Why don't you support Ron Paul?

[doppelganger]

As for your comments on Christianity, as I've said before, this is one of the areas I dissagree with Rep. Paul on.

Legislating morality is kind of a big one, I think. Especially for someone purporting to be in favor of "less government."

 

[YmirGF]

You didn't really answer the question, YmirGF. Why would Ron Paul be the last one that you pick?.

I don't buy into the thinking of those whom I discern as being politically naive, that is why. Heck, Doppelganger is explaining my sentiments far better than I feel the topic warrants.

 

[Trassin]

Maybe. But he won't get the GOP nomination unless he cozies up to the corporations that own American democracy and its conduits. (Likewise, neither can any "Democratic" candidate).

It is certainly a fear amoung his supporters, especially since he refuses to cozy up to them.

Through the law, manipulation of prosecutors and regulatory agencies and buying off congress, federal contracts, reduced legal liability . . . How does Paul intend to reign in corporate excesses and maintain his "libertarian" cred?

He blaims federal interferance and over reaching for the corporations ability to do this. Rep. Paul's argument is that when the federal government attempts to regulate businesses it inevitable leads to those businesses, especially the very powerful corporations, being able to use those same regulations to gain an unfair advantage through manipulating the government.

I know that he's addressed corporatism specificall before but I can't find the speech/article at the moment. He does touch on it a bit in this article though: Democracy Is Not Freedom by Rep. Ron Paul

Here is what he has to say about the federal government reducing legal liability: TST: Going from bad to worse - Federal intrusion in civil actions detrimental to all

 

[doppelganger]

He blaims federal interferance and over reaching for the corporations ability to do this. Rep. Paul's argument is that when the federal government attempts to regulate businesses it inevitable leads to those businesses, especially the very powerful corporations, being able to use those same regulations to gain an unfair advantage through manipulating the government.

So he plans to reign in corporate excesses by taking all the legal reigns off of corporate behavior? :areyoucra

I assume, given the article about "legal liability" you posted, that Paul imagines the civil justice system can somehow substitute for the regulatory state. Paul is a medical doctor and not a lawyer or litigator and clearly has no idea what he's talking about though. Judges are still chosen by the political process and "justice" is often a function of how much money you can bring to finance the fight. That's my world and I know it very well. The idea that the civil justice system and plaintiffs' lawyers can substitute for the regulatory state looks more like a shroom-induced fantasy than a serious political stance.

 

[Trassin]

Legislating morality is kind of a big one, I think. Especially for someone purporting to be in favor of "less government."

Well he certainly doesn't believe it is the federal governments job to dictate how people live their lives, regarless of his own Christian beliefs.

Here are his closing remarks from the Values Voters forum. He makes his feelings on legislating morality very clear: YouTube - Ron Paul at the Value Voters Debate
By the way, if you haven't seen the entire debate, I don't recommend watching it. The questions asked throughout the debate and they way they are asked showcase some of the most close minded and bigoted attitudes of the christian right.

 

[Trassin]

doppelgänger[/B]]So he plans to reign in corporate excesses by taking all the legal reigns off of corporate behavior?

I'm not a fan of the extremes of this policy either. That being said, I do think our government is to cozy with business and that the two need to be further seperated than where they are currently. While I would never want a pure "libertarian" economic policy, 4 or even 8 years isn't nearly enough time to make that happen.

doppelgänger[/B]]The idea that the civil justice system and plaintiffs' lawyers can substitute for the regulatory state looks more like a shroom-induced fantasy than a serious political stance.

Look at the mess our current regulatory state has created though. I'm personally ready to try something different.

That being said, I need to get some sleep so I can drive to Nashville, TN tonight for Rep. Paul's rally tomorrow. Anything else posted I'll have to get back to on Sunday.

 

[Trassin]

I'm back and Ron Paul not only had his biggest rally to date in Nashville, TN over the weekend but the biggest rally of any of the 2008 candidates with 1440 people. By the time he finished talking it was standing room only.

 

[Mathematician]

Maybe that's just me then, I dunno, i always assumed he was -- didn't have a reason to think otherwise.

Could be because he uses the same libertarian conspiracy-theorist jargon like "collectivist" in his speeches.