Ron Paul's Policies vs Barak Hussein Obama's Policies

Discussion in 'Elections & Campaigns' started by Watchman, Feb 19, 2012.

  1. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I thought of a new one.

    How about a post of comparison where we post ONLY the FACTS about Ron Paul and Barak Hussein Obama.

    I'll start.

    Ron Paul wants to end the federal reserve and the income tax.
    Ron Paul wants ALL of our Troops home.
    Ron Paul wants the U.S. Border secure.
    Ron Paul will NOT go to war or make war with any country WITHOUT a declaration of war from Congress.
    Ron Paul wants small, limited government, and government out of the lives of the American People.
    Ron Paul wants to bring America back to her Constitutional Republic.
    Ron Paul wants America to worry about America and fix her problems.

    It really is all about the Constitution, which Ron Paul happens to be all about.

    That I know of, Barak Hussein Obama is the complete opposite.
     
  2. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What's in a name?

    Again, this is no opinion or theory, but a serious question.

    Is our President, Barack Hussein Obama Constitutionally elligible to serve?

    His very name is Muslim.
    He has quoted from the koran and has praised Islam.
    He has bowed to a Muslim king.
    He has more respect for Islam and Muslims than he does for Christianity and Americans.
    He has worn Muslim garments.

    These are the FACTS, folks. You decide.

    Check this video out:

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCAffMSWSzY&feature=related"]Obama Admits He Is A Muslim - YouTube[/ame]

    There is NO question or even a shadow of a doubt that Ron Paul IS a U.S. Citizen, where Barack Hussein Obama's Citizenship is still HIGHLY questionable even to this day.
     
  3. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    May as well lump in every other candidate running for POTUS.

    Newt Gingrich's Policies:

    Mit Romney's Policies:

    Rick Santorum's Policies:

    Let's compare and contrast everyone that's running.

    Only the FACTS.

    Whoever is MOST Constitutional wins, and should be the next U.S. President.

    I already started with Ron Paul and a little with Barack Hussein Obama. Please add if you choose to.
     
  4. PoliticalRuckus

    PoliticalRuckus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2012
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Let's pretend that Obama is really a Muslim, where in the constitution does it say Muslims can't be President?
    So his name makes him a Muslim, so Stephen Tyrone Colbert is really black!

    Just admit you're a completely racist bigot who has zero understanding of the Constitution.
     
  5. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have a very good understanding of the Constitution. He's been befriending the very people we've been at war with. Ok, NOT against Islam / Muslims, but Islamic fanaticism, which is pretty much all of them, because their teaching and Koran want Israel and the U.S. completely wiped out.

    What I'm getting at is this: Our Nation was founded on Christian and Biblical Principles. We need to get back to our roots and Constitutional Republic. I do not see ANY loyalty to the U.S. or Constitution from him at all.

    He is simply unfit to be President of the U.S., especially because of the acts and bills that he has past just this passed December 2011.

    National Defense Authorization Act, SB 1021 and 1022

    The government has turned against the American People.
     
  6. marbro

    marbro New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,581
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Obama makes a terrible muslim and christian. What he really is, is a statist!
     
  7. PoliticalRuckus

    PoliticalRuckus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2012
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wrong, our nation was founded on the basis of "Freedom of religion" and in fact our founding fathers very very rarely spoke about religion during the conception of the United States, actually rarely spoke about religion at all period. This includes George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, and Patrick Henry.
     
  8. Bluespade

    Bluespade Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    15,669
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    About sums it up.
     
  9. Think for myself

    Think for myself Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,048
    Likes Received:
    4,453
    Trophy Points:
    113

    None of those are policies. None of those are criticisms of policies.

    If you are going to take the president to task, and there certainly is a lot of things to take him to task for, shouldn't it be on actual policies or decisions rather than really bad made up rhetoric?

    I mean, your entire argument there seems to be an unsupported insinuation that the president is Muslim.
     
  10. PoliticalRuckus

    PoliticalRuckus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2012
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Exactly! Just spreading propaganda.
     
  11. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Okay: National Defense Authorization Act, Senate Bills 1021 and 1022, and, do you know what's inside the documents of Obamacare?!

    Hardly any Senator or Congressman read it, but they just went ahead and blindly signed and passed it, didn't they?!

    The simple fact as well that, no thanks to Hillary Clinton, that the Obama Administration is looking to sign and pass the U.N. Small Arms Treaty, which will pretty much ban the 2nd Amendment, which will completely abollish the U.S. Constitution, and will enslave good, innocent American Citizens. It will be a full blown dicatorship and tyranny. Think of nazi Germany on steroids.
     
  12. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They're preparing for what's coming.
     
  13. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You said it. Because they're scared, and they need to be and should be. But they really have NO idea what is coming. NOTHING will prepare them. They will wish they never messed with the U.S. Constitution.

    NO amount of force or foreign troops on U.S. Soil will be able to do what they so wickedly, maliciously, and sadistically planned and conspired to do.

    They really have NO idea what they have started, and they will NOT be able to finish it.
     
  14. Jason Bourne

    Jason Bourne Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    11,372
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    What's troubling about Ron Paul is that he has all of these grandiose plans but he hasn't explained how he plans on effectively and efficiently implementing his policies. For instance, Paul plans on withdrawing all US armed forces to the CONUS. How does he plan on fufilling our global treaty responsibilities? He hasn't said. And what about support from Congress? Paul has virtually no supporters in Congress. Just how does he plan on implementing his policies without Congressional support?

    Paul simply doesn't make any practical sense.
     
  15. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Much more reasonable and logical than our current one.
     
  16. Jason Bourne

    Jason Bourne Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    11,372
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Alright then, explain how Paul intends to implement his foreign policy ideas without congressional support?
     
  17. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    He did say that he WOULD NOT go to war unless there is a declaration from Congress. What more of a foreign policy idea do you need than that?

    As far as international trade, etc.? I believe he stated not too long ago that he'd keep that, but only to a few countries, so we can bring back our businesses that went overseas. That means more jobs for the American People, and building a better, stronger, more stable economy. That means we'd be able to pay our debts off, so our grandchildren, great grand children, and great, great grand children wouldn't have to inherit our debt. That means the unemployment rate in the U.S. goes by, by. What more of a foreign policy idea do you need than that?

    That would be Congressional support.

    But...if you're a staunch advocate of the anti-Constitutional / anti-American Obama Regime, go ahead.
     
  18. Jason Bourne

    Jason Bourne Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    11,372
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Ron Paul has said that he plans to withdraw all US armed forces to the CONUS thus abandoning our treaty responsibilities. He has said that he would end all foreign aid. He plans on withdrawing from NATO and the UN.

    Just how does Paul plan on implementing his isolantionist policies without congressional support?
     
  19. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In places like North and South Korea, where a region is hot, perhaps it would be better if some U.S. Troops stayed.

    How do we know that he would not get Congressional support?

    About 75% of our Military backs Ron Paul.

    Ending the foreign aid for a period of time to work on and fix America's economy. Not a bad idea.
     
  20. Jason Bourne

    Jason Bourne Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    11,372
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Then you disagree with Paul's position that all US armed forces should return to the CONUS?

    In over 22 years in Congress Paul has managed to successfully sponsor only 8 bills. In 2008 he received only 1 endorsement from a member of Congress. Paul consistently votes no on legislation which hasn't endeared him to his colleagues.

    So what?

    But how will Paul gain congressional support to do that?
     
  21. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Maybe he'll do it like Obama has, and sign everything by executive order, just as Obama went around and through Congress to pass his fascist, tyrannical policies, bills, and acts.

    Perhaps the only way to get America back to her Constitutional Republic is signing of executive orders. Hey, at least we'll have our Old Republic back. :)
     
  22. Jason Bourne

    Jason Bourne Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    11,372
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    But Paul has said that executive orders are unconstitutional. Does he plan on disavowing his so called strict constitutional position? Is he that big of a hypocrite?
     
  23. RP12

    RP12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    48,878
    Likes Received:
    11,755
    Trophy Points:
    113
    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCyU3-QLg2M"]Ron Paul - How I would use Executive Orders - YouTube[/ame]

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KK6cJ83blP4"]Ron Paul: Executive Orders are Unconstitutional; We Need a Private Option in Healthcare - YouTube[/ame]

    EO's are Constitutional. How they are being used is not.
     
  24. Jason Bourne

    Jason Bourne Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    11,372
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
  25. RP12

    RP12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    48,878
    Likes Received:
    11,755
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "US presidents have issued executive orders since 1789. Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 4. Most Executive Orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President's sworn duties,[2] the intent being to help direct officers of the US Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government: the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office.[3]"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order
     

Share This Page