Ron Paul Campaign Ad - Secure

Here's Ron Paul's latest campaign ad. He keeps it short but sweet in this 30 second ad.
It basically says keep our borders secure and our nation safe by building up our defenses rather than acting as the policeman of the world and spending trillions nation-building overseas.

Yeah but border protection is a federal government affair. Suddeny rp is pro federal government now? Shouldn't each border states handle their own border accordingly. Or rp intend to bring the big gun of the federal government to enforce the border?

reply to post by Jazzyguy

Yeah but border protection is a federal government affair. Suddeny rp is pro federal government now? Shouldn't each border states handle their own border accordingly. Or rp intend to bring the big gun of the federal government to enforce the border?

Good point, I wonder how he would go about handling it, at the state or federal level. Hopefully we'll hear more about what he would do during the upcoming debates, but I'm sure they'll ask him about school lunches or something like that instead

Now come on. He is for limited government, not abolishing government, right?

Guarding the border is not that hard, really.

Originally posted by Jazzyguy
Yeah but border protection is a federal government affair. Suddeny rp is pro federal government now? Shouldn't each border states handle their own border accordingly. Or rp intend to bring the big gun of the federal government to enforce the border?

No.

Defense is one of the few things the Federal Government is actually supposed to do!! They are so far away from their original charter that the few things they were empowered to do they ignore, and the things they have no power to do are now their main activities?

Securing our National Defense is a fundamental responsibility of the Federal Government. They are in serious breach of contract with many states for refusing to deport illegal aliens, and refusing to act upon legitimate foreign incursions.

This has been RP's message all along. Build a strong Defense, not Offense. You really think he wants to leave one of the Federal Govt's real jobs to the states? You're obviously mistaking all of his points on Big Govt and wasteful spending on agencies created to run our lives for us on a federal level.

reply to post by Jazzyguy

Yeah but border protection is a federal government affair. Suddeny rp is pro federal government now? Shouldn't each border states handle their own border accordingly. Or rp intend to bring the big gun of the federal government to enforce the border?

So, you are suggesting that any State that is unlucky enough to form, with it's State border, part of the Nations border should be saddled with the expense of border patrol, while States like Missouri, South Dakota and Colorado be given a free pass on the cost? You are also suggesting that all the other States should rest easily because the border States are handling it? Suddenly a lot of power to resist or allow corruption has been dropped onto a lot of State politicians for National Security - the real kind, not the "No, you can't see anything" type.

No, I have not heard Ron Paul mention abandoning any of the proper areas of national interest and duties as provided for in the Constitution. He just proposes to confine it to the proper areas of national interest and duties as called for in the Constitution, and national defense is most assuredly the most clear of these.

Here is the first paragraph of the delineation of the "Powers of Congress"

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

In case your copy of the Constitution is broken, as well as your Google, here is the link to the PDF of it.

The Constitution of the United States of America

Now you have a copy of the Constitution for your own. You will also notice that these are clearly listed in the powers of Congress, so it would not be Ron Paul wielding your big gun at all but your National Representatives from your State and all the other States. So this would seem to make your concerns needless.

Hope this helps.

To provide in this case can be reinterpretated as to pay for the cost. Is it really necessary for the federal government to do the enforcing themself? The border is with mexico for crying out loud not with north korea.

If enforcement is left to the federal government it'll be the federal agency like ICE and DHS that will handle the enforcement. Is that what you all want? You better check with paul.

reply to post by getreadyalready



I cannot agree more.

I have the occasion from time to time to be face to face with some of the "officials" that are part of this. Depending on the topic, I at times call these individuals out. When I do, these people will look at me in total disbelief, kind of like a deer in headlights. It totally takes them back that I would say such a thing. Sometimes they even get downright offended.

Then again, I should probably not be telling them to mind their own business and to get their hands out of my cookie jar, and that the only thing they are expected to do is what the taxpayers tell them to do.

Originally posted by Ittabena
reply to post by Jazzyguy

 

Yeah but border protection is a federal government affair. Suddeny rp is pro federal government now? Shouldn't each border states handle their own border accordingly. Or rp intend to bring the big gun of the federal government to enforce the border?

So, you are suggesting that any State that is unlucky enough to form, with it's State border, part of the Nations border should be saddled with the expense of border patrol, while States like Missouri, South Dakota and Colorado be given a free pass on the cost? You are also suggesting that all the other States should rest easily because the border States are handling it? Suddenly a lot of power to resist or allow corruption has been dropped onto a lot of State politicians for National Security - the real kind, not the "No, you can't see anything" type.

No, I have not heard Ron Paul mention abandoning any of the proper areas of national interest and duties as provided for in the Constitution. He just proposes to confine it to the proper areas of national interest and duties as called for in the Constitution, and national defense is most assuredly the most clear of these.

Here is the first paragraph of the delineation of the "Powers of Congress"

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

In case your copy of the Constitution is broken, as well as your Google, here is the link to the PDF of it.

The Constitution of the United States of America

Now you have a copy of the Constitution for your own. You will also notice that these are clearly listed in the powers of Congress, so it would not be Ron Paul wielding your big gun at all but your National Representatives from your State and all the other States. So this would seem to make your concerns needless.

Hope this helps.

edit on 7-10-2011 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)

There you go quoting facts and such. Why can't things be like the old days when you could just make stuff up and everyone would just go along blindly, lol.

reply to post by Jazzyguy


Are you kidding? defense of the nation is a military affair. If the state wants to protect their own borders, RP would NOT be against it. I don't know how people still don't understand these things.