Slashdot Mirror

So how about how Paul wants to repeal birthright citizenship, which is part of the 14th Amendment? OK, fine, it's not part of the constitution proper. But neither is freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. Also, he made a rather veiled attack against gays; he wants to [prohibit] the expenditure of Federal funds to any organization which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style. Now, this could be construed as reduction of federal funding in general, but he specifically singles out organizations that promote homosexuality.

He also opposes a renewal of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and thinks the Constitution is "replete with references to God", which it really isn't.

Re: your sig. Ron Paul on Martin Luther King: "a world-class adulterer" who "seduced underage girls and boys" and "replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration"
Ron Paul on the closet: "I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities."
Ron Paul on San Francisco gays: "[T]hese men don't really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners." Also, "they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick."
Ron Paul on protecting oneself against 'urban youth' "If you have to use a gun on a youth, you should leave the scene immediately, disposing of the wiped off gun as soon as possible. Such a gun cannot, of course, be registered to you, but one bought privately (through the classifieds, for example)."

Also:
Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy, pull out of the UN, end birthright citizenship, and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan.

Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he's against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories.

Re: your sig. Ron Paul on Martin Luther King: "a world-class adulterer" who "seduced underage girls and boys" and "replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration"
Ron Paul on the closet: "I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities."
Ron Paul on San Francisco gays: "[T]hese men don't really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners." Also, "they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick."
Ron Paul on protecting oneself against 'urban youth' "If you have to use a gun on a youth, you should leave the scene immediately, disposing of the wiped off gun as soon as possible. Such a gun cannot, of course, be registered to you, but one bought privately (through the classifieds, for example)."

Also:
Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy, pull out of the UN, end birthright citizenship, and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan.

Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he's against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories.

Re: your sig. Ron Paul on Martin Luther King: "a world-class adulterer" who "seduced underage girls and boys" and "replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration"
Ron Paul on the closet: "I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities."
Ron Paul on San Francisco gays: "[T]hese men don't really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners." Also, "they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick."
Ron Paul on protecting oneself against 'urban youth' "If you have to use a gun on a youth, you should leave the scene immediately, disposing of the wiped off gun as soon as possible. Such a gun cannot, of course, be registered to you, but one bought privately (through the classifieds, for example)."

Also:
Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy, pull out of the UN, end birthright citizenship, and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan.

Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he's against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories.

Re: your sig. Ron Paul on Martin Luther King: "a world-class adulterer" who "seduced underage girls and boys" and "replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration"
Ron Paul on the closet: "I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities."
Ron Paul on San Francisco gays: "[T]hese men don't really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners." Also, "they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick."
Ron Paul on protecting oneself against 'urban youth' "If you have to use a gun on a youth, you should leave the scene immediately, disposing of the wiped off gun as soon as possible. Such a gun cannot, of course, be registered to you, but one bought privately (through the classifieds, for example)."

Also:
Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy, pull out of the UN, end birthright citizenship, and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan.

Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he's against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories.

Ron Paul was good friends with Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman, I'm sure you would consider him a "respected" economist. http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul352.html Ron is also a follower of the Austrian School of Economics, a very respected school of economic thought. Ron Paul is a true student of Economics, likely the only candidate that truly understands Economics. I hope you realize that the federal reserve is a PRIVATE enterprise. It has been responsible for the latest housing and dot-com bubbles. I suggest you look at the History of federal banks or reserves and who the federal reserve truly represents. Andrew Jackson has written "I killed the Bank" written on his tombstomb. His reasons for wanting to kill the Second Bank of the United States: "It concentrated an excessive amount of the nation's financial strength in a single institution. It exposed the government to control by foreign interests. It served mainly to make the rich richer. It exercised too much control over members of Congress. It favored northeastern states over southern and western states. " from wikipedia. You think anything has changed??? The current Federal Reserve was by the top families(Morgans, Rothchilds , rochefellars) in Jekyll Island (look it up). Do you think they were looking out for the good of the public? http://www.amazon.com/Thieves-Temple-America-Federal-Reserve/dp/0975965484 Just one point, and this is really scary, especially since I've been studying economics for years and never heard of this until recently. The way CPI was historically calculated is that if a typical basket of goods is steak and wine, they would track the prices of steak and wine over time. BUT, in the early 1990s, the FED decided that if steak and wine became too expensive, people would substitute it with Hamburger and Coke. So the new CPI was not the adjustment for the cost of livings, but instead, it measures the adjustment for the COST OF SURVIVAL. http://www.shadowstats.com/article/56 This is a (still??) free society, so you are allowed to criticize Dr. Paul, but I ask everyone to do some research, his views are soundly footed in economics and history

With credit to Pope Guilty of the SA forums: Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy (which would bar atheists from holding office in Texas, prevent the striking down of antisodomy laws, prevent the government from spending any money to enforce its decisions, among many other things), pull out of the UN, end birthright citizenship, and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan. Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he's against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories. He also said: "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be" and "Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action."

With credit to Pope Guilty of the SA forums: Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy (which would bar atheists from holding office in Texas, prevent the striking down of antisodomy laws, prevent the government from spending any money to enforce its decisions, among many other things), pull out of the UN, end birthright citizenship, and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan. Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he's against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories. He also said: "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be" and "Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action."

With credit to Pope Guilty of the SA forums: Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy (which would bar atheists from holding office in Texas, prevent the striking down of antisodomy laws, prevent the government from spending any money to enforce its decisions, among many other things), pull out of the UN, end birthright citizenship, and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan. Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he's against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories. He also said: "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be" and "Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action."

With credit to Pope Guilty of the SA forums: Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy (which would bar atheists from holding office in Texas, prevent the striking down of antisodomy laws, prevent the government from spending any money to enforce its decisions, among many other things), pull out of the UN, end birthright citizenship, and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan. Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he's against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories. He also said: "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be" and "Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action."

sinister. Sb mentioned "Vitamin D".

two fried cities were substituted for the years of war that had been expected to be necessary to end the Japan part of WWII

• "During the days before that fateful August 6, 1945, General Douglas MacArthur learned that Japan had asked Russia to negotiate a surrender. "We expected acceptance of the Japanese surrender daily," one of his staff members recalled."
• "The bomb had not been necessary either to end the war quickly or to avoid an invasion of the Japanese home islands; morever, 'Truman and his advisers knew it.'"
• "It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons." (as stated by Dwight Eisenhower)
• "From April to August 1945 the Japanese made a number of official attempts to secure a negotiated peace settlement and an end to the war."

But, puhlease give up the single-issue bullshit.

His position on Roe v. Wade is only a symptom, not the whole of his disease. It shows that his position is not one of preferring less government and more freedom, but of simply moving government powers around; and it shows the influence of irrational religious belief on his thoughts and opinions.

It shows that he's anti-science, when he makes statements such as "As an obstetrician, I know that partial birth abortion is never a necessary medical procedure." The whole purpose of intact dilation and extraction (the real name of the procedure) is to avoid damage to the woman's uterus. It is generally safer for the patient that dilation and evacuation. IDX is only "never a necessary medical procedure" if the health of the patient isn't a concern.

This is not a surprise from someone who, for all the noise he makes about the Constitution, believes that "a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution", and who does not accept the reality of evolution.

So, thanks, Dr. Paul, for bringing your medical "expertise" to patients you've never examined, but fuck you very much.

The enemy of good is perfect. You will never find a candidate -- mainstream or fringe -- that perfectly represents every one of your hot button issues, whatever they may be.

Certainly true - I did some work for the Kerry campaign for the general election last time around, despite his bad record on the RKBA and his less than inspiring positions on many other issues. (I still voted Green (Cobb), since I live in a safely blue state.) However bad Kerry was, he had the very important plus of not being batshit crazy like Bush.

That's the issue here - there are hot button issues, and then there are batshit crazy issues. Being pro-torture is a batshit crazy issue. Being unable to accept the reality of biological evolution is a batshit crazy issue. Being in favor of outlawing abortion, of forcing women to carry pregnancies to term at gunpoint (however indirect the threat), is a batshit crazy issue.

Yes, that means that all the Republican candidates, and a large portion of the U.S. in general, are batshit crazy. I'll stand by that.

I'm willing to give ordinary citizens who are perhaps not well educated some slack on holding batshit crazy views - otherwise very nice people can believe in creationism, that most Muslims are terrorists, in the physical reality of extraterrestrial aliens who abduct humans and/or of angels who bring them visions, that Iraq was behind 9/11, or that an zygote is a person because some sort of ghost comes into human egg cells along with the sperm. I can deal with neighbors or coworkers, even students or clients, who have views like this, as I smile and nod and say "That's very interesting, though I'm afraid I can't agree."

But a candidate for office? Batshit crazy views are an immediate disqualification.

Between his views on abortion, the separation of church and state, and evolution, Paul earns three strikes on the batshit-o-meter. Thanks for playing and we have some lovely parting gifts.

If the worst were to come about and elective abortions were outlawed nation-wide, it would not be anywhere near as big a deal as it was before. Women have much more freedom, and more importantly, ability to control their bodies today than they had before.

Huh? If elective abortions were outlawed nation-wide, that would mean exactly that women's freedom and ability to control their bodies was reduced. What you are saying makes no sense.

And if state governments controlling women's bodies "would not be anywhere near as big a deal as it was before", then the U.S. is finished, over, done; the rational few of us ought to just abandon it to the religious extremists.

Here is what Ron Paul wrote on the "secular left's war on religion".

As for Ron Paul's position on abortion, the federal government does have a right to step in IF it is a constitutional matter and the Supreme Court has dictated that it is a constitutional matter based of their reading of the constitution. The bill of rights exists so that minority rights can't be stripped even at the state level.

Are you sure you know where Paul derives his ethics from? Here's what Paul wrote about on the alleged "secular left's war on christmas". As for your arguments about public vs. private education, we really could go back and forth on that discussion all day. But what the discussion will eventually boil down to is that I believe every child deserves a fair chance of moving up the social ladder and public education gives him that chance. A child wouldn't have the same right to an education like he currently enjoys if the DOE was eradicated.

While he the grandparent was uncouth about it, he is right, Ron Paul has a lot of bad ideas.

Ron Paul runs on a platform of states rights and openly says it is so the states can remove those rights currently protected by the Federal government. There is nothing in the earth or the stars that proclaims a state government would be any more sane with guaranteeing our freedoms than a federal government. In fact if you go into the South you'll find state's rights as an excuse for racism as much as anything else, if you go to the bible belt you'll find state's rights as an excuse to teach creationism Christianity using public funds while ignoring the scientific aspects of evolution that would be just as if not more important to a growing mind. Ron Paul doesn't want to limit the government to protect the citizen he wants to limit it to restrict the citizen.

Ron Paul runs on a platform of strict-constitutionalism but he supports amendments to tear down the Full Faith and Credit clause (src: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html). He wants to limit the ability of the supreme court to protect separation of church and state, the right to an abortion, the right for people to have sex with whomever they wish (be it man and women out of wedlock, or woman and woman, or a married couple getting a little freaky) and even the right to marry. (src: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.300.IH:;)

Ron Paul wants to return the legislating of environmental policies to states, but fails to recognize that pollution in one state can cause serious or worse implications in other states.

Ron Paul wants to remove the IRS, but seems to have no firm plan on how to make up lost funds. In some places he has said he won't replace it with anything, in some places he claims to use what amounts to a regressive tax policy to replace it meaning people who make less end up paying more percentage-wise (this is in direct contradiction to reforms suggested by billionaire Warren Buffet).

Again in his currency policy he is unclear, he wants to return us to a system similar to the gold standard and even endorsing multiple currencies. He seems not to recognize the strength of having one clear currency and the fact hat our economy has been for the most part more resilient because we stopped using the gold standard.

There are a number of other issues with his platform, but I'll end on a conciliatory note with the parent. If all RP does is stop the drug war we will be better off, because if he does even 1/10th of the other things we will not be better off.

McCain is a lamer. Sure, I appreciate and sympathize with his being a POW and being tortured, but that doesn't make his welfare/warfare state views correct. Thankfully his campaign has faltered and he has no chance. http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig5/duffy-p3.html

We have limited radio spectrum, allowing anyone to broadcast will cause collisions, either accidentally or on purpose.

But with technology radio stations can be a lot closer together allowing more stations to broadcast in a given area.

Jamming a station that disagrees with you?

"During the 1920s, such a common-law-based order in radio was emerging, with spectrum rights being traded and some court decisions recognizing a right against interference. Unfortunately, the free-market, common-law regime that was beginning to break through the crust of federal regulation was strangled in its cradle by the 1927 Act, which eliminated all individual rights in the radio spectrum. Henceforth, the Federal Radio Commission (later renamed the Federal Communications Commission) would assign frequencies, and naturally politics would play a leading role."

"During the 1920s, the courts were working out precisely such a system of homesteaded private property rights in airwave frequencies. It is because such a private property structure was evolving that Secretary of Commerce Hoover pushed through the Radio Act of 1927, nationalizing ownership of the airwaves."

Then it comes down to who can afford umpteen gigawatts of broadcast power. Pretty hard for the common person to compete.

Have you ever heard two different people trying to talk on radios using the same frequency? I have and it was sometimes hard to make out what was being said by either party. Now if they both had been selling ads and I was a potential advertiser I never would have advertised on either one. Playing music would have been even worse. Two, as was done before the FRC, Federal Radio Commission, renamed the FCC in 1934, the courts were recognizing a right against interference. "During the 1920s, the courts were working out precisely such a system of homesteaded private property rights in airwave frequencies. It is because such a private property structure was evolving that Secretary of Commerce Hoover pushed through the Radio Act of 1927, nationalizing ownership of the airwaves."

Here is Paul's speech in which he confuses the Darfur genocide with the North-South civil war - two completely separate issues (the Sudanese government even said that they were delaying a peace agreement to end the civil war, in order to have a "lasting solution in Darfur").

http://www.lewrockwell.com/knaebel/knaebel11.html

See that article: Are Cancer Cures Being Hidden From the Public?.

/Z

I don't give a rat's ass about democracy. I care about freedom. Democracy is merely a means to an end.

government in disaster relief.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul275.html

Not true. Cops kill lots of people because they *think* they are armed..

Or maybe some of think its fun.. read this, you'll be sick. http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w10.html

Most US citizens with PhDs are underemployed.

The Ph.D. Glut Revisited

...and he will also get rid of stuff like the Federal Reserve. I think it's great that he thinks civil liberties are important, but you need to look at the whole candidate. Some people I know supported Ron Paul for a while and thought he was great, until they researched some of the things he would like to do.

Funny you should claim blind faith. The state, democracy, and constitution worship I read about online every day is no less religious.

Democracy: The God That Failed

He's much more knowledgeable about the American monetary system than most. He's the only person who cared when the Fed stopped reporting the M3. He's obviously not fond of inflation, fiat currencies, or fractional reserve lending. As a result, Ron Paul is in my five ;) He's right between Feingold and Boucher.

He's much more knowledgeable about the American monetary system than most. He's the only person who cared when the Fed stopped reporting the M3. He's obviously not fond of inflation, fiat currencies, or fractional reserve lending. As a result, Ron Paul is in my five ;) He's right between Feingold and Boucher.

He has a more recent update:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance103.html

According to Vance, US forces occupy (most recently): "159 regions of the world: 144 countries and 15 territories."

There are now 192 countries in the world.
The DOD spends approximately $200 Million dollars a *day* maintaining this empire.

With numbers like these, one begins to understand the complaint of other people in the world who express angry at the US for being on thier soil.

When did what happens in Germany effect us in the States?

Oh yeah, Germany is one of the 135 countries that we currently occupy. Here is the list:

Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan
Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, Chile
China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cote D'lvoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic
Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, East Timor, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador
Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana
Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia
Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia
Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique
Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, North Korea, Norway
Oman, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania
Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore
Slovenia, Spain, South Africa, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Sweden
Switzerland, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia
Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom
Uruguay, Venezuela, Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe

source

If it's true that he's gone pro-torture

The torture took myriad forms, each designed to cause pain, anguish, depression and, ultimately, the loss of will to live. The base ingredient in Mr. Padilla's torture was stark isolation for a substantial portion of his captivity.

• This sleep deprivation was achieved in a variety of ways. For a substantial period of his captivity, Mr. Padilla's cell contained only a steel bunk with no mattress.
• He would be shackled and manacled, with a belly chain, for hours in his cell
• The temperature of his cell would be manipulated, making his cell extremely cold for long stretches of time
• In an effort to disorient Mr. Padilla, his captors would deceive him about his location and who his interrogators actually were. Mr. Padilla was threatened with being forcibly removed from the United States to another country, including U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where he was threatened his fate would be even worse than in the Naval Brig.
• ...was threatened with being cut with a knife and having alcohol poured on the wounds
• ...was also threatened with imminent execution.
• ...hooded and forced to stand in stress positions for long durations of time
• ...was given drugs against his will, believed to be some form of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) or phencyclidine (PCP), to act as a sort of truth serum during his interrogations

You're just a right-wing nut. I should have known better.

No, I don't like the right-wing. Right and Left are both wings of the same side of the coin: authoritarians. I'm on the other side of the coin, anti-authoritarian.

Who was President in 1973? What party was he from?

Doesn't matter, both parties conspire to reduce freedom, increase taxation, and use both to support their friends and cronies.

BTW, the market did cause the healthcare crisis. There is an economic phenomenon called "cost disease" that occurs when a skill that can only turn out so much efficiency (such as surgery) fails to keep up with the broader market (which, at large, is in fact efficient and therefore surpasses its inefficient sections). It is no mistake that medicine became a problem around the time that efficiency took off.

If you look carefully at the health care system, you see the obvious causes for the crises: reduced supply of doctors, and a high cost to pay for services.

BOTH of these problems are caused by Congressional force.

1. Congress, the AMA, and the ADA artificially place a cap on new doctors licensed. This reduces the supply of doctors, which increases cost. Low supply + high demand = high price. In a market economy, people could become doctors, putting added competition in the market.

2. The high cost of services comes from two factors: a. the government's money flow into the industry (acquired through theft), and the laws legislating criminal response to what a market economy would provide for. For example, rather than having doctors hold liability insurance, the market economy would let each individual acquire their own liability insurance for each medical treatment based on what they need and what they can afford. This is currently ILLEGAL to get. This way, you would pay for the insurance you need, per treatment, based on the doctor's history with your insurer. Tort lawyers would hate this. This is called negative outcome insurance, and you are a criminal if you try to acquire it.

I find this funny considering you're posting this comment on the INTERNET of all places.

I started my first telecom business as a BBS when I was 11 years old. The Internet may have been a government-started entity, but it was the market that provided what we have today. Heck, I had an X.25 network in my house in my teen years before I could get a decent Internet connection -- and X.25 worked wonderfully for interconnection before the market started providing T1s and ISDL to those willing to foot the bill. The government-designed Internet was not an efficient process, and it would have happened naturally soon enough through X.25 or other communication, too. Remember FidoNet? I remember when the nightly dial-ups started to disappear as more large BBSes had X.25 packet networks to connect real-time through. FidoNet was a market-provided network, and it worked fine for a long time.

Research requires patronage. And that patronage will fund a lot of broken and useless crap.

Nothing is useless, all products have markets, however large or small. Yet some "useless crap" today can be a useful treasure tomorrow, based on what each individual needs and is willing to pay for.

Also, the efficient markets theory isn't true. Companies fund tons of useless, unmarketable crap, too. Look at half the semiconductor and pharm industries.

Stepping stones to finding products and services that they can offer. All my research also helps me find a market for my solutions.

A lot of research is useless. But you don't always know until you get in there and see what things really do. And people do abuse the system. It doesn't matter what system you use. Every system is prone to abuse because there will always being people looking to abuse the system. All the market does is give capitalist interests an excuse to claim their abuses are profitable and therefore no one should bitch because the consumer gets to foot the bill.

The consumer who foots the bill is the same individual who AGREED to foot the bill. Today, taxpayers foot the bill -- taxpayers who do NOT agree to foot each particular expenditure. Consumers spending = voluntary, government taxes = theft. How hard is that to understand?

Think about market-driven research itself before thinking it is so great. Some monkey actually sat down and built the actuarial tables and policies that today are screwing up the healthcare system and making sure that even people who have insurance somehow don't get procedures covered. Yep. Market-driven research really did a lot of good there.

Sorry, my friend, but it was not the market that created the health care problem. The biggest destroyer of cheap and excellent health care in the United States was, guess who? Government, starting with the HMO Act of 1973.

You should check out some economic papers written by Ron Paul who is running for President:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html

You'll find them interesting I'm sure.

"Federal agencies can submit retroactive search warrant requests up to 72 hours after they begin surveilling someone. In 2002, for instance, Attorney General John Ashcroft personally issued more than 170 emergency domestic spying warrants -- permitting agents to carry out wiretaps and search homes and offices for as many as 72 hours before the feds requested a search warrant from the FISA court. He used such powers almost a 100 times as often as attorneys general did before 9/11."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/bovard/bovard17.html

dunno how authoritative the above is, but I've heard similar from several sources

/Let the eeeeeeeaaaaagle sooooooaaaaaaar

Read some of Ron Paul's articles on the economy here:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html

But the wonderful thing about him is that, as a libertarian, he believes that the federal government has no role in deciding these issues.

It's a funny kind of libertarian that doesn't believe in the separation of church and state.

"Amendment X -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. "

Can that be in any more plain English?

Since no where in Article 1 Section 8 is the federal government authorized to create laws on the issue of labor, then by the 10th Amendment, that is strictly a right reserved to the States or the People.

Also, the role of the Supreme Court has unconstitutionally evolved beyond it's role laid out in the Constitution. There is a good book available on the subject here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods70.html

And it is interesting that you say "you can't claim the supreme court is wrong. The supreme court is always right. " So does that mean when the Supreme Court upheld 'separate but equal' and other slavery-like laws that it was correct? Or was it correct when it reversed itself? It' can't be correct in both instances, its either one or the other.

And an amendment to the Constitution allowing the federal government to pass laws on labor would at least be Constitutional, but I would personally not go for it because centralized power invariably leads to corruption and the States better know how to govern themselves than does the Fed.

Dr. Ron Paul's stance of racism is clear:

"Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist.

The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence, not skin color, gender, or ethnicity."

Dr. Ron Paul's stance of racism is clear:

"Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist.

The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence, not skin color, gender, or ethnicity."

I think he has thought things through a bit more than you give him credit for.

Check this:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html

Not to mention the "uncluttered by regulations" part tends to result in highly unsafe products. The list goes on. Somehow, I don't equate "being able to make random knockoffs but cannot do anything without governments approval" to be "true capitalism"

The safety of products sold is a prime reason to use a retailer and not buy wholesale yourself. Will Amazon or CVS or Wal-Mart sell unsafe products? They add their profit overhead to cover their infrastructure, but also to insure against buying faulty or dangerous products. If a product is deemed dangerous, they'll remove it from the market. If they find a large number of dangerous products from a given source, say China, they may go so far as to test products themselves before releasing them to the market. A large retailer can do way more, way faster, than the FDA, USDA or other organizations can. See: Underwriters Laboratories.

As for regulations, China is definitely not a regulated economy as much as the US is. China's provinces ("States") have varying degrees of regulations, with the least regulated ones growing the fastest. Doug Casey says about Shanghai "The dozens of hotels that can compete with those in Bangkok are starting to draw not just businessmen, but tourists. They like the beaches, and the shopping in a tax and regulation-free environment is incredible."

I've visitd Beijing and Shanghai, and I can tell you that government is quickly backing off of entrepreneurs and the business market. The booms in growth are amazing, along with the freedom that even a non-citizen has in starting new businesses. The same can be said about Dubai, where I'd love to at least have residency because of the unlimited opportunity to grow and blossom a business.

If you think that only a laser can blind someone, might I suggest you stare at the sun for a while? Obviously it's not a laser and therefore cannot harm you and I've heard you see the most gorgeous light-show of spots.

Seriously, wake up. No one is saying that this device is going to be designed to blind people or purposefully abused as a matter of policy from the start. It is simply inevitable that it will though. We're talking about something that will emit light intense enough to blind someone temporarily. It is only a matter of time before the device is set on a too powerful setting (accidentally or intentionally), malfunctions, or simply is used on someone who cannot tolerate the same amount of light as an average person. We have a right to discuss these things and present them as serious problems. More importantly, it's incredibly foolish to simply swallow whatever those in power regurgitate. This device is being marketed as being able to disable an entire crowd of people. We should ask ourselves though, do we really need such a device? The police already have methods of dealing with crowds and rioters so why should we give them an additional weapon that has the potential to cripple people for life?

As far as the abuse of this power goes, you are incredibly naive if you think the government never abuses it's power. Just recently we had a story come out about FBI agents that had been abusing the USAPATRIOT act. I seem to recall that when the act was first came into being there were many people, myself included, that warned it would be abused, that it was not just a hypothetical situation but only a matter of time. We had similar dismissals then.

And what about Tasers? There's another non-lethal weapon being pushed quite heavily by police forces around the country. When those first went into circulation people said "Oh no, they won't be abused and look: when they are used, they're non-lethal so it's ok!" Of course now it seems we can't go a week without another story about someone being killed or brutalized by a taser, that simple device that the police will maintain the same self-restriction on use as their firearms. Whether it's shocking an already hand-cuffed teenager in the back of a patrol car, brutalizing a student for refusing to show his ID, or tasering and killing a man in what can only be likened to an execution, the police have not shown that they can effectively use restraint or treat civilians with respect. If you think that this new device will be used even less than tasers when it can disable one or many suspects from a long range, consequences be damned, then you're a fool.

To refresh your memory, think back to the 2006 Duke University lacrosse case. Sophomore Ryan McFadyen, a member of the team and an attendee of the party, sent an email that parodied a bit from the book American Psycho, which is (or at least was) required reading in one of Duke's English Lit classes. The police got their hands on the email and threatened to release it to the press if he didn't admit to witnessing the alledged rape. To his credit, McFayden refused; he was subseqently villified by the press and suspended by the university.

It seems to me that this ruling means that McFadyen now has an excellent chance to pursueing a case against the prosecuter's office.

Ron Paul's disconnect from reality is his own problem.

From the idiotarian headquarters,

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul178.html

"Students of history will recall that the US government's ill-advised coup against Iranian leader Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953 and its subsequent installation of the Shah as the supreme ruler led to intense hatred of the United States and eventually to the radical Islamic revolution of 1979."

Yeah, after Mossadegh stole an oil company and dissolved the Iranian parliament to avoid impeachment:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mossadegh

Ron Paul is no Libertarian. The Libertarian Party is against the initiation of the use of force and the credible threat of force. Mossadegh and the Mullahs do not deserve a pass, stealing is violence, terror is precisely the initiation of violence in order to increase the credibility of further threats of violence.

Rupaul and his gang of thugs are the useless idiots of our times.