My impression of Ron Paul is that he's becoming a populist Libertarian--I mean already him and his supporters seem to measure their success by how many people show up at his rallies and how loud they shout. There's talk of pulling an electoral coup at the Convention and among his more vocal supporters there's virulent distrust of anything establishment related.
You'd think from all that he'd be a 30something Central American with a megaphone in one hand and a pistol in the other, not a 70plus Texan harping on about the inviolability of the Constitution.
__________________
"End when I find myn Hertland, efter Irfet end Woo,
In Dale af Paper, worin Ink Nymphen dans’n,
I’ll endly have somthing stour ta gib ta myn Fremdin.
O Vers’ af de Musen, dwan’t ferlet me noo!"
Oh certainly he clamped down when one over-zealous supporter alleged that Huntsman was a real life Manchurian Candidate, but otherwise I've not seen much in the way of "hey guys, quiet down, you're talking crazy".
Which would make him little different from most politicians. More scrupulous, I'm certain, but little different.
__________________
"End when I find myn Hertland, efter Irfet end Woo,
In Dale af Paper, worin Ink Nymphen dans’n,
I’ll endly have somthing stour ta gib ta myn Fremdin.
O Vers’ af de Musen, dwan’t ferlet me noo!"
He's been on Alex Jones to talk about the superhighway that will link Canada, America, and Mexico as part of a plot to destroy all three countries and replace them with single country.
__________________
Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.
Basically there's already a highway (or technically a trio of highways that sort of blend together) that already stands where the NAFTA Superhighway is supposed to be constructed. Somewhere there's a video of Alex Jones pointing to an actual, current, map and claiming it is a plan for constructing a highway.
__________________
Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.
I feel a bit stupid/ignorant on this particular topic. But what is wrong with a superhighway that includes energy and transportation between the 3 countries. Wouldn't that be a good thing? Again, don't crush me because I am ignorant of this particular topic.
Edit - I read this:
"Paul (May 10, 1988): The American people have never reached this point of disgust with politicians before. I want to totally disassociate myself from the Reagan Administration. "
Amazing. Those were fighting words in '88.
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Jun 22nd, 2012 at 11:21 PM
"End when I find myn Hertland, efter Irfet end Woo,
In Dale af Paper, worin Ink Nymphen dans’n,
I’ll endly have somthing stour ta gib ta myn Fremdin.
O Vers’ af de Musen, dwan’t ferlet me noo!"
Most of Ron Paul's budget plans comes straight from military cuts which are the priority.
Yes, a creationist who claims neither side as definite proof. I dont see anything wrong with that.
Where did he qualify himself as a scientist?
Even though its one of the low priorities. (Ending the wars, auditing the fed and hopefully easing our way out of the central banking grasp, and bringing back constitutional liberty is the main focus) All his views on federal governments role come from the constitution. Other than the section where dealing with promoting science and invention, the constitution does not permit government authority to subsidize science.
It has nothing to do with the individual states funding the state sponsored science. California passed bonds to be in debt so it could sponsor the state funded stem cell research because the gov isnt doing it.
When there are fewer federal regulations and federal subsidies of established corporations there will be more incentive and fewer barriers to innovative scientists and science-based companies entering the market.
Sorry, I've been pretty busy lately. Plus.. all that reading.
NRC had, in total, a $700 million budget, I'm not sure how much of that went to Winnipeg and the fMRI stuff. As the articles said, this was done because our conservative government didn't see the value in basic research and is retooling the NRC to be friendly to the private sector.
1) great, Winnipeg is in Canada though.
2) so? He explicity says he is going to cut funding to federal agencies responsible for science. He isn't making military cuts to fund science.
you think there is a reasonable intellectual opinion that questions evolution?
wait... you believe in evolution, right?
The only reference to it is a clip the Amazing Atheist uses in a video ranting against Paul, so w/e, he may have only said it once or in some off hand way.
I think we've talked about these type of answers before. Saying: "We could, but we shouldn't" is no more convincing to me because your doctrine comes from the constitution than it would be if it came from a religious text.
1) California is not very representative of what most states will be capable of affording. I'm going to a conference in a week in North Dakota. The center that is holding it is a huge operation that exists exclusively due to federal grants. The state of ND itself probably couldn't afford it, and the type of research being done (basic research into vision and visual processes) is not marketable. Also, the "Its bad when one government does it but not when a different one does" theme that comes from Paul is nonsense to anyone not part of the American political tradition of "states rights", but hey, so is the idea that states could violate individual rights simply because they aren't a nation.
2) You continue to say "private sector! private sector", when you haven't addressed any of my points about how problematic the private sector is for science funding. Lets talk about this lab in ND, then. Why would the shareholders of any corporation allow them to invest in research that almost surely will not provide financial benefit to the corporation. Aren't CEO/CFOs legally bound to act in the fiduciary interests of their corporation? Wouldn't that make supporting the vision science center in ND a violation of the law?
However, you're distorting what that law would actually cover. SOX is more about the handling of the finances than it is about curing diseases. If an organization cured a disease that destroyed it's long term profitability, it would not come under SOX's litigative repercussions. However, if one of the Executives falsely reported losses, due to that cure, to keep investors happy, that would fall under SOX.
With a 15 trillion dollar debt and him being the only candidate making legitimate cuts in a broke country filled with debt, i'm fine with the prosperity 1 trillion dollars would bring into America.
I haven't studied it hardcore but it seems possible. Nothing I care too much about at the moment. Not against it but I cant say i'm fully aware of their studies.
Just stating the reasoning behind Pauls policy and consistency. I believe cuts will be made eventually with a huge debt.
Why not? Compared to who else?
What exactly is being done here and for what purpose, again?
Lol stretching here. The Federal governments purpose is to defend the borders and defend the individuals liberties of the citizen. The citizen has more say of the laws being passed and chooses which state best suits them instead of countries if power was given to the federal government. Its the constitution that defends peoples liberties period regardless.
If there is a need for the lab in ND then it shouldnt be forced through taxes. I'm all for science funding but I believe we have bigger problems facing us currently.
I can't think of a single instance where states' rights has been a force for good in American history.
But hey, I'm from the south where states' rights has really just been an excuse to own slaves, oppress minorities, and neglect education.
And I'm terrified at the notion of decentralizing the public education system more than it already is. For every one county that may profit from the lack of Federal meddling there will be dozens of rural counties where education collapses for lack of funding.
__________________
"End when I find myn Hertland, efter Irfet end Woo,
In Dale af Paper, worin Ink Nymphen dans’n,
I’ll endly have somthing stour ta gib ta myn Fremdin.
O Vers’ af de Musen, dwan’t ferlet me noo!"
Last edited by Omega Vision on Jul 11th, 2012 at 08:06 PM
and I'm just pointing to what I see as a flaw in Paul's reasoning.
If California were a nation, it would be the world's eighth largest economy and is home to some of the most prestigious universities in the world and countless Nobel laureates.
And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
- 1 Corinthians 12:26
ok, you keep saying it should be, but can you justify that point? can you explain why it would be a good thing to have no federal science funding?
KMC Community Forums
Jun 22nd, 2012 10:32 PM
Plus.. all that reading.
