Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Eric in the Ozarks

What I keep in mind is that if Rand were President his actions would be limited by Congress and the Courts. He’d have to move thoughtfully and nimbly in finding consensus.

It would be fairly easy to eliminate redundancies within and between departments, shrink departments and shut some down by divesting their funds and transferring those funds, with only mild limitations, to the respective states.

It would be impossible for him to radically alter America alone. He’d have to create liberal and conservative coalitions idea by idea and issue by issue. It would be very healthy for this country to have those kinds of debates.

I’m done freaking out at every nuance of a candidate. That got us Obama and a bunch of morons who thought Romney or every McCain would have been worse.


13 posted on 04/07/2013 7:19:19 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: 1010RD
“What I keep in mind is that if Rand were President his actions would be limited by Congress and the Courts. He’d have to move thoughtfully and nimbly in finding consensus.”

Lets hope we can convince the country of that fact.

In reality I don't think anyone has any idea of how far a president can really go in crippling unconstitutional federal agency's.

From deliberately miss-allocating their personnel, to appointing deliberately incomplete(or unmotivated) folks. Like Obama’s executive amnesty.

A Conservative president could effectually end a whole lot of the Federal welfare state by theses simple means and do it in a way that serves to fuel the idea that the Federal government is not a place to invest your money or liberty. This is the power of saying No.

Think about it, what is a federal court going to do when your “failing” to provide some service? They can't make personnel operate efficient or effective. Even if they could declare Rand Paul as not excuiting the laws Rand Paul can always claim there is some "new" bureaucratic problem preventing operation.

At the end of the day all the Federal court can do is:

1: Halt prosecutions(which does them any good because Rand Paul is not prosecuting anyone.) or

2: Deliver civil verdicts when folk sue the government for "their services". (which would take years and require abrogation of 'sovereign immunity'(A big + for us down the road), as well as the invention of numerous entitlement "rights" for every "malfunctioning" service.) Even then when all is said and done, Rand Paul could still refuse to pay out the verdicts just as Madison refused to issue the writs in Marbury vs Madison 200 years ago.

Or if he liked he could may payout soo slow and ineffective that its not worth it.

For years democrats have always campaigned claiming if we were elected we would end theses programs, and our leaders never did, nor did they ever think they could. Although some tried thou congress, but congress does not act until a thing becomes political reality.

No is the most powerful and important word in the English language. Its time we start using it.

17 posted on 04/07/2013 5:29:06 PM PDT by Monorprise (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: 1010RD
"It would be fairly easy to eliminate redundancies within and between departments"

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man."

/sarc

True Grit -- Robert Duvall to John Wayne....

19 posted on 04/09/2013 1:08:40 AM PDT by uncommonsense (Conservatives believe what they see; Liberals see what they believe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson