Dew Knight
Doing the Dew, Old School Style
Vote for Ron Paul… Maybe
Author:
Russ - Posted on Thursday, July 26th 2007
I put a video up on Ron Paul a couple of days ago. This guy has got a lot of the right ideas, but unfortunately he is a constitutionalist. That means he doesn’t vote for legislature unless it is expressly authorized by the constitution. That would have been great 200 years ago, but the world evolves, and some things need to go through that the founding fathers (yes fathers) couldn’t foresee.
He does call himself a republican, and I love that he wants less taxes, and smaller government. He doesn’t support the war in Iraq, which I don’t exactly agree with. He has a lot of perfect ideas, but up pops the constitutionalist thing again.
So, Ron Paul is almost perfect for the presidency. If only we could find somebody just like him, without the whole constitutionalist deal, and then I’ll be happy.
But please oh please don’t let Hillary be president. The nanny laws pushed by congress now are bad enough, if she’s president, I might just die. I might just.
| 2.5 |
Categories
Recent Comments
Drop It
5 Responses for "Vote for Ron Paul… Maybe"
“This guy has got a lot of the right ideas, but unfortunately he is a constitutionalist. That means he doesn’t vote for legislature unless it is expressly authorized by the constitution.”
The fact that you list this as a weak point is troubling, but common. Department of Education FTW!
The Constitutional issues can be corrected with proper amendments, and Ron Paul’s position is that we can’t just go around skipping that step.
I disagree with him on several issues too, but the Constitutional argument is one where I am absolutely in agreement with him.
If the things that are not authorized are so important to enact or keep, it’s a simple matter of getting an amendment passed. Just get a 2/3 vote of Congress and enough states to ratify it, and bingo - it’s not authorized. Until then, it isn’t.
“That would have been great 200 years ago, but the world evolves, and some things need to go through that the founding fathers (yes fathers) couldn’t foresee.”
And that’s precisely why the founding fathers have allowed future generations to pass constitutional amendments. The constitution is there to protect your natural RIGHTS, quaint things such as freedom of speech and habeas corpus. That is unlike our president who says “The constitution is just a damn piece of paper”.
I agree that the Founders couldn’t foresee everything, but I’m sure they always meant for the Constitution to protect individual rights. A lot of suggested amendments seem to want to reduce those rights, and get more government involvement in our lives. That’s why they made it so damn hard to add anything to it.
Thanks for the comments.
What I don’t like is I see that he’s voted no on pretty much everything. If he were president, what would the vetoes be like?
I don’t like many of the things coming from congress right now, and very much support Downsize DC and the Read the Bills Act, but like I said, things do need to be added to the constitution, some things in the constitution need to be changed, and some things need to stay rock solid.
Leave a reply