Who do you like in 2012? - Page 4

Firefly · 2011-08-29, 01:53 PM

Originally Posted by Hamma

Glad to hear they are getting rid of that, pretty dumb to have a lower limit at night.

I never saw much use for it - five miles per hour slower isn't apt to save lives unless it's going from five mph to zero. Considering how strict Texas cops are, when I lived in west Texas I pretty much obeyed the law. When I was there it was 70 on open roads, 65 at night. Has it changed (aside from the obvious)?

MrVicchio · 2011-08-29, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by Firefly

I never saw much use for it - five miles per hour slower isn't apt to save lives unless it's going from five mph to zero. Considering how strict Texas cops are, when I lived in west Texas I pretty much obeyed the law. When I was there it was 70 on open roads, 65 at night. Has it changed (aside from the obvious)?

I-10 from Kerrville to El Paso is now at 80, possibly going to 85 soon.

Baneblade · 2011-08-30, 03:20 AM

That's awesome.

p0intman · 2011-08-31, 11:30 AM

Srs candidate i want to see, if obama is to lose to anyone: McCain

joke/troll candidate if mccain doesnt make it so that its at least amusing: Sara palin.

that said, I'm a democrat, so I don't really care, I'll vote for obama because the fella is from the windy city.

Traak · 2011-09-18, 01:14 PM

Do people have to vote fewer than 75 times each this time around?

**Malorn** · 2011-09-21, 06:03 AM

Meh.

Baneblade · 2011-09-21, 08:56 AM

I think the problem with Ron Paul isn't even Ron Paul, its the extreme changes and the panic they would cause. Americans have short attention spans, especially the media.

We would forget why we elected Ron Paul before he was even able to see any real results.

Accuser · 2011-09-21, 12:38 PM

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

I think the problem with Ron Paul isn't even Ron Paul, its the extreme changes and the panic they would cause. Americans have short attention spans, especially the media.

We would forget why we elected Ron Paul before he was even able to see any real results.

Since the President only has direct power over the military, the only thing we can be sure Ron Paul would achieve would be bringing our troops home and reducing our expensive military presence around the world. Also, he would not employ military force offensively without an act of Congress, in accordance with the Constitution.

He'd push Congress to audit the Federal Reserve, repeal the Patriot Act, and put all drug laws/enforcement on the States. But just because he's against abortion doesn't mean that President Paul will get a magic wand to make it illegal... Americans seem to have forgotten that the President only has a few powers, and only occasionally has the support of Congress for his initiatives.

So if you see a "crazy" idea from Dr. Paul that you don't like, odds are Congress wouldn't let it happen anyway.

**Malorn** · 2011-09-21, 12:40 PM

Meh.

Accuser · 2011-09-21, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by Malorn

Doesn't that apply to everyone?

You mean about bringing our military home and only starting offensive wars if Congress authorizes it? I'm pretty sure Ron Paul's the only person advocating those things.

I'm pretty sure the rest of the Republican field and Obama plan on keeping the Patriot Act and letting the Federal Reserve do as it likes as well...

My point was that his newer ideas such as returning to the 1971 gold standard and eliminating the income tax would require some significant Congressional support.

**Malorn** · 2011-09-21, 03:46 PM

Meh.

Hamma · 2011-09-21, 04:36 PM

Originally Posted by Malorn

I was replying to Sobekeus.

On the subject of presidential power being limited you are correct.

On a related note, I believe congress needs term limits just as the President has them. But good luck convincing life-long politicians to put a limit on their own power. I think it is the right thing to do for the country though and in the spirit of the virtues of America.

TOTALLY agreed here, so totally I can't type it big enough.

Baneblade · 2011-09-21, 10:53 PM

Originally Posted by Accuser

Since the President only has direct power over the military, the only thing we can be sure Ron Paul would achieve would be bringing our troops home and reducing our expensive military presence around the world.

Which would be a massive step forward. It would certainly help the debt situation more than any other single step.

He'd push Congress to audit the Federal Reserve, repeal the Patriot Act, and put all drug laws/enforcement on the States.

And Congress would probably not need much pushing... unless they resisted out of spite.

But just because he's against abortion doesn't mean that President Paul will get a magic wand to make it illegal...

I don't think he would try. The Supreme Court ruled on the issue and that was in accordance with the Constitution.

Americans seem to have forgotten that the President only has a few powers, and only occasionally has the support of Congress for his initiatives.

Perception is power. Power is perception.

So if you see a "crazy" idea from Dr. Paul that you don't like, odds are Congress wouldn't let it happen anyway.

Perhaps, perhaps not. We may be smart enough to find out someday.

Mutant · 2011-09-22, 12:05 PM

so Gary Johnson ?

**Malorn** · 2011-09-22, 01:04 PM

Meh.