(Video - last couple minutes on Boston etc) Ron Paul on Fox Business channel at 8PM 4/23
- Thread starter Valli6
- Start date
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
He's up next!
-t
-t
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
any linK?????
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
Good interview!
Link? - how many times have we asked you to sticky the list of TV internet stream feeds?
It's probably buried deep now...
should rebroadcast in 2-3 hrs if you have cable. On his web site tomm or YouTube tonight? - if we are any good...
-t
Link? - how many times have we asked you to sticky the list of TV internet stream feeds?
It's probably buried deep now...
should rebroadcast in 2-3 hrs if you have cable. On his web site tomm or YouTube tonight? - if we are any good...
-t
Last edited:
heavenlyboy34
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2008
- Messages
- 59,093
eduardo asked me to post this here:
You're welcome!
You're welcome!
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
I don't think anyone ever asked me to sticky that.
I'll look for it when it comes up, I was hoping to see one live. This is his third today, and I missed the other two.
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
eduardo asked me to post this here:
You're welcome!
thank you! I will add it to the OP
--
and thank eduardo!
tangent4ronpaul
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2007
- Messages
- 21,101
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
I love Ron, but here he was saying the same thing he's said many times and they only really reached the meat of what I think Cavuto wanted to talk about in the last couple of minutes. It was a great couple of minutes, Ron is Ron, but I'd have liked to have had five minutes of that. Not that he said anything wrong, but I needed someone outraged about the police state, today, and two minutes only made me want more....
Thanks, though, Ron.
Thanks, though, Ron.
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
No, he didn't say it like that. He said it like, if the court approves it I guess we're stuck with it. He didn't use those words but it was in his tone, and he went right to that the federal government isn't supposed to be our police force and the incredible police state on display in Boston.
Technology can be used in various places, but who uses it and what approvals they have to get, warrants etc are the issue.
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
Any vid of the other 2?
I didn't know about them...
-t
they are on the respective threads, I changed the titles to show the videos are included
You don't think Ron would be ok with drones for surveillance purposes if police followed all the proper procedures?
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
Police, by the state, if the people wanted it, and the courts issued a warrant. Not federal, not without a warrant, and he'd personally want it to safeguard privacy, but thinks states should be able to choose for themselves. I don't want to get into a fight about it but we both know he would not have used the example Rand used, because he comes from a core place that wouldn't have permitted it. And if you are implying their positions are the same, they sure don't express them the same. For example, he doesn't think Boston is an example of Constitutional use of law enforcement, on the excessive police state side, from his comments.
It may be that Rand thinks first of spinning his thoughts to sound how he thinks would be easier to hear for more of the GOP base, and not expressing the liberty side and overcompensates, I don't know. But Ron's message, I do know.
Last edited:
I agree that I know Ron's position more than Rand's and I'm not trying to compare the two. I just want to understand what the liberty position on drones are since so many people here have different positions. Some think drones shouldn't exist at all, some think only the private should have access to it, some think governments can use it in limited circumstances, etc.
My understanding of Ron's position is that he is ok with drones because it is just a tool/technology. He said we shouldn't be scared of technology. However, every single procedure should be followed under the Constitution when it comes to using drones. If all the proper procedures are followed and the Constitution isn't violated, I can't imagine Ron being against it.
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
I wouldn't be against drones myself in the right circumstances, but that is not what is being suggested nationwide. His push back that it shouldn't be federal would wipe out quite a bit of it and make what does exist easier for people to contain locally. And he immediately WENT to push back against the police state.
Personally, I really would like to hear more of that outrage from more people at this point.
Personally, I really would like to hear more of that outrage from more people at this point.
Last edited:
July
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2012
- Messages
- 1,427
Personally, I would think that the NAP would apply to drone usage, same as it would any other sort of weapon, or surveillance tool. Legitimate for self defense against agression, but not for trespassing private property or the initiation of violence. I think the fear (rightly so) with drones though is that they are being abused overseas and people don't think the Constitution would be followed on American soil either if they are allowed here. I'm not against drones per se, but I am skeptical of how they would be used and I do think they would be abused. It's a larger problem that goes beyond drone technology though. State power is being abused in all sorts of ways.
Last edited:
Agreed! Here I was thinking that I'm alone in the wilderness vehemently opposing the police state, what with Rand's diluting of the message so much to the point it almost seems Neo-Con lite and out comes Ron swinging, addressing every single point that needs to be addressed and with an absolute pragmatic approach. Let's face it, drones are here to stay, but they have to be used with extreme care and within constitutional limits, and Ron understands this.
Its great to see Ron hasn't softened a bit with age on the real issues. I almost forgot, especially with Rand's milquetoast approach being the norm.. how much of a badass Ron is!
Similar threads
