorry you chose that shithole, hope your house is waterproof

9/24/2007 2:02:58 AM

yeh, ive got a raincoat. And a tarp. fuck a damn umbrella though. theres actually less rain per year here than in Raleigh.

the real problem is spiders.

and you dont know nothin' bout my Lafta-Jesus pic, so just watch yourself, okay.

9/24/2007 2:27:06 AM

yeah, that stat is misleading, though.

the annual rainfall up here on whidbey island is like 20"...but it rains about 5 days per week it seems like. just enough to get everything a little wet and make it impossible to keep a car clean, then it stops.

oh, and i ordered some hobo spider traps earlier today.

9/24/2007 4:32:24 AM

Quote :

"Well, I guess we better get rid of all the government agencies then. FBI, CIA, all the hundreds of crucial agencies out there. Can't just pick and choose, right? See what I'm getting at? Absurd. Thats the one thing I don't like about Ron Paul's platform."

Hundreds of crucial agencies? The FBI and CIA are aguably warranted because they involve national defense, one of the few things the federal government does have constitutional power over.

Seriously, can you even name 10 federal agencies that wouldn't be MUCH better off being run in a decentralized, state based system? The ONLY ones I can think of would be National Parks, and the Highway management.

9/24/2007 2:41:19 PM

^ FCC, FEC, FDIC, FTC, NRC, The Federal Reserve System, NASA, SSA, USPS and OPM...

Granted all of these don't have to be federally run agencies... they aren't going to do much better in a state run system. The USPS has enough issues as it is...

http://www.lib.lsu.edu/gov/tree for abbreviation references...

9/24/2007 3:05:58 PM

FEC exists because we have a completely FUCKED election system. Change the system, get rid of the agency.

FDIC, Federal Reserve both exist because we have no gold standard for money. Bring back the gold standard, stop market speculation and anchor the dollar, and both systems go away.

NRC exists because of the cold war scare over Nuclear energy. It should be done on a State level. I know a good bit about how the NRC works, and its a complete clusterfuck of a federal agency. It would be multiple times more efficient if it were regulated by states.

The FCC has NO BUSINESS existing at all. Effectively everything they do is a complete waste of taxpayer money. They keep us from saying four letter words on television. That should be left to private business and, at worst, a state by state choice.

Social Security needs to be eliminated completely.

The USPS is independent, we do not pay taxes into it, it's a self-sufficient agency. If all federal agencies could operate in the USPS model, it would be perfectly fine by me.

The OPM exists because there are so many stupid agencies in federal government. Remove the garbage, you no longer need the garbage men.


The only two that you've listed which are valid Federal agencies would be the FTC (although it too could be fine at a state level) and NASA.

9/24/2007 3:58:33 PM

Quote :

"Social Security needs to be eliminated completely."

If you do this you MUST refund every american who has ever paid into the system EVERY penny back.

Quote :

"The FCC has NO BUSINESS existing at all."

Agreed, except for the fact that I think there should be SOMETHING in place to make sure monopolies don't take over. As far as the FTCC acting as a censor, I say be gone with ye!

9/24/2007 4:22:27 PM

Quote :

"If you do this you MUST refund every american who has ever paid into the system EVERY penny back."

Which is utterly impossible.

9/24/2007 4:32:25 PM

Which is why you can't get rid of it.

9/24/2007 4:34:42 PM

Quote :

"If you do this you MUST refund every american who has ever paid into the system EVERY penny back. "

I'd be happy to just not pay into it anymore....but you would have to phase it out, alot of people depend on SS to survive.....society would have to be weaned off of it.

9/24/2007 4:50:02 PM

^ Unfortunately, the government won't change SS to letting people our age opt out because then the older generations now will be completely screwed. There are other solutions, though, like taking out the cap on wages that are taxed and making the age where one is eligible for SS higher, but the AARP has too strong of a lobby to let anything change on it.... Til people our age actually vote in large blocks, like the elderly do, we're screwed on this one...

9/24/2007 4:53:11 PM

Quote :

"If you do this you MUST refund every american who has ever paid into the system EVERY penny back."

no, you don't.

You merely stop benefits for INCOMING workers. Anyone before the cutoff pays for SS and gets their declining benefits. After the cutoff you don't pay for it and you don't get it.

The last generation who qualifies merely gets their funding from some other area of government (cut back defense, or parks or roads) to pay for the VERY temporary imbalance.

It's not hard, it's not problematic.

9/24/2007 5:11:44 PM

Quote :

"September 23, 2007 Our campaign is at a tipping point - one that will determine if Ron Paul wins the Republican nomination for president. Last quarter, you helped raise more money for the Ron Paul 2008 campaign than the political pundits thought possible. I assure you that we will surpass our total from last quarter. The question is by how much. We have one week left. Our goal is to raise $500,000 online by September 30th. That boost will give us the best fundraising quarter yet, and it will show that our campaign is getting stronger by the day. $500,000 online in seven days will be a challenge. But I know we can make it. If you have donated already, will you donate the same amount again? That will help immensely. Also, will you ask three friends to match your donation? That will quickly get us over the top by September 30th. Check the graphic on our website http://www.ronpaul2008.com to track our progress. You may donate directly by clicking here: https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate Thank you for your help! Jonathan Bydlak Fundraising Director Ron Paul 2008 "

9/24/2007 5:34:41 PM

I'm willing to match anyone here who donates, up to $100

9/24/2007 5:39:57 PM

i willing to give Barack Obama $100 in your name.

9/24/2007 5:46:30 PM

If Barack needed the money, I'd donate to him too. I would be pleased as punch to see Obama vs. Paul

9/24/2007 5:49:51 PM

I'll match your $100, we need at least a $1000 from tww, cmon guys

9/24/2007 7:28:11 PM

if you guys make Joe and CrazyJ have to register this site as PAC, they're gonna be pissed.

9/24/2007 8:20:32 PM

Quote :

"The FCC has NO BUSINESS existing at all."

Quote :

"The FCC has NO BUSINESS existing at all."

Quote :

"The FCC has NO BUSINESS existing at all."

Quote :

"The FCC has NO BUSINESS existing at all."

Quote :

"The FCC has NO BUSINESS existing at all."

Quote :

"The FCC has NO BUSINESS existing at all."

9/25/2007 11:24:09 PM

They were at 28K yesterday when I checked that link. Now they are already at 300K.

The internets is serious business.

9/26/2007 12:09:31 AM

just hit 500k, now they're going for a million

9/27/2007 5:28:34 PM

I will probably donate some money tonight, even though I'm kind of poor.

9/27/2007 5:54:30 PM

doesnt the FCC assign frequencies and keep the airways from becoming a cluster fuck of people competing on the same frequency?

because that is important

9/27/2007 6:26:15 PM

i think they've gone to the next step and taken ownership of the airwaves,
anyways, i donated $100, then i looked in my bank account and it said

ron paul donation $955.04
i was like
about flipped out then realised it was paypal's mistake, whew

9/28/2007 12:20:17 AM

I donated!

9/28/2007 3:10:48 AM

you donated money to a lost cause

9/28/2007 3:23:39 AM

how can anyone with almost 98k posts say anything about lost causes or wasting money?

9/28/2007 7:18:45 AM

Quote :

"you donated money to a lost cause"

attitudes like that are what lost the cause

[Edited on September 28, 2007 at 7:46 AM. Reason : oh yeah, and "The FCC has NO BUSINESS existing at all"]

9/28/2007 7:44:14 AM

^^i'm not running for president until 2032

^sorry dont mean to be a negative nancy, just being realistic...this guy would be pretty cool i think but there is no chance he will win

9/28/2007 8:09:02 AM

yea but wouldn't you rather support someone that's not a tool and at least say you tried as opposed to the people that just complain about what we have? i bet if you ask them at least 90% would say they never donated anything and are just couch jockeys.

9/28/2007 8:15:37 AM

^^not true. He's already done better than any libertarian candidate ever has. And arguably his numbers are MUCH higher than reported, because he is not included in MANY polls, which drops his numbers.

Hell, CNN has put Duncan Hunter ahead of Ron Paul. WHO THE FUCK IS DUNCAN HUNTER? If that's not direct proof of media bias, I don't know what is.

9/28/2007 9:54:33 AM

Put me on the bandwagon

9/28/2007 10:14:36 AM

Duncan Hunter was one of the leading Republicans crying about how Columbia let the Iranian president (too lazy to look up the spelling of his name) speak

9/28/2007 10:38:25 AM

Quote :

"What the Fed Has Done to Us by Ron Paul Statement before the Financial Services Committee, September 20, 2007 Mr. Chairman, the situation facing us now in the mortgage industry has its roots in the Federal Reserve's inflationary monetary policy. Without addressing the roots of the current crisis, any measures undertaken to improve the situation will be doomed to fail. As with asset bubbles and investment manias in past history, the fuel for the current housing bubble had its origins in monetary manipulation. The housing boom was caused by the Federal Reserve's policy resulting in artificially low interest rates. Consumers, misled by low interest rates, were looking to consume, while homebuilders saw the low interest rates as a signal to build, and build they did. One of the primary means the Federal Reserve uses to stimulate the economy is manipulation of the federal funds rate and the discount rates, which are used as benchmark rates throughout the economy. The interest rate is the price of time, as the value of a dollar today and the value of a dollar one year from now are not the same. Just like any price in the market, interest rates have an important informational signaling purpose. Government price fixing of the interest rate has the same deleterious effects as price controls in other areas. Reduction in the interest rate has two major effects: it encourages consumption over saving; and it makes long-term, capital-intensive projects cheaper to undertake. Under Chairman Greenspan's tenure, the federal funds rate was so low that the real interest rate (that is the nominal interest rate minus inflation) was negative. With a negative real interest rate, someone who saves money will literally lose the value of that money. The Federal Reserve continued and still continues to increase the money supply. After ceasing the publication of M3 last February, private economists have calculated that M3 has risen at an annual rate of almost 12%, which is faster than we have seen since the 1970's. Millions of Americans now find themselves stuck in a financial quandary that is not their fault. The result of manipulation of the interest rate, money supply, and mortgage markets are the recently popped housing bubble. Further regulation of the banking sector, of mortgage brokers, mortgage lenders, or credit-rating agencies will fail to improve the current situation, and will do nothing to prevent future real estate bubbles. Any proposed solutions which fail to take into account the economic intervention that laid the ground for the bubble are merely window dressing, and will not ease the suffering of millions of American homeowners. I urge my colleagues to strike at the root of the problem and address the Federal Reserve's inflationary monetary policy. "

9/28/2007 10:55:21 AM

I agree with Ron Paul on a LOOOT of things. But just from what I've been learning in my course of study (bus concentration finance) I don't think our Federal Reserve System is the cause of so much trouble. I'm in international financial management right now and it seems to me that our way of doing things is one of the reasons we're so stable.

9/29/2007 1:36:59 PM

^
I'm curious. What would your professor say was the cause of the boom/bust cycles we have suffered since the creation of the Fed?

Ask him how the Fed has stabilized the economy by stripping our dollar of 99% of its purchasing power since the creation of the Fed through inflation?

Ask him how the bloody history of our world wars could've been supported without fiat spending?

Ask him where the stability of the economy is when the Fed sets artifically low interest rates..confuses the market and intices people to get in over their heads with exotic morgtage schemes?

Ask him where is the stability when the Fed acts like a pusher for the gov't..providing an seemingly endless supply of fiat money for its ever-expanding spending addictions.

On second thought...maybe you shouldn't ask these questions. A professor's ruffled ego can play havoc with your grade.

9/29/2007 11:34:01 PM

$1,000,000 dollars in seven days.

If that's not amazing, I don't know what is. Granted I doubt he could do this many more times, but that's faster dollars/day than any other candidate, republican or democrat.

9/30/2007 2:20:17 PM

you think 1 million dollars in 7 days is faster than any candidate?

what are you smoking???

[Edited on September 30, 2007 at 3:10 PM. Reason : .]

9/30/2007 3:09:01 PM

yeah but this is just from regular people, i dont thing any other candidate has a passionate group of supporters like ron paul
the others just take speciall interest money $100,000 at a time

9/30/2007 10:07:52 PM

Quote :

"i dont thing any other candidate has a passionate group of supporters like ron paul"

really? that's what you honestly think?

what are YOU smoking???

9/30/2007 10:11:19 PM

no, what are you smoking?
you keep asking that question so you dont have to make a valid argument.

9/30/2007 10:13:22 PM

what?

9/30/2007 10:14:36 PM

a million dollars a week is at a faster rate than the other candidates. it took hillary and obama a full quarter (3 months) to raise their initial 9-12 million dollar tabs.

9/30/2007 11:04:35 PM

I'll agree with that. Ron Paul's supporters are passionate, but thats because the interests supporting the bigger candidates long ago gave up passion for power.

9/30/2007 11:52:50 PM