CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Stupid evangelicals at it again. Huckabee wins
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Stupid evangelicals at it again. Huckabee wins - Page 2

post #51 of 70
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barzun
They would be today. This is not 1780. To not even attempt to understand context- to ignore that there has been 230 years of change worldwide, the greatest and most rapid change in such a period of time in human history- is insane.
When I say his vision is closest to the founders it doesnt mean I want to live like 1780. I want our leaders to follow their oath which is to follow the constitution. If something needs to be updated in the constitution then it should be amended. The constitution can be changed, if we dont follow our basic laws this country will become like every other fascist country that has ever came to power. I love liberty and everyone knows we're headed to a police state.
post #52 of 70
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anyawatchin Angel
They were slave owners though.

Paul wants to get rid of the Deparment of Education. I can't see many Dems or Repubs thinking that's a good idea.

And correct me if I'm wrong but he wants all troops out of foreign locations such as Korea and Germany. That seems like a very bad idea.

Reagen talked about getting rid of the Dept of Edu.

This is from Paul website which discusses this....


The federal government does not own our children. Yet we act as if it does by letting it decide when, how, and what our children will learn. We have turned their futures over to lobbyists and bureaucrats.

I support giving educational control back to parents, who know their children better than any politician in D.C. ever will.

The federal government has no constitutional authority to fund or control schools. I want to abolish the unconstitutional, wasteful Department of Education and return its functions to the states. By removing the federal subsidies that inflate costs, schools can be funded by local taxes, and parents and teachers can directly decide how best to allocate the resources.

To help parents with the costs of schooling, I have introduced H.R. 1056, the Family Education Freedom Act, in Congress. This bill would allow parents a tax credit of up to $5,000 (adjustable after 2007 for inflation) per student per year for the cost of attendance at an elementary and/or secondary school. This includes private, parochial, religious, and home schools.

Another bill I have sponsored, H.R. 1059, allows full-time elementary and secondary teachers a $3,000 yearly tax credit, thus easing their financial burden and encouraging good teachers to stay in an underpaid profession.

Many parents have already shown their desire to be free of federal control by either enrolling their children in private schools or homeschooling them. And students enrolled in these alternatives have consistently performed better and tested higher than those in state-run schools.

Years of centralized education have produced nothing but failure and frustrated parents. We can resurrect our public school system if we follow the Constitution and end the federal education monopoly.




And why do we need 50,000 troops in Korea?
post #53 of 70
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pop Zeus
How about eliminating the income tax for starters? He wants to eliminate the Dept of Education? He wants to deport all illegal immigrants? He's an isolationist, which is another deeply flawed position to take. I think the quality of life under a President Ron Paul would sink to the bottom. Right quick.

My ultimate problem is that I think the libertarian position is a flawed philosophy at its core since it cannot be applied to the real world in a self-sustaining way. I just checked Ron Paul's website. He has no infrastructure policy, no real energy policy, no initiatives of transforming our economy or creating new jobs. Then again, none of the Republicans are addressing this in a meaningful way. They talk about tax cuts as if they will magically solve problems.

Libertarians and Republicans share a real disdain for government (not to mention an irrational worship of capitalism,) but I think it's a straw man argument. The fact is the private sector simply cannot solve all of society's ills and that there is a role for a strong, just government in our lives. Arguing the Libertarian position is as foolish as arguing that government is the solution to everything.

This notion of turning back the clock to the founding fathers is untenable and nonsensical. The founding fathers knew at the time that the Constitution and their democratic experiment was a work in progress. They couldn't predict the industrial revolution, the internet, global warming, the military-industrial complex, globalization and multi-national corporations. Libertarians choose to ignore all of these things in favor of romanticizing the past, to the detriment of the American people.
Income Tax
He does want to get rid of the income tax. If we got rid of it today the revenue that government gets would be at the level it was 10 years ago. You dont think we could cut spending to levels from 1998? Think of how much money is wasted through government beauacracy.

Dept of Edu
See my post above.

Illegals
Whats wrong with kicking out illegal aliens that are in our country? In the 80's we gave in and let them stay and now theres 12 million more. If we let them stay the next wave will come full force. Besides these illegals use our schools and hospitals, when the hospitals close because they care for people who cant pay where does that leave our citizens?
post #54 of 70
Thread Starter 
You know what's good about Ron Paul is that he's making everyone think and debate. I hear some of his views in the media being debated and it's a very good thing. Look how many good discussions we have here, this is good for America.
post #55 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthSidious
You know what's good about Ron Paul is that he's making everyone think and debate. I hear some of his views in the media being debated and it's a very good thing. Look how many good discussions we have here, this is good for America.
At least you're starting to realize that he's not a viable candidate.
post #56 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthSidious
Illegals
Whats wrong with kicking out illegal aliens that are in our country? In the 80's we gave in and let them stay and now theres 12 million more. If we let them stay the next wave will come full force. Besides these illegals use our schools and hospitals, when the hospitals close because they care for people who cant pay where does that leave our citizens?
Human beings...not 'illegals'. I'm sorry, but if your issue is that you need to be a citizen of this country or else you deserve to die of cancer, your vote shouldn't count.

Of course, there's also the matter of how ridiculous such a scenario is. Hospitals so overrun with illegal immigrants ("They're coming out of the walls, doctor! What do we do?" "We pray, nurse. We pray") that they cannot help paying patients. The industry of medicine is doing just fine, thank you, even if they help people without greencards. In fact, we have so much fucking money invested in medicine, we spend billions of dollars not curing cancer, but finding newer and better boner pills. Take a sip of reality.
post #57 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barzun
I'm saying it doesn't matter how the war started, the war's on. It's as gone as Gettysburg.

That's a very dangerous way to think. We need as much discussion over how and why this was allowed to happen so something this horrific won't happen again.
post #58 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthSidious
Im sick of having money in the bank and it's being eaten by inflation every day.
Wow, are you going to enjoy the return to the gold standard.
post #59 of 70
I wouldn't want him in office but I love having Paul in the GOP debates and agree that he's elevating the dialog. It's awesome that the lunatic is the only one who doesn't sound like he's reciting lines on a sitcom.

That said, his philosophy on the Dept. of Education is scary. The DoE is a disaster without a doubt, but eliminating it is not the answer and will make the situation a thousand times worse, pure intentions or no.
post #60 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Paul
To help parents with the costs of schooling, I have introduced H.R. 1056, the Family Education Freedom Act, in Congress. This bill would allow parents a tax credit of up to $5,000 (adjustable after 2007 for inflation) per student per year for the cost of attendance at an elementary and/or secondary school. This includes private, parochial, religious, and home schools.

Another bill I have sponsored, H.R. 1059, allows full-time elementary and secondary teachers a $3,000 yearly tax credit, thus easing their financial burden and encouraging good teachers to stay in an underpaid profession.
Holy shit, is he out of touch! Five thousand dollars won't get you through the door of most private schools in the states let alone allow your kid(s) to attend. And three thousand for a tax break to a profession that is already underpaid by about fifteen thousand a year is a straight kick in the nuts.

I've never hated one group of political believers in my life but the libertarians sure are coming close.
post #61 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guttenberg Fan Club
Human beings...not 'illegals'. I'm sorry, but if your issue is that you need to be a citizen of this country or else you deserve to die of cancer, your vote shouldn't count.

Of course, there's also the matter of how ridiculous such a scenario is. Hospitals so overrun with illegal immigrants ("They're coming out of the walls, doctor! What do we do?" "We pray, nurse. We pray") that they cannot help paying patients. The industry of medicine is doing just fine, thank you, even if they help people without greencards. In fact, we have so much fucking money invested in medicine, we spend billions of dollars not curing cancer, but finding newer and better boner pills. Take a sip of reality.
Regardless of the medical care situation, illegal immigrants are just that...here illegally. Their status as human beings is irrelevant. Show me any other country that will accept immigrants, allow them to partake of government (local and/or federal) programs and not go through the process of becoming naturalized citizens. I'm not saying that some of the scenarios that have been presented are not ridiculous, but there has to be some standard of protection for a country and its legal citizens.
post #62 of 70
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cervaise
Wow, are you going to enjoy the return to the gold standard.

I would like it very much actually.
post #63 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybeanbag
With all due respect, madamoiselle yt, elevating the dialog amongst that bunch is like telling dick and fart jokes to break the tension after someone mentions that they date-raped a few people.
Jesus, if I had the rep I'd give it.
post #64 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybeanbag
...what?
Just like I said. The "they're human beings!!!" argument is irrelevant in regards to immigration status; nobody has accused them of being 3-toed sloths or anything. The fact that they are human is indisputable, but who cares? They're here illegally! Maybe it sounds heartless or whatever, but so what? Let 'em follow the naturalization process like everybody else, or be human beings in their own country.
post #65 of 70
Yeah, man! Who cares about their kids who had no say in how they came to this country! No vaccines! No education! That'll teach 'em!
post #66 of 70
Romney should have spent his ad money on hiring Naomi Watts to say "Fuckabee!"
post #67 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybeanbag
Again...what?

The moment your compassion for another living, breathing human being is trumped by their status as a citizen, your status as a human being is questionable. You haven't accused them of being three-toed sloths, sure, but you have no problem with talking about illegals like they're expendable.
I can kind of see your point, but you're not seeing mine. I have compassion for others, sure. The problem is, at what point do you say 'enough'? You cannot help every single person in the world who wants to come to this country.

Also, I do have a problem with my tax dollars being used to help people who are not here legally. There's already too many citizens of this country who need help, and the focus has been turned completely away from them (especially in this election so far).
post #68 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybeanbag
Of course not, and I never meant to imply that doing that was a possibility. But there's a vile, hateful level of rhetoric going around that specifically targets illegals, which is disconcerting.

They're spoken of as subhuman sponges who make absolutely no contribution to society short of gridlock in our emergency rooms. People jump at the chance to make racist comments when the issue is brought up, and it's hard to have a sensible discussion about it when the people you try to discuss it with are apoplectic with red-faced, misguided white rage at the audacity of people trying to better their lives.
I can see that, and I hope I didn't come off that way. I grew up in South Texas (literally right at the Mexican border), and I saw many instances of people crossing the border and using American programs (specifically food stamps and medical care), then went right back across the border again. No tax money is generated from that. The abuses of state and federal programs were (and probably still are) rampant there, so I have a kind of skewed view of the topic. However, I did have friends who were here illegally, but worked hard and contributed to the economy just like you said. Also, they were trying hard to become actual citizens...I saw many more who just wanted to use the programs available and leave. This should not happen.


Quote:
I'd like to see the number of tax dollars that go to treatment for illegals, if anyone has links to stats and such. My understanding is that the amount of illegal immigrants with fake SSNs still funnel money into the system when they get a job where tax money is automatically withdrawn, yet they don't reap the rewards. Additionally, illegal immigrants still have to pay state sales taxes, which go to the obvious places such as improvement of infrastructure, etc.
I don't have the stats that you mentioned, but I would like to see them as well. Most of the illegals I saw didn't have jobs that required SSNs, yet they were able to use fake SSNs for food stamps, medical care, etc. Once the bills went out to the fake addresses that they used they were returned. Guess who has to cover the difference. Many times, they use a couple of different addresses (I saw up to 5 once) for food stamps that were for the same person, and the addresses were abandoned houses. The postal carriers know that no one lives at those addresses but they still have to deliver them.

Like I said before, I had friends who were here illegally, but with the sole purpose of gaining citizenship. They had to work here to save up the money to do it since their own country has such a crappy economy. But, I also saw many more who were more than willing to drain the system dry and move on. They are the ones I have a problem with.
post #69 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barzun
I know he said it. I said your argument was disingenuous.
Incorrect.

Quote:
Your argument was not that he said he intended to install permanent bases in Iraq, it was that because he wants to permanently occupy a country we invaded "under false pretenses", he was immoral. That was your argument as I understood it.

Completely correct. You don't have to agree with me, but that's your problem. It doesn't make me disingenuous.

Quote:
If you can show me a quote of McCain's in which he says anything like "It's okay to maintain a permanent military presence in Iraq so long as it only costs Iraqi lives", well, to quote Orson Welles, I'll go down on you.
Single malt scotch will do, thanks. Oban Double Barrel.

Quote:
That is dishonest and cheap of you. He said- and I know this because I just watched the interview- that Americans would not have a problem with an occupying force remaining in Iraq if American soldiers weren't dying- he said, in effect, that Americans didn't mind occupations- we don't mind having bases in Germany, Japan, Korea- but only casualties.
He didn't put up much of an argument, so I can only assume he's okay with permanently occupying countries under false pretenses as long as only natives are being killed as well. Americans who think such an occupation is okay are morally bankrupt, and that includes McCain.

Quote:
And he's correct.
No he isn't. The majority favour withdrawal from Iraq, not a presence lasting decades or possibly a century.

Quote:
How you can spin that the way you did with a straight face is beyond me.
What you cannot understand is not my problem.

Quote:
America can maintain a base in Iraq and not police the nation or overtly take part in their civil wars, and it would not be "appalling".
I'd be appalled. Just because you're trained to think it's okay for the US government to throw its weight where it isn't welcome does not make it so.

Quote:
McCain made no statement to the effect that- and did not imply that- he values American lives more than Iraqi lives, or that it's all right for Iraqis to die but not Americans.
Of course he did. Unless you think he was inventing stories about what most Americans want for the sake of disagreeing with those invented stories.

Quote:
The point you seem to be missing is that he's not running for president of Iraq, but of America- therefore the welfare of American, not Iraqi, troops is his concern.
Yes, that's obvious through his endorsement of permanently stationing them in the middle of a hostile situation. Permanent occupation of Iraq is not necessary to save American lives.

I don't miss the point, his cavalier attitude toward the lives of non-Americans is precisely the point. It's not that I don't understand what the guy's saying, it's that I do understand and I think it's awful.

Quote:
This is to McCain's credit- the odds that the democratic president would do much different than McCain in Iraq are pretty low.
What Democrats might do is not the issue here.

Quote:
On the contrary, we have many businesses occupying Iraq.
Yes, That was the point. And that makes the US the bad guys. And that's why permanent military bases are a bad thing. Even if it's only the local towelheads killing each other off, it's still a bad thing.


Quote:
Well in this area I have no goals, as I'm not running for office.
That was the generic 'you', pedant.

Quote:
I imagine McCain's goals are to promote the welfare of his nation, rather than try to appeal to some imaginary all-knowing moral arbiter by going around atoning for past administrations' sins at the expense of American interests.
If you think Republicans are concerned about the welfare of the US, then you haven't been paying attention. And not permanently occupying Iraq isn't atoning for past crimes, it's merely ceasing to commit them.

Quote:
Regardless of the morality of our occupation of Iraq (and it's as moral as anything else- when we're talking nations, morality is whatever you can get away with),
That's bullshit. I see I'm wasting my time debating right and wrong with you. Bye.
post #70 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthSidious
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cervaise
Wow, are you going to enjoy the return to the gold standard.
I would like it very much actually.
Good luck with that.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Stupid evangelicals at it again. Huckabee wins