Yeah, man, we should just give up our civil liberties and let the state governments decide what basic rights individuals have...that sure worked out realllly well in the past.
Screw the Bill of Rights!
Screw the Bill of Rights!
Actually, no 14th Amendment right now would make segregation mandatory in places like Alabama, where segregation is mandated by their state Constitution. Moreover, it would also result in other things like some states forcing all people running for office to have particular religious beliefs.
These are actual real world problems that would come into immediate effect and are only not observed because of the 14th Amendment and the resulting incorporation doctrine. So a vote against Ron Paul is a vote for civil liberties and rights.
Ron Paul is the most anti-civil liberties candidate out there today.
Yeah, man, we should just give up our civil liberties and let the state governments decide what basic rights individuals have...that sure worked out realllly well in the past.
Screw the Bill of Rights!
LOL Paul Bots are clueless about what the constitution says, just like Ron Paul.
FYI The Supremacy Clause does not say all federal law is the supreme law of the land. Nor does it say the states are bound by the bill of rights. Please study the supremacy clause, federal and state powers under the constitution, and the 14th amendment.
Here's the Supremacy Clause
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
So are you saying the bill of rights is not part of the constitution?
Yeah, man, we should just give up our civil liberties and let the state governments decide what basic rights individuals have...that sure worked out realllly well in the past.
Screw the Bill of Rights!
I am concerned about Mr Paul's age. I remember how Mr Reagan was in his second adminstration.
Your assumption that he assumes that all 50 states will, in a conspiracy, strip our civil liberties in an organized, deliberate way, when laws are up to them, is more nutty than the paulbots or candidate Paul you openly criticize.Your assumption that all 50 states will, in a conspiracy, strip our civil liberties in an organized, deliberate way, when laws are up to them, is more nutty than the paulbots or candidate Paul you openly criticize.
Your assumption that all 50 states will, in a conspiracy, strip our civil liberties in an organized, deliberate way, when laws are up to them, is more nutty than the paulbots or candidate Paul you openly criticize.
Here's the Supremacy Clause
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
So are you saying the bill of rights is not part of the constitution?
Maybe not all 50 states, but you are a naive child if you think that many states won't strip away certain rights.
You are a complete idiot if you think that the states are just going to start "stripping away our rights". Float this around in your pea brain, those same states ...legalize gay marriage, drugs, abortion, and create more freedoms that the federal government doesn't. You assumption that they will turn everyone into slaves is as absurd as you recent shtick here has been.
It's already on the books, Paulbot. Examples would be Alabama's constitution still requiring segregation (and their active refusal to remove this from their constitution) and other states requiring belief in a supreme being to pursue political office.
Yet another example of a Paulbot who has no idea about reality. LOL.
I now expect the Paulbot to get angry. Get angry, Paulbot!
Angry? LOL, you're the one that wants to round up everyone that doesn't agree with you and ship them out of the US. You really think that a fool like you crying "Paulbot" (you need some new material by the way) is going to make me "angry" BWAHAHA? I find your projection kind of interesting, but other than that, you are irrelevant, fun to poke, and laugh at, but irrelevant.
How, exactly, would he be the greatest ever?
His economic policies would return us to the 19th century. Returning to the gold standard would almost instantly destroy our ability to be an effective export country, it would open us up further to countries depreciating their currencies and flooding our country with cheap goods, it would instantly trigger huge amounts of wealth redistribution to the upper classes, inevitably triggering riots and/or revolution.
His definition of "rights" would return us to the 19th century. Gays, women and african americans (as well as other minorities) would suffer huge setbacks in rights. More riots/revolutions.
What I don't understand is what was so fucking great about the 19th century? Does anybody even know how much life sucked then?
We have achieved *HUGE* strides in making and keeping this country as the best in the world. We have problems but reverting back to 100+ years ago isn't the way to solve problems, it's hearkening back to what never really was. In the 99 years since the Federal Reserve was created we went from a country barely on the world stage to the greatest economic superpower on the planet. In the last 100 years we have improved the rights, health, wealth of every person in this country.
What the fuck is so appealing to reverting back?
You are a complete idiot if you think that the states are just going to start "stripping away our rights". Float this around in your pea brain, those same states ...legalize gay marriage, drugs, abortion, and create more freedoms that the federal government doesn't. You assumption that they will turn everyone into slaves is as absurd as you recent shtick here has been.
Oh yeah? And just how do you think those "jobs" are paid for? Don't you get it? The military-industrial complex is designed to break down the working middle class so they can consolidate control globally without the pesky middle class being able to stop them.Sure he's qualified. But NO I don't want him as president. His isolationist (err... "noninterventionist" bfffshhh, yeah right) foreign policy and desire to cut the military budget more than 50% automatically disqualify him in my eyes. And yeah, that military industrial complex means jobs (which we need right now in the current depression).