Posted on 09/30/2007 10:12:11 AM PDT by traviskicks
Edited on 09/30/2007 4:01:53 PM PDT by Lead Moderator. [history]
I love the way the Mods change these Paul thread titles to be more in line with reality. LOL
My idea is that the military should fund itself(or at least partly). They would do this by obtaining a lease or temporary rights to natural resources in places they are deployed. Obviously there would need to be some kind of oversight. We can’t have the military deploying itself to all the resource rich places in the world just to cash in. But it seems to me when America is doing police type actions all over the place, someone else should be helping to pay for that. We could do something like this: Allow the military to seek out it’s own funding to equal the value of the fuel and ordnance consumed, but no more. And they would not be allowed to take resources from region A to compensate for expenditures in region B.
There’s a lot that would need to be worked out, but I don’t see why the military shouldn’t be finding some of it’s own funding in some way.
Eliminate the federal income tax? Term limits?
How would these corrupt hacks stay in power? How would all these hacks from both parties make a killer living off the stupid citizens that continue to elect the wealthy elites over and over. No term limits.
Most of these people have made a great living for many years consuming our tax dollars. What would they do? How would they make a living? Who would pay for their multi-million dollar homes and limos?
I think we need more taxes to help pay for their retirement pensions and their life styles. We need more government and more control.
Liz Viering and her husband Peter, from Stonington, Conn., said Paul's opposition to the war in Iraq is the major reason they are supporting him. "Money spent on wars of choice takes money away from other programs," she said.
Yep. Anti-war. So government money can be spent on other programs. Yep, a committed conservative here! BWAHAHAHAHA!
The “Useful Idiot” Party Candidate.
A true libertarian! GO ,,,, RON PAUL ,,,, GO!!!!!!!!!!
Oh, the mods. They’re nothing but prawns of Wall Street bankers.
I have no idea what the rules are here on FR anymore. No more Ron Paul pings, but can I say something nice about an elected public serpent like Ron Paul who wants to shrink Gubmint to within an inch of it’s life?
Please advise. I’m waiting for my marching orders.
A truly all-volunteer military: no conscription of funding.
Other than the security (national defence measures you cited): the market can take care of sanitation on it’s own; it doesn’t need government to fix that for us!
“why was the title of this thread altered?”
I was wondering the same thing. This is the stuff that makes me more active where I can be, locally, seeing as how the hamhanded Rudy McThomneyites regularly mod or flame Paul threads—appearing impervious to being moderated themselves.
Only citizens of the United States who have been legally registered to vote after providing photographic documentation of such citizenship to the proper authority may donate money or anything else of value to a candidate legally running for federal office but only if the candidate directly represents the citizen and the citizen can vote for the candidate.
That's basically it. If you cannot legally vote for the candidate you can't give them anything of value. No more lobbyists, no more Hillpac, no more moveon.org. No more John McCain types running around the country sticking their hands in peoples pockets for money. They would be too busy at home listening to the people they represent for a change because thats the only place they would get any money from.
Something like this will never happen, of course but we need to get back to the idea who you elect represents you.
Yep. Anti-war. So government money can be spent on other programs. Yep, a committed conservative here! BWAHAHAHAHA!
And they love to go around saying he's the "only true conservative." Where do they get this stuff?
Coulnd't help but notice that Liz and her husband Peter are from Stonington, CA. The weed going around these days must be a good deal more powerful than the stuff we had when I was in college. ;-)
Thank you,
A prole.
Agreed. I don't see eye to eye with RP on the WOT. ...to say the least. But he's spot-on about the abolition of the IRS, the U.S. pulling out of the UN, and the drastic reduction of both the size and scope of gov't. ....issues that shouldn't be controversial around these parts.
PS: I am paying good money to the Fed’rul Gubmint in taxes and all I ask is that they keep me and my family from being blown to bits by an Islamofascist.
By whatever means necesary.
Ron Paul is misguided on the WOT but he is still a genius when it comes to libertarian, limited Government DOMESTIC issues.
Can I say something nice about his libertarian domestic policy?
You’ve said something nice about his libertarian domestic policy, and you’re still here. That should answer your question.
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.