If Ron Paul becomes president....

[kwc57]

1870's socially would make life hell in this country for Blacks and other minorities, no thank you.

The claims of 'going back' to the 1870's is just slapstick. In point of fact, it would be more like the 2020's - moving forward toward a sustainable government that isn't bankrupting our grandchildren.

Very few grandchildren will be able to attend college one Paul shuts down the Dept. of Education.

It's rather ironic that you made such an uneducated comment on education.

 

[Dr.Drock]

1870's socially would make life hell in this country for Blacks and other minorities, no thank you.

The claims of 'going back' to the 1870's is just slapstick. In point of fact, it would be more like the 2020's - moving forward toward a sustainable government that isn't bankrupting our grandchildren.

Very few grandchildren will be able to attend college one Paul shuts down the Dept. of Education.

Getting rid of the department of education would make all scholarships vanish, and all private banks vanish who give out student loans?


I'm sure you have all sorts of facts to back that up, please provide the links that have those facts.



Thank you.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The claims of 'going back' to the 1870's is just slapstick. In point of fact, it would be more like the 2020's - moving forward toward a sustainable government that isn't bankrupting our grandchildren.

Very few grandchildren will be able to attend college one Paul shuts down the Dept. of Education.

It's rather ironic that you made such an uneducated comment on education.

Please don't back up your comments with any evidence.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The claims of 'going back' to the 1870's is just slapstick. In point of fact, it would be more like the 2020's - moving forward toward a sustainable government that isn't bankrupting our grandchildren.

Very few grandchildren will be able to attend college one Paul shuts down the Dept. of Education.

Getting rid of the department of education would make all scholarships vanish, and all private banks vanish who give out student loans?


I'm sure you have all sorts of facts to back that up, please provide the links that have those facts.



Thank you.

It would eliminate nearly 27 billion in Pell Grants for one thing
http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget11/justifications/p-pell.pdf

 

[Katzndogz]

Isn't getting rid of grants one of the things Paul wants to do? No government money at all. No student loans, no grants. No govrernment money whatsoever.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Very few grandchildren will be able to attend college one Paul shuts down the Dept. of Education.

Getting rid of the department of education would make all scholarships vanish, and all private banks vanish who give out student loans?


I'm sure you have all sorts of facts to back that up, please provide the links that have those facts.



Thank you.

It would eliminate nearly 27 billion in Pell Grants for one thing
http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget11/justifications/p-pell.pdf

So scholarships and private loans would still be perfectly available?


Thank you.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Getting rid of the department of education would make all scholarships vanish, and all private banks vanish who give out student loans?


I'm sure you have all sorts of facts to back that up, please provide the links that have those facts.



Thank you.

It would eliminate nearly 27 billion in Pell Grants for one thing
http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget11/justifications/p-pell.pdf

So scholarships and private loans would still be perfectly available?


Thank you.

Just as available as they are now. So most people who are presently able to go to college wouldn't be able to - while some still would. This will help create the society Republicans want - one were only some people can get ahead.

Is this conclusion surprising in any way? No.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Isn't getting rid of grants one of the things Paul wants to do? No government money at all. No student loans, no grants. No govrernment money whatsoever.

The right apparently claims the gap will be made up with private loans -because banks are so obviously eager to loan money to 18 year olds with no credit history, a part time job, and no assets except maybe a clunker of a car they worked their ass off to buy.

 

[Dr.Drock]

It would eliminate nearly 27 billion in Pell Grants for one thing
http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget11/justifications/p-pell.pdf

So scholarships and private loans would still be perfectly available?


Thank you.

Just as available as they are now. So most people who are presently able to go to college wouldn't be able to - while some still would. This will help create the society Republicans want - one were only some people can get ahead.

Is this conclusion surprising in any way? No.

From 2001-2007 with almost all republicans in office all your beloved big gov't programs were kept in place and likely expanded on. Some new big gov't programs were invented too.

Most people could still go to college if they wanted, just like they could before the Dept of Education. You'd have people getting scholarships, taking out private loans, or working after high school to save money and pay for college. All that could be done and we wouldn't have to tax the brains out of our citizens, especially the citizens who don't want to go to college yet still have to give gov't money for it.

Republicans and democrats both want you dependent on gov't, so your agenda will win whoever wins the elections.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Will he foot the bill for the White House from his personal funds?

George Washington paid rent for the Samuel Osgood house.

He wont become president but if he did he wouldn't throw 3 million dollar parties in the white house funded by taxpayers

 

[Luissa]

Will he foot the bill for the White House from his personal funds?

George Washington paid rent for the Samuel Osgood house.

I was so hoping you'd say "If Ron Paul becomes President..." you'd move to Botswana.

Wouldn't have to...

It would be like Botswana here

Not to defend Paul, but he would just be the President... He would be able to pass some of his ideas, but I doubt he would be able to shut down the Department of Education too easily, or get rid of Social Security. If he becomes the nomination, I doubt he will even mention any of that.
Part of me wonders if I should vote for him, for one we might get a President who would actually decriminalize Marijuana, and scale back the military.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

So scholarships and private loans would still be perfectly available?


Thank you.

Just as available as they are now. So most people who are presently able to go to college wouldn't be able to - while some still would. This will help create the society Republicans want - one were only some people can get ahead.

Is this conclusion surprising in any way? No.

From 2001-2007 with almost all republicans in office all your beloved big gov't programs were kept in place and likely expanded on. Some new big gov't programs were invented too.

Most people could still go to college if they wanted, just like they could before the Dept of Education. You'd have people getting scholarships, taking out private loans, or working after high school to save money and pay for college. All that could be done and we wouldn't have to tax the brains out of our citizens, especially the citizens who don't want to go to college yet still have to give gov't money for it.

Republicans and democrats both want you dependent on gov't, so your agenda will win whoever wins the elections.

THe percentage of the population with college degrees has been growing steadily
File:Educational attainment.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia for 60 years. To claim it was just as easy to get a college education before the Department of Education and before the federal government started funding higher education is simply to ignore factual reality.

Where on Earth do you think all of these private loans would magically pop up from? If you were a banker would you give an unsecured loan to an 18 year old without a full time permanent job and no assets? Get real.

 

[The Infidel]

Will he foot the bill for the White House from his personal funds?

George Washington paid rent for the Samuel Osgood house.

I was so hoping you'd say "If Ron Paul becomes President..." you'd move to Botswana.

Wouldn't have to...

It would be like Botswana here

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I doubt it. It'd be nothing more than a token gesture that wouldn't really do anything.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

His own distaste for earmarks!

America's Most Hypocritical Earmark King Is... Ron "The Representative From Stormfront" Paul

Even Paul doesn't say he's not the earmark King! He justitifies them.


...Paul made over $157 million in earmark requests for FY 2011, one of only four House Republicans to request any earmarks. Additionally, he made over $398 million in earmark requests for FY 2010, again one of the leading Republican House members...
Among Paul's earmarks are boondoggles like $38 million to "encourage parents to read aloud to their children", $18 million for a light rail study, $4 million for a "Trails and Sidewalks Connectivity Initiative", $11 million for an ACORN-like "Community-Based Job Training Program", $2 million for a "clean energy" pilot project, and many, many more.

All of the above earmarks can be found on Paul's own congressional website... Paul typically will make the earmark request, but then votes against or abstains from voting on final passage, so he can maintain his claim to have "never voted for an earmark", even the earmark requests he himself made.

This is Paul's job, this is the law of the land today and this is one of the reasons he was put into office. Paul did nothing morally corrupted nor illegal. Paul did not set himself up for "advisor" or "Historian" jobs after he left congress or do insider trading... No, Paul did his job and earmarked moneys that was being taken from his state... Paul does not agree with earmarking but to not do it would devastate his district.

BTW. You're so full of shit your eyes are brown. You better get back to being nutty for Newtie.

So you admit that Ron Paul does not have a distaste for earmarks! Thank you for pointing that out.

No, he doesn't have a distaste for earmarks per se, just the useless spending that earmarks have come to represent. Regardless, earmarks are just token cuts that Republicans have latched on to because they're unable to make any real substantial cuts.

 

[Decepticon]

Somalia has become the liberal version of the Christian hell. A place where all those who don't worship at the alter of the state will suffer for eternity if they dare to question the wisdom of ubiquitous government control.

Freedom? Burn in Somalia, sinner!!!!

Maybe you could point to ANOTHER state-less libertarian paradise?

Oh and you have Cholera.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Somalia has become the liberal version of the Christian hell. A place where all those who don't worship at the alter of the state will suffer for eternity if they dare to question the wisdom of ubiquitous government control.

Freedom? Burn in Somalia, sinner!!!!

Maybe you could point to ANOTHER state-less libertarian paradise?

Oh and you have Cholera.

That would of course assume that Somalia is in some way a "stateless" libertarian paradise to begin with. Which, of course, is ridiculous.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Just as available as they are now. So most people who are presently able to go to college wouldn't be able to - while some still would. This will help create the society Republicans want - one were only some people can get ahead.

Is this conclusion surprising in any way? No.

From 2001-2007 with almost all republicans in office all your beloved big gov't programs were kept in place and likely expanded on. Some new big gov't programs were invented too.

Most people could still go to college if they wanted, just like they could before the Dept of Education. You'd have people getting scholarships, taking out private loans, or working after high school to save money and pay for college. All that could be done and we wouldn't have to tax the brains out of our citizens, especially the citizens who don't want to go to college yet still have to give gov't money for it.

Republicans and democrats both want you dependent on gov't, so your agenda will win whoever wins the elections.

THe percentage of the population with college degrees has been growing steadily
File:Educational attainment.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia for 60 years. To claim it was just as easy to get a college education before the Department of Education and before the federal government started funding higher education is simply to ignore factual reality.

Where on Earth do you think all of these private loans would magically pop up from? If you were a banker would you give an unsecured loan to an 18 year old without a full time permanent job and no assets? Get real.

Is it your argument that private loans to 18 years olds don't exist now?

I wish that were true, would sure make my monthly budget a lot easier. Make all those extra loans i had to take out in college to pay tuition just poof into thin air.

I could spend that money I save donating to gov't to put more money into welfare and social security and other wonderfully efficient gov't programs.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Will he foot the bill for the White House from his personal funds?

George Washington paid rent for the Samuel Osgood house.

he'd do that just like he adhered to his own belief in term limits...

not...

and to his own distaste for earmarks...

not...

luckily it's not going to be an issue.

Funny how when Ron Paul supports term limits but doesn't term limit himself he's a hypocrite, but Elizabeth Warren taking Wall Street money is another story.

youb know... that's all well and good. the problem is that we can't have campaign finance reform and until we do (not that that can happen b/c of citizen's united, but...) you don't win elections without having money. it's really that simple. you'd have to be a moron to turn down money. it's like telling your opponent... no, you take the win, i'm not serious...

and elizabeth warren isn't stupid.

Isn't it proof that Ron Paul isn't stupid for not term limiting himself since term limits aren't binding on everybody?

 

[kwc57]

Very few grandchildren will be able to attend college one Paul shuts down the Dept. of Education.

It's rather ironic that you made such an uneducated comment on education.

Please don't back up your comments with any evidence.

Hey Bobo, your the one who made the wild assed assertion, I'll back my comment up right after you back your's up.