Posted on 01/11/2007 4:32:27 PM PST by dogbyte12
Rep. Ron Paul has filed papers in Texas to create a presidential exploratory committee that will allow him to raise money, the Associated Press reported late Thursday. The nine-term congressman from southeast Texas was the Libertarian nominee for president in 1988 and received more than 400,000 votes, the AP reported. This time he plans to run as a Republican.
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
On the other hand, what would have been the problem with passing and ratifying a Constitutional amendment specifically authorizing such, before appropriating funds for multi-year projects? I don't think any World War II planes were multi-year projects the way some later ones have been, and surely World War II had demonstrated the value of having an Air Corps. What would have been the opposition to a Constitutional Amendment authorizing the Air Force as an entity in its own right with the ability to receive multi-year appropriations like those given to the Navy?
If one grants Congress the power to act as it sees fit without needing Constitutional authorization, so long as it declares its actions to be "necessary", then any limits to Congressional power become meaningless. Practically anything can be declared to be "necessary".
Why do you think that airplanes can not be part of the army? They were all through ww2.
Congressman Ron Paul: Surrender works for me.
The Army has operated a lot of aircraft since WWII and continues to do so.
Why couldn't the Navy be part of the Army?
Thank you for calling anyone who disagrees with you a "moron." That really lifts the debate to an intellectual level.
I cannot wait to see if the "usual suspects" turn up to bash him like they have Rudy and Mitt and McCain.
If they don't, this could be their guy!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What a prophecy!
I also think that our founders would not mind NASA at all....
bump
No, they wouldn't have. And they wouldn't have minded an Air Force, and they wouldn't have launched privateers to go get al-quaida instead of a standing Army and a standing Air Force.
It's about divining their intent if they were writing the document today, using the exact same principles they used when they wrote it then.
That's not it. He literally stated this was a war brought on by Christians wanting to attack Iraq because it was Muslim.
Because some large ships take more than two years to build.
Typically, with such a large project, the purchaser will make a down-payment and sign an agreement to make payments on some schedule typically related to the builder's progress. A builder will want a commitment that the project isn't going to be abandoned before it's completed without some sort of severance payment. Absent such a commitment, a builder is going to want to charge so much up front for the project that once the bulk of the money is received the builder may no longer have much interest in its timely completion unless the government agrees to substantially overpay for the project.
One thing that people needs to understand, when this nation was created there was no planes, no rockets also there was no Al Qeda threat to deal with....
There are strict constructionists, (and I consider myself one of them), and then there are constitutional absolutionists who want to wear 1700s blinders and ignore what the Founders would have clearly permitted had technology advanced to today's levels.
There are a lot of wealth redistribution programs in this country from welfare to farm subsidies that I don't think have any plausible basis on a federal level when looking at the Constitution.
But a constitutional reading that says we should defend ourself against bin Laden by unleashing pirates is just plain looney tunes.
Perhaps someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Army installations are indeed appropriated two years at a time. There would be certain inefficiencies in doing so, but most land-based projects could be subdivided into pieces such that a partially-completed project would still have some utility. By contrast, a partially-built boat or airplane would be pretty much useless (especially since much of the interior has to be built before the hull can be made watertight).
It's possible that Congress has avoided any extended appropriations for the Air Force. Perhaps some other FReepers more knowledgeable than I can elaborate. On the other hand, if that's the case I would suggest that a Constitutional Amendment establishing procedures for longer-term appropriations could greatly improve efficiency and help to ensure projects get completed in timely fashion.
Finally, a "true" conservative Cindy Sheehan can embrace.
Well... Without making a personal judgement about Iraq, may I just mention that I have heard it said that if you are in hole the first thing you should do is stop digging. At least entertain the idea instead of going full knee-jerk.
And even thinking about voting for the Manchurian Candidate, who by the way doesn't wash his hands after visiting the men's room, would indicate a certain lack of understanding about morality and personal hygeiene. Seriously, the guy was a poor pilot and not someone you would like to have a beer with... You want to trust him with your country?
It gives me a headache. Paul wants to be limited to what the Constitutional Convention of the late 1700s explicitly set out and nothing more.
Those visionaries would reject his viewpoint in a nanosecond if they had known what that was.
Ron Paul is an old fart, a weird thing out there in the Republican Party, and nobody to be taken seriously. This candidacy may be about one last hurrah, or it may be about getting campaign money to build a vacation house.
It's not about issues. We all held our nose and voted for him.
Oddly enough, Paul seems to have figured out how to do that.
She’lll have to crowbar him from Kucinich.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.