PDA

View Full Version : Side effect of Ron Paul Presidency




anewvoice
08-27-2011, 09:23 AM
I was reading an article, hxxp://hotair.com/archives/2011/08/24/oh-my-obama-39-ron-paul-38/, and found this little gem.

<quote>My fear is simple: Paul, like Bachmann, is comfortable being the only no vote on massively popular legislation. His ideological rigidity would result in a de facto government shutdown wherein almost all legislation would require a two-thirds majority in both houses in order to override Paul’s veto. </quote>

So a Ron Paul Presidency gives us back our liberties, adherence to the Constitution, common sense AND, it solves the bi-partisan divide. You can be sure the Republicans and Democrats would be best buds and finally figure out how to work together if for no other reason than they would need to.

Not sure that's a good thing though. :)

Borrow and Spend Republicans + Tax and Spend Democrats = Spend and Spend?

harikaried
08-27-2011, 11:08 AM
A government shutdown that doesn't extend the Patriot Act or approves corporate bailouts? That doesn't sound too bad does it?

LibertyEagle
08-27-2011, 11:13 AM
So a Ron Paul Presidency gives us back our liberties, adherence to the Constitution, common sense AND, it solves the bi-partisan divide. You can be sure the Republicans and Democrats would be best buds and finally figure out how to work together if for no other reason than they would need to.

Not sure that's a good thing though. :)

Borrow and Spend Republicans + Tax and Spend Democrats = Spend and Spend?

Nah. If Ron Paul wins the Republican nomination, there will be a groundswell across the nation. People who had almost given up hope of have constitutional government ever again would run for office from everything from dog catcher to Congress. We will be there to support Ron Paul's presidency. Count on it. :)

ninepointfive
08-27-2011, 11:18 AM
I am concerned about the Federal Reserve using a scorched earth policy to knock Paul out with a monetary collapse.

LibertyEagle
08-27-2011, 11:22 AM
We have no control over that. The only thing we can impact is helping him get elected.

Paul4Prez
08-27-2011, 10:44 PM
If all legislation required a two-thirds vote to get passed, a lot of bad laws would never have been enacted. If you really want to protect our freedom, veto everything.

anaconda
08-27-2011, 10:47 PM
If all legislation required a two-thirds vote to get passed, a lot of bad laws would never have been enacted. If you really want to protect our freedom, veto everything.

An unruly congress might indeed override routinely. Or impeach over nothing.

Xenophage
08-27-2011, 11:47 PM
I've always thought the real challenge would be getting him nominated as the Republican candidate. If he was in a general 1v1 election against any democrat I think he could win... not by a landslide, but by a very closely contested vote. The other problem is that if he actually did win the Repub nomination, would the GOP accept him as the nominee? I think it would look very much like the Alaskan senatorial race did, where the tea-party favorite won the nomination, but faced off against an establishment Republican who ran as an independent.

Ron Paul would probably face something similar, and that would completely spoil his chances.

It's a very hard uphill battle. I don't know how political victories of any significant magnitude can be won without a dramatic philosophic shift in the populace, and we're really out of time on that if we plan on having President Paul in 2012.

Carehn
08-27-2011, 11:55 PM
An unruly congress might indeed override routinely. Or impeach over nothing.

Congress has no balls. I don't suspect they would do a damn thing.

But it would be just our luck to have an angry drunken congress spring forth to fight the evil Libertarian who has stolen from then their king.

NJames
08-28-2011, 12:13 AM
It's a very hard uphill battle. I don't know how political victories of any significant magnitude can be won without a dramatic philosophic shift in the populace, and we're really out of time on that if we plan on having President Paul in 2012.
A big part of the change in the political landscape that we need is proving that it is possible. So many have tuned out or been talked into a policy of accepting the lesser of two evils.

CaptainAmerica
08-28-2011, 12:29 AM
Ron Paul as president could very well possibly enforce the U.S. Constitution article 1 section 8 as law and repeal just about anything unconstitutional . Is it not the president's vested power to enforce existing law?

MJU1983
08-28-2011, 12:46 AM
"Liberty, when it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth." -George Washington

S.Shorland
08-28-2011, 03:51 AM
How I look at it is: The blood suckers in charge have every group fighting against eachother so that they can steal unobserved. By doing three (mighty) things:1.(Your) troops come home.This is BIG.It kills the MIC and it has the psychological effect of concentrating minds on the republic.This also gives the money to help the seniors and competing currencies mean that their savings can't be inflated away. 2. Introduction of competing currencies.The 'FED' (corporatist banking cartel) is dealt a mortal blow.Again,the psychological effect will be to concentrate minds on the Republic.The income tax will become fair game and people will start to refuse to be scalped 3. Pardoning non-violent,non hard crime drug users in FEDERAL jail.Your body is yours.This is BIG.Again,the psychological effect will be to focus on individual rights and on what your republic did and should stand for.A Paul Presidency would be a seismic event worldwide (which is partly why I support it as an Englishman.I want America to be what you were promised it would be to save us too).I don't think it is possible to overstate the huge impact Paul will have.He would be the most important figure in the world at least since the second world war and his legacy would actually be greater than those wartime leaders in intellectual terms.These are mighty deeds that Paul will do,actually.This is an intervention moment in the psyche of Uncle Sam himself.I think he will come out the other side a better man for it.You people have really been slaves.Farmed like cattle and freedom will be sweater than you can possibly imagine.

S.Shorland
08-28-2011, 04:02 AM
I am too but that is on their heads,not his.

I am concerned about the Federal Reserve using a scorched earth policy to knock Paul out with a monetary collapse.

anaconda
08-28-2011, 02:45 PM
Ron Paul as president could very well possibly enforce the U.S. Constitution article 1 section 8 as law and repeal just about anything unconstitutional . Is it not the president's vested power to enforce existing law?

This is a fascinating point. I believe he can instruct all of the agencies as to how to proceed based upon the law of the land. I also wonder if the POTUS can ask for Supreme Court review of things? The POTUS could probably force rulings on may things. For example, POTUS Paul could announce that the law states that there is no law requiring Americans to file a 1040. And then he could instruct the IRS commissioner to rebate all tax withholdings, instruct the FBI and IRS to cease and desist on pursuing tax violations, and also pardon all convicted tax convicts.

febo
08-28-2011, 03:31 PM
I was reading an article, hxxp://hotair.com/archives/2011/08/24/oh-my-obama-39-ron-paul-38/, and found this little gem.

<quote>My fear is simple: Paul, like Bachmann, is comfortable being the only no vote on massively popular legislation. His ideological rigidity would result in a de facto government shutdown wherein almost all legislation would require a two-thirds majority in both houses in order to override Paul’s veto. </quote>

This ignores the fact that in 2 years things will be significantly worse.