If Ron Paul Wins the Presidency
Do you believe he will null and void all gun laws. His stock answer to similar questions is to let each state decide. Would that mean that "assault style weapons" would still be illegal in California? What do you think?
0
-
No Jeff, If you 'saviour in chief' RP gets the nomination I would even vote for him to stop our current 'dictator in chief'.
Now if RP does not get the nomination will you vote for whom ever does get the nomination or will you vote for Obama through RP???????????
Don't go politician on me, answer the question!![}:)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
No Jeff, If you 'saviour in chief' RP get the nomination I would even vote for him to stop our current 'dictator in chief'.
Now if RP does not get the nomination will you vote for whom ever does get the nomination or will you vote for Obama through RP???????????
Don't go politician on me, answer the question!![}:)]
Jeff,
Your quote is correct. Paul does not believe he will get elected, so he is simply the 'spoiler' who will get Obama reelected.
You just said the same thing I did. Why not admit the truth and stop spinning it???????????[:(]0 -
quote:Originally posted by lt496
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
You need to get your facts straight Jeff. Ron Paul is not the 'Constitution', he is a man, nothing more. And he is sure a long way from our founding fathers!![V] He has many good ideas, and many good traits, BUT he also has many bad points and traits.
In your opinion the good outweigh the bad, in mine the bad outweigh the good.
To each his own.[:)]
Jim, I see you studiously backed off you previous 'extremist' and 'nut-job' verbiage. Why is that?
I would like you to step up and tell me what about 'his advocacy', not about 'the man', that you find crazy, extreme, or nutty, please.
As I and others have said, over and over and over again, Ron Paul 'the man' is not the focus. Rather, it is the constitutional message he advances and the things related to limited-government and liberty that he advocates, all relating to the Constitution and principles of our founding, that myself and others support, advance and advocate.
It really is looking like you are emoting and being disingenuous, rather than thoughtful..
Ten days without a response. What a surprise!
He is from the "free state" of Winston, maybe it's in the genes.
Came back to the thread and still no response. Must not have anything to say. Go figure.[xx(][xx(]
He must agree with everything Ron Paul stands/has stood for for 30 years. Or he's too ashamed to admit he doesn't. Or he doesn't really know what Paul advocates. Or he's to simple to grasp basic concepts or follow a conversation.
I'm thinking simple.[;)] Trust me, I've been through Winston County.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Charles Johnson
quote:Originally posted by lt496
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
You need to get your facts straight Jeff. Ron Paul is not the 'Constitution', he is a man, nothing more. And he is sure a long way from our founding fathers!![V] He has many good ideas, and many good traits, BUT he also has many bad points and traits.
In your opinion the good outweigh the bad, in mine the bad outweigh the good.
To each his own.[:)]
Jim, I see you studiously backed off you previous 'extremist' and 'nut-job' verbiage. Why is that?
I would like you to step up and tell me what about 'his advocacy', not about 'the man', that you find crazy, extreme, or nutty, please.
As I and others have said, over and over and over again, Ron Paul 'the man' is not the focus. Rather, it is the constitutional message he advances and the things related to limited-government and liberty that he advocates, all relating to the Constitution and principles of our founding, that myself and others support, advance and advocate.
It really is looking like you are emoting and being disingenuous, rather than thoughtful..
Ten days without a response. What a surprise!
He is from the "free state" of Winston, maybe it's in the genes.
Any response would be a side step anyway, or off on some other issue.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by steve45
Please understand I realize he cant just wave a magic wand and change things. He would have to work with congress and the senate. The question is theoretical, what would he try to do?
That is exactly my point. He is NOT a leader or he would have motivated those he was worked with in congress for many years and made some of the changes he has been ranting about. He has NO creditability with anyone except the small group of loyal followers, like those here. And that just will not 'cut the mustard'![xx(]
Dr. Paul is a leader on gun issues.
RON PAUL'S PRO-SECOND AMENDMENT STANDS
As a congressman, Ron Paul has never once voted for any piece of legislation that would infringe on gun owners' rights or weaken the Second Amendment.
The inalienable right to keep and bear arms is not only essential to a free society, but it is the guardian of every other right.
During his time in Congress, Ron Paul has worked tirelessly to restore the Second Amendment rights of all Americans by:
* Introducing legislation to repeal the "Brady Bill" and the so-called "Assault Weapons Ban."
* Authoring legislation to end U.S. membership in the anti-gun United Nations to ensure American tax dollars are not used to fund global gun control schemes like the so-called "Small Arms Treaty."
* Writing a bill that would allow pilots and specially trained law enforcement personnel to carry firearms in order to protect airline passengers and help prevent future 9/11-style attacks.
With our gun rights under constant attack from our own government and the anti-gun United Nations, as well as the threat of rising crime due to our country's economic woes, Congressman Paul believes it has never been more important that our President be 100% committed to defending our God-given right to keep and bear arms.
In Congress, Ron Paul has stood as a champion for law-abiding gun owners, and he will continue protecting your Second Amendment rights as President.0 -
quote:Originally posted by steve45
Do you believe he will null and void all gun laws. His stock answer to similar questions is to let each state decide. Would that mean that "assault style weapons" would still be illegal in California? What do you think?
If he were elected, God forbid, he would not do that because it would be unconstitutional, and he would not have that authority. [;)]
You with deaf ears need to start listing, I am getting tired of educating you all!!![;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by steve45
Do you believe he will null and void all gun laws. His stock answer to similar questions is to let each state decide. Would that mean that "assault style weapons" would still be illegal in California? What do you think?
If he were elected, God forbid, he would not do that because it would be unconstitutional, and he would not have that authority. [;)]
You with deaf ears need to start listing, I am getting tired of educating you all!!![;)]
Unbelievable.
That aside, there actually is great educational value in what you post, Jim. It just isn't along the lines that you think it to be.[:)]0 -
He could use a Presidential pardon to get around bad laws. President John F. Kennedy used this power to basically nullify the narcotics Act of 1956.
http://people.howstuffworks.com/presidential-pardon7.htm0 -
If Dr Ron Paul wins the presidency. This country will be back on the right track...
Where the founders intended us to be.0 -
I think is is interesting to note that the progressives refer to Paul supporters as their, the progressives, 'useful idiots'!![;)] 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
I think is is interesting to note that the progressives refer to Paul supporters as their, the progressives, 'useful idiots'!![;)]
It would be interesting if true.
Progressive talk radio focuses much more upon the idiocy of Romney, Santorum and Gingrich; and abject ignorance of their supporters. Even progressives get it right once in a while.0 -
Most of the people I know who have expressed dislike or distrust of Congressman Paul's message,when pressed to define why, demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of what his message really is. Usually they are not able to progress past the most often misinterpreted sound bites, such as Jim's insistence that Paul doesn't believe he can win or mixing terms like isolationism for non-intervention in displays of willful ignorance. The good news is that it is very hard to maintain unfounded and flawed opinions in the face of consistent verifiable proof to the contrary. Slowly people seem to be catching on. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by skicat
Slowly people seem to be catching on.
But not quick enough. The media will not let that happen. [:(!]0 -
quote:Originally posted by pickenup
quote:Originally posted by skicat
Slowly people seem to be catching on.
But not quick enough. The media will not let that happen. [:(!]
To be fair to the media people I believe carrying water for the establishment is part of their mission statement these days.[:(!][V]0 -
Look paulers, herres the thing. Paul was dead in the water before he even got started. There is no way he could ever get elected. And if he somehow did, there would be little he could to get rid of all the things he wants to get of. The least of reasons is that all these other un-constitutional programs employ millions of people. Given our economy now, it would be a disaster. Talk about the great depression. Nobody would even know what that was after the great closing of all of those Governmental Departments. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by skicat
Most of the people I know who have expressed dislike or distrust of Congressman Paul's message,when pressed to define why, demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of what his message really is. Usually they are not able to progress past the most often misinterpreted sound bites, such as Jim's insistence that Paul doesn't believe he can win or mixing terms like isolationism for non-intervention in displays of willful ignorance. The good news is that it is very hard to maintain unfounded and flawed opinions in the face of consistent verifiable proof to the contrary. Slowly people seem to be catching on.
Not a big shock, sadly. If you pressed them most couldn't tell you anything about any of the candidates other than what party they're in and what the media feeds them.0 -
quote:Originally posted by steve45
Do you believe he will null and void all gun laws. His stock answer to similar questions is to let each state decide. Would that mean that "assault style weapons" would still be illegal in California? What do you think?
Paul thinks that the power to decide should be in the hands of the state and the people.this is the true Constitutional way.0 -
I would like you to step up and tell me what about 'his advocacy', not about 'the man', that you find crazy, extreme, or nutty, please.
What about it, Jim?0 -
quote:Originally posted by Charles Johnson
I would like you to step up and tell me what about 'his advocacy', not about 'the man', that you find crazy, extreme, or nutty, please.
What about it, Jim?
Just like the plague, CJ, just like the plague.
Wonder why?0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
49 comments