Ron Paul’s bipartisan attack on the Fed »
Posted By Eagle_Eye 4 months ago in Business & FinanceRon Paul's legislative history is a lesson in principled failure. Among the bills he has co-sponsored: ending U.S. cooperation with the United Nations, a repeal of antitrust law "to restore the inherent benefits of the market economy," and stripping the government of the right to set a minimum wage. Just last week, he again introduced a bill "to repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990," which would presumably make schools less safe but which would reinforce our right to bear arms. For Paul, ideology almost always trumps politics.
None of these bills, I should note, have picked up much support. And Paul's track record with economic legislation isn't any better. His perennial efforts — shifting the country back toward a gold standard, abolishing the personal income tax, and dismantling the Federal Reserve — are nonstarters. They so change the very fabric of this country that Paul can't marshal his colleagues to his side.
Read Full Story at msnbc.msn.com »
383 Views Share Story 23 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Eagle_Eye
I am a female who has lived a complex life with complex situations and have learned a lot from my experiences.
I love the Environment ...
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 23 (view all)
-
-
JerrySmithRulesComment removed: Hard Banned2 Replies
-
80%
tadair9194 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
clearly written by a liberal who could barely muster the courage to say that they actually support one of Ron Paul's ideas. heaven forbid we actually audit the murky bank that got us in this mess.
Reply
Allow me to put this opener into perspective:
"Ron Paul's legislative history is a lesson in [principles]. Among the bills he has co-sponsored: [obeying the Constitution], [obeying the Constitution], and [obeying the Constitution]. Just last week, he again introduced a bill "to [obey the Constitution]," which would [be a nice change for once]. For Paul, [swearing to uphold the Constitution] ... always trumps politics. "-
jaspersneedComment removed: Spam
-
-
-
-
-
25%
Jeboba4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I used to have some respect for Ron Paul but his totally lunatic ranting of late has totally lost me! He wants to abolish the department education, department of health, etc. because they are not specifically spelled out in the constitution? What rubbish and stupidity.
Reply-
75%
tadair9194 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the department of education wasn't even introduced until carter. that means magically most of us were somehow educated without government holding our hand to get through the lunch line.
Reply
do you remember "leave no child behind?" teaching to the test. yeah. Dept of Education really did a fine job making our kids smarter with that one.
Fifty years ago we were the best in math and science. Other countries had a brain drain problem because everyone who could afford it sent their kids to our schools to get a decent education. Now, what are we? 26th overall? Our kids are coming out of school dumber and more broke than ever. -
-
100%
fjgalt4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Federal government is only authorized to do what the Constitution permits it to do, nothing more. To give it more power, amendments must be made and passed.
Reply
From the Supreme Court decision on Marbury vs. Madison, 1803
"The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.
"If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law: if the latter part be true, then written constitutions are absurd attempts, on the part of the people, to limit a power, in its own nature illimitable."
From the U.S. Constitution...
9th Amendment The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
(In other words, the citizens have rights other than those listed in the first eight and succeeding amendments.)
10th Amendment The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
(In other words, the federal government is only authorized to exercise those powers permitted by the Constitution and all other powers belong to the states and people.)
-
-
stalemateComment removed: Retracted by user
-
Neutral
willottica4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Just last week, he again introduced a bill "to repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990," which would presumably make schools less safe but which would reinforce our right to bear arms.
Reply
My opinion of the mentioned sponsorships by Ron Paul:
Ending cooperation with the UN - Disagree. It behooves every country in the world to make an effort to act together in the best interests of all.
repeal of antitrust law - Hell no. If you want to restore the power of the market economy, you don't get rid of regulations, you get rid of subsidies. Regulations can be handled by the law of supply and demand without affecting the balance, subsidies throw the balance off completely (by artificially increasing supply).
stripping the government of the right to set a minimum wage -- This is harder. I think though, a minimum wage goes along with the abolition of slavery (which the law of supply and demand doesn't protect against). As a people, we believe there is a certain minimum standard of life that should be achievable if one is willing to work for it.
repeal the Gun-Free School Zones act -- This one I kindof agree with. Why should school zones (especially colleges filled with adults) be a special case? Why shouldn't states be able to set their own laws? Why shouldn't teachers also have the right to bear arms (provided that they have no right to pull them on students)?
And finally making the fed accountable (and/or abolishing it) -- This I agree with. Constitution prevents a central bank? There shouldn't be one. The power of a central bank certainly shouldn't be placed in the hands of unaccountable private citizens. I hope more congressmen join with Ron Paul on this, and am disappointed that Obama would seek to give the Fed more power without guaranteeing more oversight.-
100%
tadair9194 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the author got it wrong when he said he wanted to end cooperation with the UN, by the way.
Reply
Paul says we should leave the UN, not cease talking to them. It's not like the UN is the only way to communicate with the outside world, anyway. The UN is just a do-nothing, pay a lot globalization scheme that removes our national sovereignty.
that means he would want real diplomacy, and not this pretense of diplomacy where the U.N. goes and talks and try to pass resolutions, like the war they started with Korea.
It's about sovereignty and it's about obeying the Constitution.
-
More News
Daily Finance
Boeing's move to South Carolina cuts 787's costs, but risks labor turbulence
McDonald's sees slack U.S. demand, so it's cooking up dollar breakfast deals
Fiat pulls the plug on Chrysler's electric car program
Fewer home mortgages are under water as values stabilize
G20 nations agree to continue stimulus, split on financial transactions tax
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.