It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ipleadthe5th
reply to post by CRDDD
please show some proof..
Many twist Ron Pauls words to suit their agenda..
Often it's a case of him wanting power taken off the Fed and given back to the states where it belongs..
Originally posted by ipleadthe5th
reply to post by CRDDD
Umm no, it's actually normal for an OP to contain links backing up the claim..
I find it funny that you believe differently.
So without links your opinion is noted and minus any proof it is rejected.
Originally posted by ipleadthe5th
reply to post by CRDDD
please show some proof..
Many twist Ron Pauls words to suit their agenda..
Often it's a case of him wanting power taken off the Fed and given back to the states where it belongs..
Originally posted by dazbog
reply to post by CRDDD
It is your statement of alleged fact. The onus is yours to provide a source.
However, I'll play. Alleged candy machines in Nation Parks vs. End the 20 year war & put the FRB in it's proper place . Damn tough call.
And the Department of Interior would be ended, which would cut annual federal spending by an additional $12 billion. None of these five departments plausibly advances a legitimate constitutional objective of the federal government.
Originally posted by eleven44
Ron Paul would allow the states to control the land that is within their borders, with their own rules, and as longfar as We the People exercise our rights to interact with our world/land/state/community, I believe most states would be very dedicated to protecting their parks.
Originally posted by ipleadthe5th
reply to post by CRDDD
And the Department of Interior would be ended, which would cut annual federal spending by an additional $12 billion. None of these five departments plausibly advances a legitimate constitutional objective of the federal government.
That's all I can find..
Again it seems Ron Paul wishes to do the right thing and give the power back to the States..
Calling me a troll is a little pathetic when you make unfounded accusations and then use some lame excuse why you refuse to post proof..
I think many know who the real troll is.
Originally posted by eleven44
reply to post by CRDDD
And one question: if not Ron Paul, who would you support and why?
I repeat: a simple google search would show you all the proof you need. If he eliminated the Dept. of the Interior, this would pave the way for private companies to come in and buy up all the national/state parks.
Originally posted by CRDDD
Originally posted by eleven44
reply to post by CRDDD
And one question: if not Ron Paul, who would you support and why?
I don't plan on voting, because I don't feel confident enough in any of the potential candidates.
2.2 Environment
We support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Pollution and misuse of resources cause damage to our ecosystem. Governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet's climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.