Just Ron Paul approaching his private jet

[bluesc]

http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/301944_10150405185341686_6233046685_8641923_112971 6173_n.jpg


Soon that will be Air Force One. Let's make (http://supervoterbomb.com/) it happen. (https://secure.ronpaul2012.com/)


http://robrimes.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/3652_air-force-one-5_05320299-jpg.jpeg

[McDermit]

So cool that he took his grandkids with him. Lucky kids!

[Oddone]

Need a Photoshop with Ron Paul walking towards Airforce One.

[Kade]

I personally hope he actually gets rid of Air Force One. Waste of money.

[freeforall]

I read on his facebook page that if we saw him tug his ear during the debate he was just saying hello to another grandchild at home. So sweet!

[Cowlesy]

Awesome pic. Thanks for sharing!

[No Free Beer]

like a boss

[wgadget]

I don't know why, but that pic is worth five stars.

I ♥ Ron Paul.

[Kords21]

Next to Ron Paul, Air Force One looks so small

[tremendoustie]

I personally hope he actually gets rid of Air Force One. Waste of money.

I agree. I think it'd send a great message for him to stick with the jet in the first picture.

The extreme pomp at taxpayer expense in the second picture makes me a bit queasy.

[fisharmor]

I personally hope he actually gets rid of Air Force One. Waste of money.

This - I certainly can't see him calling for a trillion dollars in cuts and maintaining Air Force One in its current form.
The 747 first flew in 1969.
There are certainly more cost effective solutions out there, and if he's planning on taking a 30k a year salary, I can't imagine he'd keep multiple 40+ year old aircraft flying.

[eduardo89]

I personally hope he actually gets rid of Air Force One. Waste of money.

Air Force One isn't an actual plane. Any plane carrying the president is code named Air Force One. Any helicopter carrying him is Marine One.

[eduardo89]

This - I certainly can't see him calling for a trillion dollars in cuts and maintaining Air Force One in its current form.
The 747 first flew in 1969.
There are certainly more cost effective solutions out there, and if he's planning on taking a 30k a year salary, I can't imagine he'd keep multiple 40+ year old aircraft flying.

The two aircraft used as presidential planes are actually VC-25's. They're based on the 747-200 and were a actually bought in 1986 and delivered to the USAF in 1990.

From Kennedy till Reagan they used Boeing 707's (actually there were VC-137C's). The first president to use the current planes was Bush I.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

This - I certainly can't see him calling for a trillion dollars in cuts and maintaining Air Force One in its current form.
The 747 first flew in 1969.
There are certainly more cost effective solutions out there, and if he's planning on taking a 30k a year salary, I can't imagine he'd keep multiple 40+ year old aircraft flying.

Not to mention, the President has no business flying around everywhere. He basically has two functions, both of which can be performed in Washington, D.C.

[truthdivides]

Not to mention, the President has no business flying around everywhere. He basically has two functions, both of which can be performed in Washington, D.C.

What? Isn't the sitting president's job to be in full campaign mode for 4 years? /s

[rp713]

Not to mention, the President has no business flying around everywhere. He basically has two functions, both of which can be performed in Washington, D.C.

well the president does have to make appearances across the country and international summits/visits as well. although i dont see rp taking 2 week long visits to china or anything like that. he'll probly go for the summits and come right back.

[Johnnybags]

at the very least he could have given Santorum one last ride home.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

well the president does have to make appearances across the country and international summits/visits as well. although i dont see rp taking 2 week long visits to china or anything like that. he'll probly go for the summits and come right back.

Uh, no he doesn't.

No. Not. Ever.

See how the myth is everywhere?

The President is not "our leader". He's a nobody who sits around waiting to push pens, or in a time of war, directs the troops. He is not an ambassador of any kind.

[JohnGalt23g]

Not to mention, the President has no business flying around everywhere. He basically has two functions, both of which can be performed in Washington, D.C.

Uh... no.

As POTUS, Ron would be head of state, and as such, expected to make state visits.

And when my head of state travels abroad on state business, I want him to do so safely, and frankly I want him to make a splash when he arrives.

[rp713]

Uh, no he doesn't.

No. Not. Ever.

See how the myth is everywhere?

The President is not "our leader". He's a nobody who sits around waiting to push pens, or in a time of war, directs the troops. He is not an ambassador of any kind.

so when he says "trade, talk and travel with people" means he's going to do all of that on the phone? sorry but if a world leader wants to talk with him face to face either he goes over there or they come over here. all leaders travel.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

Uh... no.

As POTUS, Ron would be head of state, and as such, expected to make state visits.

And when my head of state travels abroad on state business, I want him to do so safely, and frankly I want him to make a splash when he arrives.

Are you kidding? Where in the Constitution does it say the President is head of state? Sounds like you want a king.


so when he says "trade, talk and travel with people" means he's going to do all of that on the phone? sorry but if a world leader wants to talk with him face to face either he goes over there or they come over here. all leaders travel.

He's not talking about the office of the Presidency. He's talking about opening up the free market instead of having government imposed sanctions, etc.

[squarepusher]

I like how Mitt Romney takes the commercial planes

[eduardo89]

Are you kidding? Where in the Constitution does it say the President is head of state? Sounds like you want a king.

The POTUS is both head of government and head of state.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

so when he says "trade, talk and travel with people" means he's going to do all of that on the phone? sorry but if a world leader wants to talk with him face to face either he goes over there or they come over here. all leaders travel.

Also, the President is not a world leader. There are ambassadors you send in your stead if someone wants to talk with you. Or they can come here.

This idea you have of what the President is is not based on our Constitution, but on what you learned in school and see on TV. The President today has been turned into a dictatorship. Ron Paul would never be a dictator.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

The POTUS is both head of government and head of state.

No. He isn't.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

Section 2 - Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, AppointmentsThe 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 (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#IMPEACH).
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 (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#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 (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#ADJOURN), he may adjourn (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#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.

Any questions?

[eduardo89]

No. He isn't.

Yes he is. The US has a "presidential system" of government where the president is both the head of state and government.

If you think he's not, then who is the head of state?

[archangel689]

Soon that will be Air Force One.

We should privatize that, too.

[bluesc]

We should privatize that, too.

Completely off topic. Air Force One can be used as a command station in a time of war, and, as far as I remember, is used if no bunker is available, in the case of nuclear war. It is maintained by the USAF and should not be privatized. Defense is a legitimate role of the federal government.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

Yes he is. The US has a "presidential system" of government where the president is both the head of state and government.

If you think he's not, then who is the head of state?

You're not talking about what the law is, but what we actually have today. And even that is an illusion. Calling our President the "head of state" is an example of not having a better title for him. "Head of State" powers are divided among the three branches for a reason. Again, just read the Constitution. Although some statists would like to have a head of state, the Constitution clearly shows we in America shouldn't have one.

[JK/SEA]

I personally hope he actually gets rid of Air Force One. Waste of money.

this.

I can't see Ron actually using this money gobbler to fly around in. I see him in that private jet to get to where he NEEDS to be. Whats the point of a 747 anyway?

[rp713]

Also, the President is not a world leader. There are ambassadors you send in your stead if someone wants to talk with you. Or they can come here.

This idea you have of what the President is is not based on our Constitution, but on what you learned in school and see on TV. The President today has been turned into a dictatorship. Ron Paul would never be a dictator.

no one is saying that rp should be a dictator. but occasionally the pres will go on peace missions or just to talk with other world leaders. the sec of state does most of that work the majority of the time. the president in charge of keeping us safe from enemies right? so he is suppose to never go anywhere and talk to other world leaders? what if another country invites or requests a sit down with him? is he just suppose to ignore that?

[Nate-ForLiberty]

this.

I can't see Ron actually using this money gobbler to fly around in. I see him in that private jet to get to where he NEEDS to be. Whats the point of a 747 anyway?

It's like a king arriving riding a huge elephant. It's about show. And why on earth, in a time of war, would you put your commander in chief on a big blue plane marked "U.S. President Here!!"

It's a status symbol and nothing else. Real airborne military command centers are painted completely white.

[tremendoustie]

Uh... no.

As POTUS, Ron would be head of state, and as such, expected to make state visits.

And when my head of state travels abroad on state business, I want him to do so safely, and frankly I want him to make a splash when he arrives.

Tell you what, we'll take up a collection. All those who want the president to "make a splash" by showing up in a decked out 747 can donate to that effort. All those who want to help address world hunger, or donate to other charities, are welcome to do that.

I know where my money's going ....

[Nate-ForLiberty]

no one is saying that rp should be a dictator. but occasionally the pres will go on peace missions or just to talk with other world leaders. the sec of state does most of that work the majority of the time. the president in charge of keeping us safe from enemies right? so he is suppose to never go anywhere and talk to other world leaders? what if another country invites or requests a sit down with him? is he just suppose to ignore that?

Then we can host them here. The President is not supposed to go on these diplomatic missions. That is a creation of the twentieth century. Not the Constitution.

[tremendoustie]

Completely off topic. Air Force One can be used as a command station in a time of war, and, as far as I remember, is used if no bunker is available, in the case of nuclear war. It is maintained by the USAF and should not be privatized. Defense is a legitimate role of the federal government.

Defense is a legitimate role of the militia. I think such an approach is more moral, more expedient, and actually, more constitutional as well.

[bluesc]

Defense is a legitimate role of the militia. I think such an approach is more moral, more expedient, and actually, more constitutional as well.

Legitimate role of the federal government.

[archangel689]

Defense is a legitimate role of the federal government.

I didn't sign the constitution, did you? No one has the natural or legal right to bind future generations to some form of government without their permission (as adults). Thomas Jefferson recognized this.

[bluesc]

I didn't sign the constitution, did you? No one has the natural or legal right to bind future generations to some form of government without their permission (as adults).

You're not going to convince me that defense is not a legitimate role of the federal government. You're also not going to convince me that the constitution should be thrown out.

[unknown]

Someone needs to start a radiation free/grope free airline.

Watch their business skyrocket.

[archangel689]

You're not going to convince me that defense is not a legitimate role of the federal government. You're also not going to convince me that the constitution should be thrown out.

"the social contract argument doesn't work very well as anything more than a metaphor. Contracts get their moral force, in the view of most people, including most libertarians, from the agreement of the parties. But the "social contract" has the form "I will give you these services [Defense] and you will pay me for them, whether you agree to or not."

The standard response, and Mike's, is that you "implicitly agree" by remaining in the country. But this works only if the government already has the right to throw you out of the country--i.e. if the government is somehow the owner of the entire territory it rules. Without a social contract, it is hard to see how you can justify such a claim. And until you can justify it, you can 't get your social contract.

I could, after all, propose a contract to Mike under which he agrees to pay me a thousand dollars a month in exchange for the valuable services I am providing by critiquing his FAQ. I could also inform him that by breathing, he agrees to accept that contract. But unless he already believes that he has no right to breath without my permission, it is hard to see why he should feel obligated to pay."


All taxes are theft and once government exists, it is inevitable that it becomes the monstrosity it is today. You Minarchists really need to learn that.

[rp713]

You're not going to convince me that defense is not a legitimate role of the federal government. You're also not going to convince me that the constitution should be thrown out.

this. we amend the constitution if something needs to be updated or changed.

also, why is it that every thread there has to be an argument among us? comment on the pic and move on.

[tremendoustie]

Legitimate role of the federal government.

Uh, ok, what a thoughtful rebuttal.

Obviously this is a charged issue for you, so let's just move on. We can have these debates after the primary ;)

[Nate-ForLiberty]

this. we amend the constitution if something needs to be updated or changed.

also, why is it that every thread there has to be an argument among us? comment on the pic and move on.

Welcome to the world of internet posting. :)

[bluesc]

Uh, ok, what a thoughtful rebuttal, lol.

Obviously this is a charged issue for you, so let's just move on. We can have these debates after the primary ;)

I'm not looking into getting into a thoughtful debate. Almost every reply in this thread has been wildly off topic. Look again at the OP.

[tremendoustie]

Someone needs to start a radiation free/grope free airline.

Watch their business skyrocket.

That'd be great, but unfortunately, it's currently illegal. Airlines are forced by law to submit to the TSA.

[bluesc]

-snip-

And you anarchists are obsessed with turning every thread into some complex debate over the big issues of the world, when the OP was a picture of Ron and links to donate to his damn campaign.

[tremendoustie]

"the social contract argument doesn't work very well as anything more than a metaphor. Contracts get their moral force, in the view of most people, including most libertarians, from the agreement of the parties. But the "social contract" has the form "I will give you these services [Defense] and you will pay me for them, whether you agree to or not."

The standard response, and Mike's, is that you "implicitly agree" by remaining in the country. But this works only if the government already has the right to throw you out of the country--i.e. if the government is somehow the owner of the entire territory it rules. Without a social contract, it is hard to see how you can justify such a claim. And until you can justify it, you can 't get your social contract.

I could, after all, propose a contract to Mike under which he agrees to pay me a thousand dollars a month in exchange for the valuable services I am providing by critiquing his FAQ. I could also inform him that by breathing, he agrees to accept that contract. But unless he already believes that he has no right to breath without my permission, it is hard to see why he should feel obligated to pay."


All taxes are theft and once government exists, it is inevitable that it becomes the monstrosity it is today. You Minarchists really need to learn that.

You're completely right of course, but for the next few months we should just focus on helping Ron methinks. There will be plenty of time for these debates later. We all want more liberty than we have now, and that's good enough for me.

[JohnGalt23g]

Are you kidding? Where in the Constitution does it say the President is head of state? Sounds like you want a king.





Are you fucking high?

The POTUS is Chief Executive. By definition, he is head of state.

Jesus, sometimes....

[rp713]

Welcome to the world of internet posting. :)


tell me about it. i used to post alot on forums about 5 years ago(non political). got tired of it cause of all the menial bickering all the time. i really only look at threads in here that post articles/pics/vids/info. other than that, i avoid most of these opinion or fanfic threads. pointless to read imo.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

tell me about it. i used to post alot on forums about 5 years ago(non political). got tired of it cause of all the menial bickering all the time. i really only look at threads in here that post articles/pics/vids/info. other than that, i avoid most of these opinion or fanfic threads. pointless to read imo.

I'm pretty much the same. In fact, i really don't post on any other forums because it's mostly garbage. But if you want to stay at the front of what's happening with Ron Paul, be here.

[JohnGalt23g]

Then we can host them here. The President is not supposed to go on these diplomatic missions. That is a creation of the twentieth century. Not the Constitution.

Once again, are you fucking high?

State visits have been a tradition amongst states for... well, for as long as there have been states. How many Kings and Queens of England sat down with the King of France, or Spain, to help smooth negotiations?

The POTUS is head of state. As such, he has to travel from time to time. As it stands now, an American head of state has to travel a lot. When RP is elected, we might be able to think about dialing that back some. But even for something that ought to be as simple as ending the UN, he will have to schmooze some foreign leaders, and in some extreme cases, he'll have to go their house to do it.

Or are you so arrogant that you assume every other foreign leader should come here, as opposed to our leader making the trip from time to time?

[Nate-ForLiberty]

Once again, are you fucking high?

State visits have been a tradition amongst states for... well, for as long as there have been states. How many Kings and Queens of England sat down with the King of France, or Spain, to help smooth negotiations?

The POTUS is head of state. As such, he has to travel from time to time. As it stands now, an American head of state has to travel a lot. When RP is elected, we might be able to think about dialing that back some. But even for something that ought to be as simple as ending the UN, he will have to schmooze some foreign leaders, and in some extreme cases, he'll have to go their house to do it.

Or are you so arrogant that you assume every other foreign leader should come here, as opposed to our leader making the trip from time to time?

We can continue this discussion once you've calmed down and start showing respect to me, yourself, and the forum guidelines. If you continue being abusive I will report your posts.

[musicmax]

He basically has two functions, both of which can be performed in Washington, D.C.

As Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky proved.

[walt]

Thanks Jesse...