Ron Paul

1. 62

   American Viewposted 12 years ago

   Ron  Paul blasted FEMA ."FEMA has been around since 1978, it has one of the worst reputations for a bureaucracy ever," Paul said. "It's a system of bureaucratic central economic planning, which is a policy that is deeply flawed."
   
   Thanks for finally realizing and telling us what we already knew since 1980. He is so up on things, nothing gets by him.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      ... ugh.
      
      He's been saying this for 20 years, the media is just trying to use this to make him look bad now that Irene has hit.
      
      Good job on insulting some guy without knowing his views - he's been against FEMA for 20+ years.
      
      Next you're going to start making fun of him because the media is finally noticing that he's against the Fed's counterfeiting scheme...
      
      Whatevs.

      replyreport
      1. 62

         American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Evan,
         
         A refresher here. I have lived in Texas since the southern part of Texas voted him in. I have watched for years how clueless he is. Do not even think I am jumping on the media bandwagon with this idiot. I have been telling this stuff to you for months about him. I have posted his record and you ignored it, you quote things like he founded the tea party and I reveal the facts back to you. Look, I understand he is your guy, I said that to you before, we will just agree to disagree on him. By the way, I have been making fun of him for years. Before my trach was put in I did a great Ron Paul voice and made so much fun of him. If you lived here that long and listened to him as often as I have, you would make fun of him too, even if you do vote for him

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            The Tea Party was born on December 16th 2007 when Paul received over 5 mill in one day in donations.
            
            You're wrong about Paul here. Deal with it.
            
            Ron Paul has done nothing but demand a return to our Constitution - and NO WHERE is ANY federal agency such as FEMA outlined or mentioned in the Constitution. Thus, he's been speaking out against FEMA.
            
            You're wrong about Paul here, too. Deal with it.
            
            And, if I'm not mistaken, I recently pointed out that we've been screwing in Middle Eastern politics since 1914. This has generated a massive amount of blowback in the region against us. Ron Paul has been calling us out on this for years now - years before 9/11.
            
            You're wrong about Paul here, too. Deal with it.

            replyreport
            1. 62

               American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Evan,
               
               I am far from wrong and while I tossed an olive branh, you respond the same so here we go and you are wrong again so get over it.
               
               Here is the actual begining of the tea party
               
               On January 24, 2009, Trevor Leach, chairman of the Young Americans for Liberty in New York State organized a "Tea Party" protest in response to "obesity taxes" proposed by New York Governor David Paterson, and out-of-control spending. Several of the protesters wore Native American headdresses similar to the band of 18th century colonists who dumped tea in Boston Harbor to express outrage about British taxes.[36]
               
               Some of the protests were partially in response to several Federal laws: the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008,[37] the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009,[38][39] and a series of healthcare reform bills.[40]
               
               New York Times journalist Kate Zernike reported that leaders within the Tea Party credit Seattle blogger and conservative activist Keli Carender with organizing the first Tea Party in February 2009, although the term "Tea Party" was not used.[41] Other articles, written by Chris Good of The Atlantic[42] and NPR's Martin Kaste,[43] credit Carender as "one of the first" Tea Party organizers and state that she "organized some of the earliest Tea Party-style protests".
               
               Carender first organized what she called a "Porkulus Protest" in Seattle on Presidents Day, February 16, the day before President Barack Obama signed the stimulus bill into law.[44] Carender said she did it without support from outside groups or city officials. "I just got fed up and planned it." Carender said 120 people participated. "Which is amazing for the bluest of blue cities I live in, and on only four days notice! This was due to me spending the entire four days calling and emailing every person, think tank, policy center, university professors (that were sympathetic), etc. in town, and not stopping until the day came."[45][dead link][41]
               
               Carender also contacted conservative author and Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin, and asked her to publicize the rally on her blog.[45][dead link] Carender then held a second protest on February 27, 2009, reporting "We more than doubled our attendance at this one."[41]
               
               According to pollster Scott Rasmussen, the bailouts of banks by the Bush and Obama administrations triggered the Tea Party's rise. The interviewer adds that the movement's anger centers on two issues, quoting Rasmussen as saying, "They think federal spending, deficits and taxes are too high, and they think no one in Washington is listening to them, and that latter point is really, really important."
               
               Tea party was not born as you claim on Pauls Donation day. He did that to commemerate the original Tea Party that happened in colonial time
               
               The theme of the Boston Tea Party, an iconic event in American history, has long been used by anti-tax protesters.[25][26][27] It was part of Tax Day protests held throughout the 1990s and earlier.[28][29][30][31] More recently, the anniversary of the original Boston Tea Party was commemorated by Republican Congressman Ron Paul supporters who held a fund raising event for the 2008 presidential primaries advocating an end to fiat money and the Federal Reserve System, disengaging from foreign entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan, and upholding States' rights"
               
               And lastly you ATTEMPTED to show about Mid East politics, but you could not show any credible source to back you claim of US invading any country there. You also spouted off about releasing the torture documents you said were being kept quiet. But they were released.
               
               So as I said, you can vote for him, but you do not see him for as he is.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  God dammit, I can't believe we're still discussing this.
                  
                  Here we go.
                  
                  Your quote:
                  
                  "On January 24, 2009, Trevor Leach, chairman of the Young Americans for Liberty in New York State organized a "Tea Party" protest in response to "obesity taxes" proposed by New York Governor David Paterson, and out-of-control spending. Several of the protesters wore Native American headdresses similar to the band of 18th century colonists who dumped tea in Boston Harbor to express outrage about British taxes.[36]"
                  
                  You said "the Young Americans for Liberty in New York State organized a "Tea Party" protest"
                  
                  Now,  HERE'S YAL'S OWN WEBSITE ADMITTING THAT THEY ARE AN OFFSHOOT OF THE RON PAUL REVOLUTION!!!!
                  
                  http://www.yaliberty.org/about
                  
                  "Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) is the continuation of Students for Ron Paul (SFP). In less than 8 months, SFP established over 500 college and high school chapters in all 50 states and over 26,000 students joined the Ron Paul 2008 campaign."
                  
                  HER DER.
                  
                  YOU'RE WRONG: YOU'RE DEMANDING I'M WRONG, YET YOU'RE AGREEING WITH ME.
                  
                  Do you know WHY they chose to mimic the Boston Tea Party? Because there had been a MASSIVE CAMPAIGN DONATION FOR RON PAUL JUST 2 YEARS EARLIER.
                  
                  Please stop demanding me to accept what isn't true. Your own source (mixed with that organization's website) is arguing against you.
                  
                  Ron Paul is the ideological grandfather of the Tea Party.
                  
                  Deal with it.
                  
                  Here's YAL's first magazine cover:
                  
                  

                  replyreport
                  1. 62

                     American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Evan
                     
                     you could not be more wron in what you said. You claim Paul started the tea party in 2007 by a fundraiser. That is not true, That fundraiser was in sync with the tea paerty celebration of the 1700s.
                     ""On January 24, 2009, Trevor Leach, chairman of the Young Americans for Liberty in New York State organized a "Tea Party" protest" He I wil make it so simple you may understand it this time though I believe you will still deny it. Notice the date 2009, notice Leach is not a tea party person, notice that  the "tea party" in quotes as in reference to the tea party of the 1700s fame, and you would have noticed that by the next sentence"Several of the protesters wore Native American headdresses similar to the band of 18th century colonists who dumped tea in Boston Harbor to express outrage about British taxes" notice the words "british Taxes" Not Paul He is never mentioned, But you will not acknowledge it.
                     
                     By the way, I see you ignored this statement about Pauls fundraiser on the anniversary of the original tea party. Not that he formed the tea party, but in celebration of the 1700s tea party. Het it now, doubt it
                     
                     "More recently, the anniversary of the original Boston Tea Party was commemorated by Republican Congressman Ron Paul supporters who held a fund raising event for the 2008 "
                     
                     So you think every blog site you show knows more than Wikipedia, which is where this information came from. Or the many other readings of the first tea party being the ones who mailed tea bags to congress. Facts are against you.

                     replyreport
                  2. 62

                     American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     "Ron Paul is the ideological grandfather of the Tea Party".
                     
                     You do know the "difference between " and the founder or "it was born on that day"  Big difference

                     replyreport
               2. 61

                  Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  PS: If a professor of US-Middle Eastern policies isn't enough of a "credible source" for you, then I give up talking to you. ... He's a PROFESSOR AT YALE...
                  
                  http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/cour … x?cid=8593
                  
                  Admit you're wrong on AT LEAST ONE of these points (US/Mid.East, or Ron Paul and the Tea Party) and I'll bother responding to you.
                  
                  Until then, you'll just be another individual who can't admit to being wrong and who harasses me on the forums (Ron Montgomery has become one of these individuals).

                  replyreport
                  1. 62

                     American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     You showed that earlier, it is nothing more than a person selling his personal opinion in a book and a course, He does not teach at yale or the university of santa barbara, when you posted it last time I looked it up. He is in business to sell and make money. Sorry, that is not a credible source.
                     
                     I told you earlier what you has to do. You know I apologize when wrong , I have to you before to and you know it.

                     replyreport
                  2. 61

                     Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Man, you're really blowin' a gasket.  You're awfully thin-skinned for someone who regularly tells everyone who disagrees with you how stupid they are.

                     replyreport
            2. 73

               Quilligrapherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Hi again, Evan.
               
               Regarding Constitutional justification for FEMA, this may easily be a subject for Supreme Court interpretation rather than Mr. Paul’s interpretation. The first clause of Article I, Section 8, of our Constitution reads in part, "provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States." This clause, called the General Welfare Clause or the Spending Power Clause, allows Congress to spend federal money for the general welfare. No federal court has ever struck down a spending program on the bases that it failed to promote the general welfare.
               I’m sure there are some who would argue the words “Federal Emergency Management Agency” are not found in the Constitution. However, the words “National Aeronautics and Space Administration” are not found in the Constitution either but that’s not a very valid reason to oppose space exploration.
               Well, Evan, its just a thouht I pass along to you at no charge. That's probably more than it's worth. Stay well!

               replyreport
               1. 62

                  American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Quill,
                  
                  The voice of reason as always. Thank you for the input.
                  
                  As always happy to hear from you. Glad Irene was not a problem for you.
                  
                  

                  replyreport
      2. 62

         American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I will give you a chance on this one. Just for laughs I will bet you a bag of your favorite chips, sorry I cannot afford to bet more becuase of the whopping $30 per month the democratic entitlement that is going broke, says I can get each month to live on. Show me a source proir to 1991, since you said 20+ years, where Paul was against FEMA. If you do, I will admit I was wrong and you win a bag of your favorite chips. What do you say. OH and if you cannot, you supply me with a bag of mine. I will tell you up front it is Gardetto's. If you do not want to bet thats cool to, I was just looking to lighten it up.

         replyreport
      3. 73

         Quilligrapherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Howdy, Evan. I hope everything is okay in your neck of the woods.
         
         I know you are a great fan of Mr. Paul so I expect you are the best person to help me out here.  Since you brought it up, I would be very interested in reading a 20+ year-old source about his opposition to FEMA.  I’ve never seen one.  Have you?

         replyreport
         1. 62

            American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Quill,
            
            There is no  doubt that Evan is the lagest Ron Paul fan I have ever seen. I think he is just overly  exuberant. I have seen him here in Texas for years. He cosponsors a lot of bills. When they pass, he is all over local TV saying Congress passed"his" bill. But when I check, it always shows he is one of many cosponsors. I am not saying cosponsoring is bad, all I am saying is he takes credit for things he did not do. When we had those bad wild fires here, Perry was trying to get Obama to declare a disaster so the families who lost homes could get the low interest loans. Obama never did, ALL congressman from Texas shouted from th rafters but one, Paul. He was very vocal in opposition when Perry made those loans out of the Texas rainy day fund to help those people. I am sure that did not make news around the country, but I bet Perry will bring it up on the campaign trail sometime.
            
            He like many, just hear the hype, not what he really does.

            replyreport
         2. 61

            Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            At the very least, he has been a Constitutionalist for 20+ years, and no where does the Constitution allow for FEMA. He has a 20+ year track record of demanding unconstitutional spending be stopped, and FEMA is unconstitutional.
            
            Cite any source where he demands an end to unconstitutional spending from 20+ years ago, and there ya go.
            
            Not rocket science.

            replyreport
            1. 62

               American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Evan,
               
               Actually it does. Under the Executive Branch. The President has the right to create entities like FEMA, then propose a budget for such entity, At the time of the budget, congress caould have removed the spending for FEMA, but did not.They opted to fund it as they, under the condtitution, are the ones who decide and vote on expenditures. SO while the Name FEMA is not written in the constitution, it exists by following the constitution.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Wrong again. Here's Article 2 Sections 2-3 (section one just outlines who can become president)
                  
                  "Section 2 - Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments
                  
                  The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
                  
                  He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
                  
                  The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
                  
                  Section 3 - State of the Union, Convening Congress
                  
                  He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States."
                  
                  No where in this document is "the president has the power to create emergency disaster relief organizations" even implied. Do you know why? Because that would require an unconstitutional act of Congress.
                  
                  The Constitution: Very easy to read, yet no one does it.
                  
                  Sorry, you're wrong again.

                  replyreport
                  1. 62

                     American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     You are right on one thing, it is an easy read, to bad you did not read it.
                     
                     First, the Budget is a resoloution.
                     "Each year in March, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) publishes an analysis of the President's budget proposals. CBO budget report and other publications can be found at the CBO's website. CBO computes a current law baseline projection that is intended to estimate what federal spending and revenues would be in the absence of new legislation for the current fiscal year and for the coming 10 fiscal years.
                     
                     The House and Senate Budget Committees begin consideration of President's budget proposals in February and March. Other committees with budgetary responsibilities submit requests and estimates to the Budget committees during this time. The Budget committees each submit a budget Resolution by April 1. The House and Senate each consider those budget resolutions and are expected to pass them, possibly with amendments, by April 15. Budget resolutions specify funding levels for appropriations committees and subcommittees."
                     
                     Now why is that important,
                     Section 7 - Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto
                     
                     All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.
                     Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall,before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and
                     proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined
                     by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by
                     their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.
                     Every Order, RESOLUTION, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives"
                     
                     So as you can see, they vote on resolutions by order of the Constitution.So congress has the constituional power to fund FEMA The next is from the Executive Branch section2
                     
                     He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which
                     shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the
                     Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
                     
                     This shows the President has the power to create a post like Fema. Why would you leave this out, either you did not read it, or you are hell bent on not addmitting you are wrong.

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        You switched sources - you claimed that the executive could do it. Now you claim the legislative can do it.
                        
                        You're still wrong because the 10th amendment exists, and no where in A1 S8 does the power to create a federal emergency management agency exist.
                        
                        Sorry, you're wrong.

                        replyreport
                        1. 62

                           American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           No I did not, you just twist everything to try and push your agenda. I made it Quite clear and obviously so as you tried to only show part on the constitution. Sorry, but I showed the proper parts you ignored.
                           
                           Sorry, you are wrong, again

                           replyreport
            2. 62

               American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               I see you did not take my bet and ignored Quills request, instead just had a deflective comeback

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  If you can't accept "demanding the constitution" as "against FEMA", then we're done.

                  replyreport
                  1. 62

                     American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Seems to all of us that you are having the hard time accepting

                     replyreport
2. 61

   Evan G Rogersposted 12 years ago

   American View, I've shown you wrong on each account yet you fail to admit it.
   
   We're done - You're either a troll, or someone without a mind to change.
   
   Either way, this has been a huge waste of time.

   replyreport
   1. 62

      American Viewposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Really, wonder why someone else also challenged you and you jusy attack me He knows you were wrong too. But you just will not admit it. Same thing happens on other threads. many show you when you are wrong and you just keep it up. I already told you I admit when wrong, and you know that to be true. I have never seen you admit you were wrong. Case in point when you made the claim about those records and I pointed out to you that they were, did you admit you were wrong, nope, you just claim you cannot find them but showed a link that even said they were released. So you need to get off your high horse, join us on planet earth and stop attacking and name calling. Funny do you think name calling is a form of torture?

      replyreport
3. 62

   American Viewposted 12 years ago

   Anderson Cooper just tore up Paul over FEMA. Cooper made Paul look foolish over his stance on FEMA. Paul was tongue tied and stuttering. While talking about Katrina and the Sept. 8, 1900 hurricane in Galveston, Texas, Paul was talking about how the Gov. would have done better if we were not in 2 wars. When Copper asked what about the lives FEMA saved or the rebuilding they do? Paul's answer was He "voted for funding to rebuild Galveston and New Orleans, we did not need FEMA" Now the 2 obvious items are 1, there was no 2 wars going on in 1900, and Paul was not in office in 1900 to vote on anything. Unbelievable, we really have a terrible pool of candidates to choose from

   replyreport