Paul's their all

The Boston Globe ^ | September 27, 2007 | By Lisa Wangsness, Globe Staff

[jmeagan]

CHICAGO - Late on a balmy Friday night in Wicker Park, a gentrifying neighborhood just northwest of the Loop, a small tribe of 20-somethings gathers outside a corner bar. Their leader, a petite, energetic 25-year-old named Meghann Walker, hands out leaflets to people heading inside.

"Do you guys know Ron Paul is going to be in town tomorrow?" Walker asks a short-haired young woman in jeans and flip-flops. "There'll be a lot of good people there, that's for sure."

[mnehring]

Petronski, ABCDEFG is right, the rest is posted in 101 & 102, it was an attempt to open the door that wideawake beat me to in a later post about the securing of these for defense (something discussed in Federalist 43 where Madison related part of this to the holding of Forts and how the holding of land cannot infringe on defense.)

[billbears]

The Constitution also says that Congress is empowered to make laws necessary and proper for carrying such powers out.

Ah yes Clause 18. However could we forget about that? The clause big government conservatives hide behind to advocate any sacred cow they may have. Do me a favor. Give Federalist 44 IIRC a read. Delves quite definitely into the intent behind this clause. Sending outdated space buses up for joyrides would not be covered under this clause

Moreover Congress is authorized to defend the nation and enact all laws necessary and proper to that end as well.

Oh yes, the Chinese putting missiles on the moon or even worse space aliens!!

One Constitutional question might be: what if a patent conflicts with national security?

Considering heavier than air flight and use of electricity could conflict with not only national security, ask Mr. Edison and Mr. Wright about their patents. Funny they didn't receive any monies from the government to 'research' these inventions. However did they do it?

Is the end that Congress is authorized to attain - "the promotion of the progress of the sciences and useful arts" trumped by the means, namely copyrights and patents?

Considering it's the last half of the damn clause I'd pretty much say that was the intent. Ah, but big government lovers can't just read the document for what it is. They have to twist it to fit what they want.

Your logic would have us believe the First Amendment can read 'Congress shall make no law' end of story without taking the rest into account. That ought to make for some fun in Washington

[hschliemann]

When I got to my pings, someone had already put up an anti-Paul picture and it showed in my pings. By the time I clicked back to the thread, a second anti picture was already up...

I think they're called "bots".But go to a thread of their candidate and do the same,and you're a "troll",with someone looking to "kick your ass".

[drpix]

Reagan was fighting the Communist Soviets - you do remember that “unconstitutional” Cold War - and he must have believed he had bigger fish to fry. AND HE DID!

Right now Jihad has been declared against America by both Al Qaeda Sunnis and the Revolutionary Iranian Shiites and THEY are that bigger fish.

[Petronski]

No he’s not. Posts 101 and 102 include the rest of the clause, not the rest of the sentence.

[mnehring]

You got me there...

Very good catch!

[jmeagan]

But still, I appreciate that you still have “hope” for “some of” us. Maybe we will all be “enlightened” to the way of Ron Paul someday...******

Hey, a non interventionalist foreign policy, a smaller federal government, sound money, less taxes, eliminate useless government departments. end the IRS, fund the federal government with a uniform, but not a protective tariff, protect our borders, turn education back to the states, etc.

Yeah, I think some of you will eventually see the light. I hope it is in time for the Republican primary in your state.

[mnehring]

Don't forget Federalist 43.
The necessity of a like authority over forts, magazines, etc., established by the general government, is not less evident. The public money expended on such places, and the public property deposited in them, requires that they should be exempt from the authority of the particular State. Nor would it be proper for the places on which the security of the entire Union may depend, to be in any degree dependent on a particular member of it. All objections and scruples are here also obviated, by requiring the concurrence of the States concerned, in every such establishment.

[hschliemann]

Reagan was fighting the Communist Soviets

LOL.Reagan was offering to share the SDI technology with the Russians.

...and he must have believed he had bigger fish to fry

So do we too have bigger fish to fry.Right on our northern and southern borders.No matter what spin you put on it,Reagan cut and ran.

[Abcdefg]

Okay then. The rest of the clause.

[mnehring]

So do we too have bigger fish to fry.Right on our northern and southern borders

You are absolutely right, too bad Paul voted against putting the Guard and Military there.

[hschliemann]

You are absolutely right, too bad Paul voted against putting the Guard and Military there.

Yeah,in case you didn't notice,they're otherwise occupied now.But thank God our troops are defending the borders of Korea and Germany,to name just tow.

[drpix]

Tell me who in the last 150 years of American history are your heroes?

[mnehring]

He voted against moving existing stateside guards and military to the border, the bill had nothing to do with troops in Korea, Germany, Iraq, or where ever.

[Tears of a Clown]

By non-interventionist, I think you meant “abandoning our allies to the terrorists and giving al-qaeda victory in iraq”

But don’t worry, I remembered for you.

[jmeagan]

****P.S.: Were it in my power, I would hand you your goofy tricorner hat, kick you in the ass and send you on your way. But I am but a guest here, so parody and satire and ridicule of your aforementioned beliefs are the only tools I have.****

I sorry that you did not get the gift of being able to support your views with a reasoned, coherent argument.

[Tears of a Clown]

By non-interventionist, I think you meant “abandoning our allies to the terrorists and giving al-qaeda victory in iraq”

But don’t worry, I remembered for you.

[Petronski]

I am going to guess his answer: Ayn Rand, Ludwig von Mises, Lew Rockwell and Justine Raimondo.

[Petronski]

I sorry that you did not get the gift of being able to support your views with a reasoned, coherent argument.

You're not equipped to understand one.

[Pistolshot]

Ron Paul National Campaign Director