Second Thoughts On Ron Paul

Donate: http://www.jacobspinney.com/donate
Blog: http://www.jacobspinney.com/blog
Backup: http://www.youtube.com/otherjacobspinney
Books: http://www.jacobspinney.com/books

Response to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIJGBAJrT84

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• JacobSpinney
• Ron
• Paul
• Libertarianism
• economy

[IJUSTLOVETURTLES]

These were probably answered in one of your 131 videos already, but I'm new to your channel and wouldn't know where to start.

1. Are you still an atheist?

2. Does Ron Paul's abortion stance make you angry? Sure, he's not for a federal ban on it, but is allowing the states to forcefully drive the practice underground any better?

3. Do you think Ron Paul should select Gary Johnson as his VP? If not, who would be a better choice?

[JacobSpinney]

@IJUSTLOVETURTLES 1. Yes. Although I see that as being irrelevant. 2. He's advocating for decentralization, which I am for, but to an even greater extent than Ron Paul. 3. That's a question to be thought about after it becomes clear that Ron Paul will win the primary . . . something I don't have much faith in happening.

[LouieDaProtectionist]

we've had a laissez-faire economy for a while now. deregulation of the banks. the PRIVATE central bank not adjusting the interest rates to the business cycle by a libertarian Fed chief Alan Greenspan.

[JacobSpinney]

@LouieDaProtectionist No we haven't. A private bank has the right to print money out of thin air? If it weren't for government interventions, there wouldn't be a business cycle. Alan Greenspan might have dabbled in Libertarianism back in college, but to call him a Libertarian is a joke. If he was a Libertarian, he would have immediately fired all Fed employees and resigned, since Libertarianism is against the Fed existing in the first place. Please see my free market was framed video.

[djcatron11]

He's forgetting about the Executive Order.

[JacobSpinney]

@djcatron11 Ron Paul just got out of a debate condemning executive orders.

[RedJacobin]

You're talking a lot, but you're not saying anything.

[YaHuWaHservant]

@DeathMetalPatriot I understand the dilemma, however look at Obama. He has been on an increasing power hunt talking about Consolidating power and appointing people when Senate is not in Recess. The importance of checks/balances is to guard against over-step. We elect a president to be commander/chief and veto every unconstitutional bill. For legislation we elect Congress. Ron Paul could appeal to the American People in order to get us focused on our congressmen.

[redshirtyear]

@Laughingblades The difference is that we have 50 state governments, but only 1 federal government. That creates competition. We have even more city governments. The more local a government is, the more power they can be trusted with.

[DeathMetalPatriot]

@YaHuWaHservant I get what you are saying, but I think one could make an exception to laws that are unconstitutional. I just don't see how else to get anything done, as nothing Dr. Paul would try and introduce would get passed by congress.

[YaHuWaHservant]

@DeathMetalPatriot Because exercising powers you do not have is wrong regardless of the reason. Two wrongs do not make a right. You cannot argue against the President using powers not allotted to him then turn around and use a power not allotted to you.

[DeathMetalPatriot]

@YaHuWaHservant How can it be unconstitutional, to repeal laws, when the very laws he would repeal were unconstitutional in the first place?

[YaHuWaHservant]

@DeathMetalPatriot Yes it is unconstitutional. Ron Paul has said that executive orders have been used way beyond their constitutional powers and that he would cease this overstep. 

[Laughingblades]

@admthrwn Yeah Ron Paul is a trojan horse presented as a third way by the media that's supposedly ignoring him, the man's a liar and a fraud, not only an economic social darwinist but a total scam as a libertarian because a lot of what he promotes is anti-libertarian, for instance libertarians don't believe states should be able to tell you who you're allowed to marry.

Oh wait, you think the supreme power of states is acceptable but not the exact same thing when the fed does it, kk.