Ron Paul says tornado victims should not get aid

[Paulie]

The losertarian kooks are just like liberal kooks, just nuts.

So if a tornado, hurricane, flood, earthquake takes out a city in the US....the Federal Govt doesn't have a role in helping out in the minds of losertarians. That about sums it up and why Ron Paul is running last in the GOP race with a so-called RINO, an old lobbyist, and washed up US Senator that can't win his own state.....

This is hilarious.

The ones calling for a LIMIT to the federal government's reach are the liberals.

This is probably why you couldn't even spell berserk right.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Established with the Militia Act of 1903 under Title 10 and Title 32 of the U.S. Code, state National Guard serves as part of the first-line defense for the United States.[4] The state National Guard is divided into units stationed in each of the 50 states and US territories, and operates under their respective state governor or territorial adjutant general.[5] The National Guard may be called up for active duty by state governors or territorial adjutant general to help respond to domestic emergencies and disasters, such as hurricanes, floods, and earthquakes.[5]

It's interesting to read about the National Guard and how it came to be quasi-Federal, but it is STILL a primarily STATE militia.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I didn't realize the CDC was worried about someone passing cancer to someone else sitting on a bus with them.

You have such a simpleton mind that I'm amazed you haven't been run over by a lawn mower yet. Hopefully you are sterile.

The internet exposes you kooks hiding in your trailers.

LOL cancer is a widespread infection!

You can't make this stuff up folks, please don't change GB. You're very entertaining.

So since it is a widespread infection, you support Obamacare, that is at least if you had consistent principles.

At least the libs on this thread like Wry and Rightwinger think taxing people and spending the country into oblivion is a great thing across the board in terms of social programs, they dont' pretend to think otherwise like you do.

Enjoy voting for the founding father of Obamacare and still holding a straight face while you tell everyone how conservative you are.

Thanks again, have a great day

If I recall you're only 26 years old. I suggest you live a little longer before you broadcast your opinions as anything more than that, or characterize someone like me as a "lib". Using "lib" as a pejorative, in effect suggesting all "lib"s are the same and hold only far left opinions is abject ignorance. I've been on this planet for twice as many years and more than you, and experience counts.

I believe universal preventative health care should be provided to all citizens; I believe in gun controls; I believe the war on drugs and the war on poverty have failed; I believe in fiscal sanity; I believe in the rule of law and that our Constitution is a living document; I believe CU v. FEC is the greatest threat to our democratic traditions and to our Republic; I believe violent criminals need to be incarcerated in prison and if paroled should be supervised for life; I believe drug offenders need to be punished for their crimes and treated for their addictions; I believe all citizens between the age of 16 and 32 should should provide two years of service to the nation; I believe in the rights of states but the rights of all citizens are supreme; and, I believe that all citizens have a duty to vote and that any effort to place roadblocks to their exercising this franchise as well as anyone who votes fraudulently should be punished upon conviction by incarceration.

See, I can write all of this without attacking you personally or using an emoticon. You can thank my 'liberal' college professors at CAL for this ability. I can also defend my beliefs in appropriate threads, and would enjoy debates with those who disagree and can do so without the use of emoticons or logical fallacies.

 

[Liberty]

wry...what part of "its not a power of the federal government" do you not understand?

 

[Foxfyre]

That kind of nonsense deserves several threads.

As I sit here in comfort on generator power.

I did have my farm manager go and buy an entire van load of food and stuff for the real victims of the tornadoes though.
And have a house full of neighbors who do not have generators.
There are no more generators to buy around here.
Ahh madness and mayhem but I will survive that too.

That's a great American tradition. That's what Americans do. They help out their neighbors in times of troubles. We take in refugees from the mountain every severe winter when the power is out for prolonged periods or the roads become impassable and folks can't get home. Same in Kansas when storms would take out large areas of power or ground flooding or blowing snow made roads impassable. Such things local communities and certainly the states can handle.

In a Katrina or Andrew or other major earthquake or other major disaster, again assistance from the Federal government can be appropriate to help clear roads, restore communications, and render other immediate emergency aid. Then too, when there is a need, the American people are ready to send truckloads of food, clothing, blankets, whatever is necessary to help folks out until they can make different arrangements.

But again, the Federal government's involvement should be over when folks are relocated and the immediate critical emergenvcy is over. If it becomes just another welfare program; just another entitlement, people will have little reason or incentive to be persuaded to become responsible grown ups and take care of themselves in many ways including buying insurance.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Isn't Ron Paul a millionaire?

So he will work at the average American worker's salary, but in reality is he is RICH.

How did he get soooooo rich? I didn't realize being a congressman was so lucrative.

The irony of whining about Ron Paul being a millionaire with your Mitt Romney avatar isn't lost on you, is it?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Isn't Ron Paul a millionaire?

So he will work at the average American worker's salary, but in reality is he is RICH.

How did he get soooooo rich? I didn't realize being a congressman was so lucrative.

40 years of medical practice and sound investments in gold and silver, that's how.

Idiot.

Paul has not be a practicing Doctor for 40 years. It's more like 20 years. And a good deal of his professional career has been spent in congress.

The 1980's were 40 years ago? I'm older than I thought.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Ok Paulestinian...

Ron Paul Takes Double Reimbursements On Travel Expenses According To Capitol Hill Newspaper - Business Insider

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3dbct7cPJU]Ron Paul Flies First Class on Taxpayer Money AP Story DEBUNKED by Lawrence O'Donnell - YouTube[/ame]

Try again, Junior.

So now you believe MSNBC?

Unlike partisan boobs I don't discount what's said simply because of the network, newspaper, or website it was said on. Lawrence O'Donnell is certainly no fan of Ron Paul, but did his job and debunked a false story.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Kook, insurance companies will rebuild a home, but they cannot turn on the electricity, shelter people, keep law and order, when a town has been destroyed.

You are so fucking stupid.

Obamacare is not the same as the Feds propping a city back on its feet. You kooks think any help by the Feds is illegal.

I hope you lose your home....that would be justice.

I wish there was a way for kooks like you to be tagged so that we could quit protecting you from terrorists and not help you during natural disasters.

When you whine about the US military killing terrorists overseas, we could just single you out here for terrorists to find you while leaving us alone, because "you don't like your tax dollars killing terrorists overseas."

Also, we can just tag you and your personal goods for not being supported when a natural disaster hits your trailer. The Feds will just say, he didn't want us to find him a place to sleep after the tornado sent his trailer airborn.

What's the difference between wanting you to be taxed more in order to pay someone else's home insurance costs and wanting you to be taxed more in order to pay for Obamacare?

If millions have a disastrous medical issue, like cancer, or hundreds or thousands have a natural disaster issue, what's the difference? Shouldn't your "principles" lead you to support Obamacare?

If people need help, just assume charity and local gov'ts aren't enough and just tax everyone else to pay for it, what's the difference?

Well aren't you just a paragon of class? I notice you have nothing to say about your little airplane story being debunked.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

IMO we (Americans) are all in this together. As individuals we cannot do enough to mitigate the misery of our fellow countrymen when disaster strikes. This ideology, Libertarianism, seems little different than the ideas expressed by Utopian Socialists more than a century ago. They are nice in theory, but reality will always get in the way.

Let my tax dollars be used to help other Americans in need, and anyone - business or individuals - who hope to profit from the misery of others are no different than looters and should be treated as such.

Yes, very little different from the Utopian Socialists. We even think think if our ideas are implemented there will be "anti-lions" that you'll be able to ride around on.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I didn't realize the CDC was worried about someone passing cancer to someone else sitting on a bus with them.

You have such a simpleton mind that I'm amazed you haven't been run over by a lawn mower yet. Hopefully you are sterile.

The internet exposes you kooks hiding in your trailers.

Enjoy voting for the founding father of Obamacare and still holding a straight face while you tell everyone how conservative you are.

Thanks again, have a great day

If I recall you're only 26 years old. I suggest you live a little longer before you broadcast your opinions as anything more than that, or characterize someone like me as a "lib". Using "lib" as a pejorative, in effect suggesting all "lib"s are the same and hold only far left opinions is abject ignorance. I've been on this planet for twice as many years and more than you, and experience counts.

I believe universal preventative health care should be provided to all citizens; I believe in gun controls; I believe the war on drugs and the war on poverty have failed; I believe in fiscal sanity; I believe in the rule of law and that our Constitution is a living document; I believe CU v. FEC is the greatest threat to our democratic traditions and to our Republic; I believe violent criminals need to be incarcerated in prison and if paroled should be supervised for life; I believe drug offenders need to be punished for their crimes and treated for their addictions; I believe all citizens between the age of 16 and 32 should should provide two years of service to the nation; I believe in the rights of states but the rights of all citizens are supreme; and, I believe that all citizens have a duty to vote and that any effort to place roadblocks to their exercising this franchise as well as anyone who votes fraudulently should be punished upon conviction by incarceration.

See, I can write all of this without attacking you personally or using an emoticon. You can thank my 'liberal' college professors at CAL for this ability. I can also defend my beliefs in appropriate threads, and would enjoy debates with those who disagree and can do so without the use of emoticons or logical fallacies.

Well I am glad to finally read a few things that you disagree with Obama on. However, I don't see how someone can be against the War on Drugs and support fiscal sanity AND support Obama, when his views are the exact opposite on the subject.

Wanting a guy who gets in a bar fight supervised for life seems awfully extreme.

Most of the views you just posted are liberal, so I'm not sure why me calling you a liberal resulted in this kind of a response.

I consider people, at least in a fiscal sense, liberal if they support big expensive government programs. Like the ones you listed, and like this one on this thread that GoneBezerk adamantly defends.

 

[GuyPinestra]

40 years of medical practice and sound investments in gold and silver, that's how.

Idiot.

Paul has not be a practicing Doctor for 40 years. It's more like 20 years. And a good deal of his professional career has been spent in congress.

The 1980's were 40 years ago? I'm older than I thought.

After earning a Doctor of Medicine degree from Duke University's School of Medicine in 1961, and completed his medical internship at the Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit and his residency in obstetrics and gynecology at Magee-Womens Hospital in Pittsburgh.[10] Paul served as a flight surgeon in the United States Air Force from 1963 to 1965 and then in the United States Air National Guard from 1965 to 1968.[11]

Paul and his wife then relocated to Texas, where he began a private practice in obstetrics and gynecology.[12] He refused to accept Medicaid or Medicare payments; he routinely lowered fees for patients who could not afford to pay.[13][14]

1969 to 2012 is 43 years...

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Paul has not be a practicing Doctor for 40 years. It's more like 20 years. And a good deal of his professional career has been spent in congress.

The 1980's were 40 years ago? I'm older than I thought.

After earning a Doctor of Medicine degree from Duke University's School of Medicine in 1961, and completed his medical internship at the Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit and his residency in obstetrics and gynecology at Magee-Womens Hospital in Pittsburgh.[10] Paul served as a flight surgeon in the United States Air Force from 1963 to 1965 and then in the United States Air National Guard from 1965 to 1968.[11]

Paul and his wife then relocated to Texas, where he began a private practice in obstetrics and gynecology.[12] He refused to accept Medicaid or Medicare payments; he routinely lowered fees for patients who could not afford to pay.[13][14]

1969 to 2012 is 43 years...

He hasn't practiced since the early 90's at the latest, but Sallow's claim was that he hadn't practiced in 40 years which was inaccurate.

 

[Wry Catcher]

wry...what part of "its not a power of the federal government" do you not understand?

I'm not a Constitutional Scholar. That said, many Supreme Court decision are decided 5-4. That explanation alone suggests to me there is no consensus on the meaning of many parts of the Constitution or the powers of the Federal Government. In fact, the legitimacy of those powers seems to change with the wind.

You, I assume, believe the Second Amendment is sacrosanct. I don't. And, it seems current law agrees with me and not with you. For example, fully automatic weapons are controlled, and this is only one example where there is no specific authority for the Federal Government to infringe on the right of a citizen to keep and bear arms.

The libertarian argument that if it ain't in the Constitution it is unlawful and a usurpation of power, and the Constitution is not a living document, isn't a universally accepted principle. I know you believe it, but 200 years of law suggests you and the libertarians are wrong.

 

[saveliberty]

If the Constitution doesn't say something you want it to, get an amendment.

 

[Foxfyre]

wry...what part of "its not a power of the federal government" do you not understand?

I'm not a Constitutional Scholar. That said, many Supreme Court decision are decided 5-4. That explanation alone suggests to me there is no consensus on the meaning of many parts of the Constitution or the powers of the Federal Government. In fact, the legitimacy of those powers seems to change with the wind.

You, I assume, believe the Second Amendment is sacrosanct. I don't. And, it seems current law agrees with me and not with you. For example, fully automatic weapons are controlled, and this is only one example where there is no specific authority for the Federal Government to infringe on the right of a citizen to keep and bear arms.

The libertarian argument that if it ain't in the Constitution it is unlawful and a usurpation of power, and the Constitution is not a living document, isn't a universally accepted principle. I know you believe it, but 200 years of law suggests you and the libertarians are wrong.

Can you say with certainty that those 5/4 decisions are based on a lack of consensus? Or are they based on one group of Justices holding to Constitutional core principles and one group who want to rewrite the Constitution into something the Founders never intended it to say?

There are Consitutional libertarians/classical liberals such as myself who look to the Founders for what they intended the Constitution to be and what they intended for it to achieve. It is only by the specifically enumerated restraints on the federal government that allow the free nation that the USA was designed to be. Justices are fallible human beings and can get it as wrong as any other person can. But it has only been in the last 80 to 100 years or so that we have had Supreme Court justices who presume to rewrite the Constitution and the law of the land to fit their personal ideology rather than respect original intent.

The Founders never intended the federal government have ability to confiscate property from any citizen and transfer that property to somebody else. To give the Federal government that power invalidates a whole big bunch of what the Constitution was designed to achieve.

 

[rightwinger]

It just goes to show you why Ron Paul is not fit to be President

If a hurricane or earthquake hit your state, Ron Paul would shrug his shoulders, smirk and say.......Sorry

 

[Dr.Drock]

It just goes to show you why Ron Paul is not fit to be President

If a hurricane or earthquake hit your state, Ron Paul would shrug his shoulders, smirk and say.......Sorry

Had to throw in the smirk, yes down deep he's Satan and takes joy in these things.

When you at least try not to be so hyperpartisan, which I've seen you do, you're a lot better poster.

It's just the standard, "you have to support gov't over charity" view that liberals have. If you don't like welfare you hate poor people, if you don't like social security you hate old people, if you don't support gov't aid you hate anyone who receives it. It's the standard way of thinking when all your viewpoints are based on emotion, and not intellect.

 

[saveliberty]

It just goes to show you why Ron Paul is not fit to be President

If a hurricane or earthquake hit your state, Ron Paul would shrug his shoulders, smirk and say.......Sorry

We were talking tornadoes. Need me to explain the difference?

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Liberals think that tax dollars should be used for every one of their bleeding heart wish lists...................................

If those hypocrites put their own money where their mouths were none of them would have a dime..................