Did Ron Paul really say this?

I think he did, and I also think he is right to say so.

Probably Federal government... if States want safety nets and response for natural disasters that is fine

Govt aid should only consist of defense...nothing else.

Religious and charitable organizations should provide aid.

Yes he did but everyone took his statements out of context

He is not against helping those in need he just feels that it shouldn't come from taxpayer money. The private sector should be the ones offering the help not the Federal Government.

have you ever heard of a little piece of paper called THE CONSTITUTION? Perhaps you should read it...?

He says that these are the things that the individual states should take care of. He says to double up on services is too costly. The federal government doesn't have the constitutional authority to take the people's money to take care of these things.

It's just like the department of education. Every state, has their own department of education. So why then, do we have a federal department of education? It's a doubling up of services that are not necessary. So you could easily say "Hey Ron Paul doesn't think that we should have free education for our youth". When the truth is, he doesn't believe that the federal government should be involved in any way whatsoever in the education system. If the states decide they want a free education system, then they can have it, and pay for it.

You see, that's why it's so damn easy for people to criticize him. Because he knows what the constitution authorizes the federal arm of the government to do, and what it doesn't. So he says "No", we shouldn't have that. That's a state issue.

Hell who knows, state taxes may double under his patrol and fed taxes would go way down, but at least he's doing it the way the constitution says he should do it.

We have laws in our states that are passed, but at the federal level they could not have passed this or that, so the two arms of the government actually are in complete opposition to each other. How ludicrous it that? They pass a law in California that Marijuana is legal to sell for medicinal purposes, but "be careful, the feds might come in and shut it down".

I mean seriously? What a fucking joke that is? We have two different police forces in opposition to each other? The constitution NEVER intended for things to be this way. And it's a blatant waste of our taxpaying dollars to double up services like they're doing.

Very nice input, thank you!

So, does the fed have the authority now to take down the medical marijuana laws?

They've been threatening to do so for a long time and still haven't done so.

They're doing it right now in Cali. State gov't approves and give licenses to businesses that provide medical marijuana to people who have a doctor's prescription. Then the feds come in and shut down the dispensaries. (Just google search how many dispensaries have been shut down in Cali in the last month alone) Going against the constitutional process has made a complete JOKE out of the law enforcement system in this country.

They're doing it right now in Cali. State gov't approves and give licenses to businesses that provide medical marijuana to people who have a doctor's prescription. Then the feds come in and shut down the dispensaries. (Just google search how many dispensaries have been shut down in Cali in the last month alone) Going against the constitutional process has made a complete JOKE out of the law enforcement system in this country.




State law can not trump Federal law, that is why the Feds are allowed to shut them down.

of course state law can trump federal law. Especially if that federal law is unconstitutional. Which the fed drug laws definitely are.

The feds aren't "allowed" to shut the medical marijuana because they are morally and "legally" correct. They do it because they have been allowed to by the state. For whatever reason, pay offs, fear, threatened loss of stolen money or what have you.

Last Edited by s. d. butler on 04/29/2012 11:24 PM

Agreed.

The Fed gvt has no business in this.

If the citizens of a particular state wants to pay taxes to support an emergency fund and is ok with national guard assisting in keeping the peace, that is up to them.

Generally, the role of "Aid Providers" is the responsibility of the private sector through the charity of the individual.

Medic, you are not familiar with the 10th amendment are you...

The states CAN and should trump the Fed when the Fed participates in actions not specifcially delineated to them in the constitution.

All other issues are the responsibility of the States and People.

According the The Constitution, the Power structure is: The People, The States, The Republic.

Last Edited by Buddaroll on 04/29/2012 11:25 PM

Yes he did and he's right.

Besides that, the states are far better off with FEMA out of the way. I think that has already been sufficiently demonstrated.

That's what I've assumed... It just gets distorted somewhere. Like the belief doctrine of our constitution are being redesigned, probably because of all the corporations getting in the way, buying out congress, etc.

Why do we accept that one law enforcement authority should be able to "trump" another? That's not what our founding fathers intended. They never thought that would happen, because if they followed the constitution in the first place, this wouldn't happen at all. It's a JOKE that we even accept this practice as commonplace. The states are to hold the power of law enforcement. Yes, it says in the constitution that the federal power trumps the state, but where does it say that the feds are allowed to be in law enforcement in the first place?

And it is unconstitutional for them to do so. This is being fought in court. The States are finally starting to assert their 10th amendment rights.

When are you going to stand up and assert yours?

You have the right to the medical treatment of your choice and the responsibility to secure it for yourself.

The Fed gvt nor the state has a right to tell you HOW to heal yourself.

State laws are SUPPOSED to trump federal laws. States are supposed to be sovereign, not cowering in fear of losing federal funds to the point of waiving their god-given rights.

A perfect example: A Sheriff can kick the president himself out of his county.

OP, you have to realize that Ron Paul is very much like a president we had before, Andrew Jackson. Jackson's presidency was arranged through the Scottish Rite by Aaron Burr. Aaron Burr was a known traitor, British agent, rejected from the continental army, and later tried with treason for unrelated crimes.

After Jackson withdrew the credit facilities of the second national bank, we had over 7000 currencies and a depression that lasted until the Civil War. Just like today, the USA had no gold (young nation using credit instead of depending on the European monopoly on gold) and Jackson's forcing the gold standard on America allowed the oligarchy in Europe to control the American market while buying up much of our land and many of our businesses.

This is a very old game. Ron Paul isn't on your side even if he says lots of nice things about freedom. Your example of the tornado thing is a great example. They are usually a localized event, but often times we have 9.0 quakes or CAT5 canes that devastate entire states and even regions. This is the reason disaster recovery is on a federal level and it makes perfect sense. Do you really want the private arm of the NSA, google, in charge of space flight? Welcome to prison earth if so. It's a vital security interest of your children that space exploration, among many other things, are state backed enterprises that grant you right of passage as the technology advances, just like you have the right of passage across the country on highways. This century will see trips to mars become as common as trips to the next state over - are you ready to pay tolls to oligarchs and have them be the only ones with access to asteroid mining for example?

Ron Paul sounds nice, but he is smart enough to have pondered issues like this. He is perpetuating the masonic modus operandi of convincing you that you're free while keeping you on the plantation through heavy cognitive dissonance. You can escape though: think for yourself.

If you're going to take something out of context at least get the text right.

But his overall attitude is he wants the Federal government to back the fuck up and out of things. Every state has their own government and emergency services in place and the Fed should not undermine them with their posse.

He sees this country is moving into a police-state and he wants to stop this before it gets worse. That's why everyone should feel grateful that this man wants to become our POTUS. It is a privilege and honor to have this man, be our voice!

The Feds are only allowed the powers given them by the constitution. All other powers, which is most of them, belong to the state.

Ron Paul on FEMA:

Ron Paul isn't real , my brother lives in the States and he was on a campaign gathering of Ron Paul, he said the man they showed on stage didn't look like him at all, most people left ...wht the hell is happening?
there was this video on you tube but i cant find it prob deleted where a dude says he's got proof that the guy that acts as Ron Paul is a former soviet KGB operative in crypto city in the 70s

or are reserved to the people.

Now THIS certainly sounds like an interesting conspiracy...