Ron Paul...savior or silver tongued liar

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by I See You

He is not a low to middle class worker. How can you have someone run a country when they don't know what it's like to live and survive in it.

 

Would you want your local mechanic running your country?

Actually YES. My mechanic is a very intelligent person. Do you believe that only politicians are are capable and intelligent enough to run our country? They havn't done very good thus far.

this is a rather one sided question, most people view ron paul not as a savior but as a defender of liberty, a bit like a savior but he is not going to save amerca all by himself so i think it is overblown to view him as a savior.

At this point, a mechanic as President is starting to look good.

In that a good mechanic knows that if a part is broken, its more cost effective to replace it. Unless the 'vehicle in question' barely good is enough to drive to the junk yard. Then if he is honest, he'll tell you that you might be able to a few more miles out of it, while you save up for a car, or he'll say "Dude, give me a call before you drive, so I am not on the road when you explode... yes your car is that bad."


We can make a million analogies, we can posit Candidate A walks on water, farts with the odor of roses, and can piss on a plate without splashing. Or that Candidate D can't find his arse without a map, compass, GPS and a force recon team kicking him in it.

Both would be BS characterizations.

(Though I have known -people- who are always LLMF in the bush with out all of the above.)

IMO this next election is just like the prior one. You can take the easy to swallow poison or you can take the hard to swallow poison, but you are going to take the poison. (Poison being the metaphor to Presidential Candidates.)

You can just hope your tolerance to the poison is strong enough that you survive.

M.

"I can clearly not take the cup of front of me." ~Vicinee ( Princess Binde)

reply to post by Moshpet

In that a good mechanic knows that if a part is broken, its more cost effective to replace it.

The same as any good representative would do.

What about the sleazy mechanics that replace parts that don't need replacing?

reply to post by I See You

Do you believe that only politicians are are capable and intelligent enough to run our country? They havn't done very good thus far.

Well, by definition, someone running the country is a politician no?

A politician or political leader (from Greek "polis") is an individual who is involved in influencing public policy and decision making *

Originally posted by jtap66
He's "against" big government, but lines up for money from the same programs he claims are wasteful.

He's as full of it as the rest of them.

You're obviously misinformed to what "earmarks" are.

A) Earmarks do not increase spending. It is allocations of funding already approved for spending. The use (or non use) of earmarks in no way affects the spending budget. He earmarks those funds to be used for projects for those he represents (ie the people). If the funds are not earmarked, then the Federal Government decides where to use them without any transparency (ever hear of taxation without representation). If the funds are taken from the People, you might as well, allocate funds for use that would benefit the tax payer.

B) Check his voting record. Even if he adds an earmark, he usually votes no on the Bill. His voting record has remained concrete for 30 years.

So, yes he's against Big Government and wants to cut spending immediately by a Trillion, but at the same time earmarks funds that have already by taken from the people to be used for the public good.

Key point that needs to be reiterated until it's understood:

If the money isn't used by the people then the Federal Government can literally use it as nothing more then kindling in D.C. fireplaces. He's just making sure it used by the people. Earmarks not only have no impact on Spending (it's going to be spent regardless), but they do increase transparency (ie People actually know where the money is being used).

People usually hear the word "earmark" and think bridge to nowhere, or "bought votes" and automatically assume that the use of earmarks are what have caused our Spending to go out of control. Only 1 percent of Federal Spending goes towards earmarks. If Earmarks were made illegal tomorrow, that 1 percent would just be pushed towards something else, like Defense or again Fireplace kindling....

Yeah.... "Full of it."

I recommend that you read this article from Dr Paul regarding Earmarks...

www.ronpaul.com...