The GOP's growing Libertarian problem

Nov 20, 2012 Full story: The Washington Post 227

Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson took about 1 percent of the vote, winning more raw votes than any Libertarian candidate ever .

Full Story
First Prev
of 12
Next Last

“Waytogo”

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#232 Dec 5, 2012
The whole HAT THIS AND HATE THAT AND BIGOTED TO THIS AND BIGOTED TO THAT of the GOP is what is killing it.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#233 Dec 5, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Start with Obamacare all you want. It has been in front of the Supreme Court.
The Department of Education? What makes you think it is not allowed? Particularly in light of private internet schools travelling across state lines to make a sale or to educate people?
We can play it any way you want PROVIDED that the rules you apply, apply to all government programs equally and not just those that you think personally should not exist.
As an example, if the federal government should not be dablling in Healthcare Insurance (Obamacare) how could you justify the FBI, ATF and other various federal law enforcement agencies?
Don't even get started on the phony private internet schools, they are primarily funded by the Federal Government through Pell Grants and Federal Student Loans.

The Feds are in cahoots with them, which is why I oppose Federal Student Aid on the taxpayer's dime.

And I don't justify the BATFE, it wasn't even created until 1972. And I'm not so sure about the FBI being constitutionally authorized. It wasn't created until 1908.

It seems the founders got along just fine without them, as did the whole nation for well over a century after it's creation.

A lot of you lefties think Homeland Security is unconstitutional. What is really the difference between one Federal law enforcement agency and another?

Since: Jul 12

Chester, VA

#235 Dec 5, 2012
Cary L Nickel wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't even get started on the phony private internet schools, they are primarily funded by the Federal Government through Pell Grants and Federal Student Loans.
The Feds are in cahoots with them, which is why I oppose Federal Student Aid on the taxpayer's dime.
And I don't justify the BATFE, it wasn't even created until 1972. And I'm not so sure about the FBI being constitutionally authorized. It wasn't created until 1908.
It seems the founders got along just fine without them, as did the whole nation for well over a century after it's creation.
A lot of you lefties think Homeland Security is unconstitutional. What is really the difference between one Federal law enforcement agency and another?
Beyond the question of Constitutionallity, they should be based on need and the good they do as opposed to what would be done without them.

The founding fathers got along just fine without a lot of things that did not exist in their time. The exixtence of new things might indicate they would have done something different if they existed during their time.

There are two questions:

1. Is something Constitutional?

2. If something is needed but is not Constitutional, should the Constitution be changed to allow it?

Perhaps we could start by defining what is meant by the Commerce Clause, the general Defense and the general Welfare Clause in this day and age.

Since: Jul 12

Chester, VA

#236 Dec 5, 2012
just another guy wrote:
<quoted text>
The guy wants to get rid of atf? There may be hope for him.
A good starting point for what the founders envisioned would be the government they had soon after the adoption of the Constitution. The government was to provide for the common defense and mediate disputes between the states.
The problem is that it leaves at least 50 separate states (DC? Puerto Rico?) doing much of what the federal government does today such as medicine approval; allocation and control of airwaves; air traffic control; aircraft safety; etc...

You are talking of almost doubling the cost of government if not more.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#238 Dec 5, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is that it leaves at least 50 separate states (DC? Puerto Rico?) doing much of what the federal government does today such as medicine approval; allocation and control of airwaves; air traffic control; aircraft safety; etc...
You are talking of almost doubling the cost of government if not more.
Actually, much of what the Federal Government does today is unconstitutional, and unnecessary, and could be completely ignored by the states.

Remaining responsibilities that ARE deemed necessary would be handled by determination of each state's citizens, and could be adjusted accordingly. States could then compare differing approaches, deem what works best and is most cost effective, and move forward from there.

Cost of government would actually be reduced, as would scope.

What's more, the citizens of the United States would likely scarcely notice the absence of government that ensues, except they would likely see infrastructure improve as monies wasted on Federal bureaucracy again became available in plenty.

Since: Jul 12

Chester, VA

#239 Dec 5, 2012
just another guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Much of what YOU THINK is necessary is not. Surely not on the scale that is being done. We have an epa that has a swat team. Much of what is done on the state and federal level should be returned to the community.
And getting rid of the atf is the best idea ever.
The EPA has a central office, the regulations are enforced by the states.

And now instead of one EPA for the state you want one for each community. At what cost?

And then if that community allows something that adversely effects 300 other communities to include some in other states you have 300 separate lawsuits both in the communities state and in other states as well against the community.

Just out of cuiosity, do you think corporations save money by grossly decentralizing everything?

Since: Jul 12

Chester, VA

#240 Dec 5, 2012
just another guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Much of what YOU THINK is necessary is not. Surely not on the scale that is being done. We have an epa that has a swat team. Much of what is done on the state and federal level should be returned to the community.
And getting rid of the atf is the best idea ever.
You don't seem to understand, I an not against getting rid of anything, anything at all. PROVIDED the same reasoning and logic is applied to everything government does.

As an example, getting rid of the ATF is fine with me provided you also get rid of the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies.

Getting rid of Medicare is fine with me PROVIDED you get rid of Medicaid and the VA Healthcare system, CHIPS, SCHIPS, etc.....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 12
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Ron Paul Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 2 min American Lady 168,043
Daddy issues: Are Ron Paul's hard-core stands a... 10 hr Le Jimbo 1
Ron Paul on the Verge of Going Third Party? (Jan '08) Jan 21 Steve 29,299
Senator Rand Paul blasts Common Core education ... Jan 17 Lawrence Wolf 14
NC legislator going unaffiliated, wants to cauc... Jan 13 Sofaking clueless 9
Iowa Ames Straw Poll planned for August Jan 10 Your Ex 1
Ready, Ames, fire? Jan 10 Aria 1
More from around the web