@Edgehead10075 "His interpretation of the Constitution is crazy". Somebody hasn't read the Constitution. And you call yourself a US Citizen? You should be ashamed of yourself.
Oh, shut up. I HAVE read the Constitution, and his interpretation of it is antiquated, and there's no one on the Supreme Court, liberal or conservative, who interprets the Constitution the same way as Ron Paul does. His interpretations of the general welfare and interstate commerce clauses would be laughed out of court. Even the founding fathers themselves disagreed with each other on what those clauses meant, so it's ludicrous for Ron Paul to act like only his view is correct.
We live in the twenty-first century, not the eighteenth century. The Constitution should be interpreted in a way that's befitting a twenty-first century society. That means that the government SHOULD be able to provide a social safety net because civilized, twenty-first century societies believe in that. Don't like it? Move to Somalia, or go back in time, assclown.
"The Constitution should be interpreted in a way that's befitting a twenty-first century society." Who the fuck made made chancellor? I say the Constitution should be interpreted to cut your balls off and if you don't like it, you can just go fuck yourself. Let's take a founding document and make it subjective. Nice job asshole. Nice fucking job.
Okay, Mr. Strict Constructionist of the Constitution. Is the Air Force unconstitutional? Nowhere does the Constitution mention an Air Force. It only mentions the Army and Navy.
@Edgehead10075 The Constitution limits the federal government of what they can do, and it doesn't permit them to get involved in healthcare. No more doctor/patient relationship with ObamaCare. It's a horrifying thought that DC bureaucrats can decide if you live or die. And btw, everything they get involved with the prices go up.
Wrong. The general welfare clause allows the federal government to get involved. Now I'm not in favor of bureaucrats deciding if you live or die, but there are people who can't afford health insurance, and the government should help them pay for it. BTW, we have government healthcare: Medicaid and Medicare, both of which are very popular programs. Ron Paul is naive to think that charities will take care of everyone who can't afford insurance; that's total nonsense.
@Edgehead10075 Again; he does NOT believe it will be that way, NOW. he was only talking about how it used to be, when charities ran hospitals, when HE was an intern.
Cripes. You people make me CRAZY. Mahr was making a JOKE, and he may have been corrected by now. And, so have you been corrected. Listen to what Paul said in all debates about M;/Care. HE will protect it, unlike Obot or Rombot (esp RomBot, who stole from US)
@Edgehead10075 Here's the thing. Ron Paul does NOT want to get rid of medicare OR medicaid. Romney DOES. Obama steals from medicare OFTEN. Romney was fined for MEDICARE FRAUD.
So, please get your facts straight. The only guy who's going to protect this is? RON PAUL.
@2ruthfox82 Right you are! I completely forgot about that! And you're also right about their ranking in education....they may not really understand? derp? hehe
HAHAHA
?? This is the party that LOVES JEEBUSS"
haha.
I Know. they should be ASHAMED IN SC for that ome. But, they don't know what they do it seems.
annebeck58 4 weeks ago
Huh? I don't even know what you just said there.
Edgehead10075 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BOOOOOOOOOO ron paul is a fucking faggat who deletes youtube commenbt cause he too scared to talk about 911 u fucking bitch
melonofwater1 4 weeks ago
The Constitution has some crazy ideas....oh pleeez
Kitswain59 1 month ago
@Kitswain59 You do realize that Ron Paul and the Constitution are different things, right?
BottleConcreteBlond 1 month ago
@BottleConcreteBlond When they say RP is crazy, they're saying the Constitution is crazy.
Kitswain59 1 month ago 2
No. His interpretation of the Constitution is crazy, as are his views on healthcare. I hate to agree with Bill Maher, but he's right on that one.
Edgehead10075 4 weeks ago
@Edgehead10075 "His interpretation of the Constitution is crazy". Somebody hasn't read the Constitution. And you call yourself a US Citizen? You should be ashamed of yourself.
stealspell 4 weeks ago
Oh, shut up. I HAVE read the Constitution, and his interpretation of it is antiquated, and there's no one on the Supreme Court, liberal or conservative, who interprets the Constitution the same way as Ron Paul does. His interpretations of the general welfare and interstate commerce clauses would be laughed out of court. Even the founding fathers themselves disagreed with each other on what those clauses meant, so it's ludicrous for Ron Paul to act like only his view is correct.
Edgehead10075 4 weeks ago
We live in the twenty-first century, not the eighteenth century. The Constitution should be interpreted in a way that's befitting a twenty-first century society. That means that the government SHOULD be able to provide a social safety net because civilized, twenty-first century societies believe in that. Don't like it? Move to Somalia, or go back in time, assclown.
Edgehead10075 4 weeks ago
"The Constitution should be interpreted in a way that's befitting a twenty-first century society." Who the fuck made made chancellor? I say the Constitution should be interpreted to cut your balls off and if you don't like it, you can just go fuck yourself. Let's take a founding document and make it subjective. Nice job asshole. Nice fucking job.
stealspell 4 weeks ago
Sorry, but society and federal judges agree with me.
Edgehead10075 4 weeks ago
Okay, Mr. Strict Constructionist of the Constitution. Is the Air Force unconstitutional? Nowhere does the Constitution mention an Air Force. It only mentions the Army and Navy.
Edgehead10075 3 weeks ago
@Edgehead10075 I'd give you a history lesson, but I really don't give a shit.
stealspell 2 weeks ago
Yeah, whatever.
Edgehead10075 2 weeks ago
@Edgehead10075 The Constitution limits the federal government of what they can do, and it doesn't permit them to get involved in healthcare. No more doctor/patient relationship with ObamaCare. It's a horrifying thought that DC bureaucrats can decide if you live or die. And btw, everything they get involved with the prices go up.
Kitswain59 4 weeks ago
Wrong. The general welfare clause allows the federal government to get involved. Now I'm not in favor of bureaucrats deciding if you live or die, but there are people who can't afford health insurance, and the government should help them pay for it. BTW, we have government healthcare: Medicaid and Medicare, both of which are very popular programs. Ron Paul is naive to think that charities will take care of everyone who can't afford insurance; that's total nonsense.
Edgehead10075 4 weeks ago
@Edgehead10075 Again; he does NOT believe it will be that way, NOW. he was only talking about how it used to be, when charities ran hospitals, when HE was an intern.
Cripes. You people make me CRAZY. Mahr was making a JOKE, and he may have been corrected by now. And, so have you been corrected. Listen to what Paul said in all debates about M;/Care. HE will protect it, unlike Obot or Rombot (esp RomBot, who stole from US)
annebeck58 4 weeks ago
Where are those charities now? I don't see them helping the millions without coverage. Ron Paul is looney, and Maher, for once, is right.
Seriously, what is your solution for people who can't afford insurance? Let them die?
Even if Obamacare is struck down, reforms will have to be made.
Edgehead10075 4 weeks ago
@Edgehead10075 Here's the thing. Ron Paul does NOT want to get rid of medicare OR medicaid. Romney DOES. Obama steals from medicare OFTEN. Romney was fined for MEDICARE FRAUD.
So, please get your facts straight. The only guy who's going to protect this is? RON PAUL.
annebeck58 4 weeks ago
Sarah Palin brought up death penals and was soundly criticized for it.
Edgehead10075 4 weeks ago
Not sure what debates Bill Maher has been watching, but I can't recall 1 debate when Ron Paul spoke about his foreign policy, and he got booed.
briandrum1 1 month ago
@briandrum1 SC debate, golden rule, on foreign policy did get booed... on another note maybe it was because SC was ranked 50th in education...
2ruthfox82 1 month ago 2
@2ruthfox82 Right you are! I completely forgot about that! And you're also right about their ranking in education....they may not really understand? derp? hehe
briandrum1 1 month ago
@2ruthfox82 South Carolina is not 50th. That has been a fight between Louisiana and Mississippi since Reconstruction. Although maybe they deserve it.
jmnhowto 1 month ago
@briandrum1 It was in the one when he said that he believed we shouldn't do unto other countries that which we would not like to be done unto us.
That was a fairly ironic repsonse from a Christian group, Maher is right.
BringBRToTheUK 1 month ago
@briandrum1 He was booed when he mentioned the Golden Rule while talking about foreign policy in the SC Debate.
dewboy910 1 month ago