If you are going to attack Ron Paul's (or anyone's) positions on the issues, then attack their positions on the issues, not what some one else says.
My point is that you are using the pi$$-poorest excuse for an argument against someone.
If Charles Manson had supported Ronald Reagan, would you have used Manson's position on issues as a reason to attack Ronald Reagan? That is the sort of logic you are throwing at me.
As for the alphabet soup of government agencies, it seems the greatest use for them our current government has is to stovepipe their information to prevent comparing notes (as in the Gorelick Memo during Clinton's administration), hobbling them to prevent disclosure of potential wrongdoings within the administration. It was apparent under Clinton, and that led to 9/11 in part because those selfsame agencies were disabled in re information sharing.
You are left with calling him a "nut", but you have not really been able to tell me why you think that.
I, personally, have no problem with returning our government to within its Constitutional bounds, which would eliminate over half of the Federal Agencies currently sucking our economy dry, and stop much of the crap going on in DC right now.
Re-read your Constitution. Great stuff, that, and it provides no authority for many of the things we spend our grandchildren's (as yet) unearned dollars on.
listen alright
you like Paul
I do not
You think he’s alright
I do not
I think with the things he says and yes I have given you a couple of points why I think he’s a nut.
I have met and talked to some of his supporters and while some are OK many I have met are nuts
that is how it is.