Quoted from rpforpres

This video, although appealing to Ron Paul groupies, is many of the reasons that most Americans will vote against
Ron Paul.  
I would run this as an anti-Paul campaign if Ron Paul won the Republican nomination.

Hey Box,
Why? Exlplain.

...because box still thinks people LOVE a failed big government.  Bureaucrats and lobbyist won't like that commercial.  Those are the same people occupiers and tea partiers agree there are too many and need to get them out of Washington.

Quoted from rpforpres

Hey Box,
Why? Exlplain.

RPFORPRES...

That commercial for me and many Americans is an anti-Paul piece.  It gives me reasons NOT to vote for Paul instead of
reasons TO vote for him.

Eliminate the dept of Education, Interior, Energy, HUD, Commerce...
So RPforPres... this ad is for:

~Eliminating Federal Student Loan programs
~Eliminating Federal Pell Grants
~Eliminating Federal standards for Special Education and Rehabilitative Service
~Eliminating Federal programs to insure  Safe and Drug Free Schools
~Eliminating Federal programs and standards for Remedial education
~Eliminating Federal programs that insure education meets at least a minimum standard in every state...
You know, programs that help PEOPLE, not CORPORATIONS.
(Note, Ron Paul isn't going after waste in the dept, or reforming the dept, he would eliminate it)

The U.S. Department of the Interior protects America’s natural resources and heritage,  and supplies the energy to
power our future.
~With out the Dept of Interior, the entire USA is open to Commercial Development... Federal Lands, you know, like
Yellowstone, Carlsbad Caverns, Arcadia, Death Valley, The Everglades, the Grand Canyon, The Great Smokey Mts,
Sequoia, Yosemite and countless more of OUR HERITAGE and OUR HISTORY...
These Federal lands will be open for development, for commercial exploitation... UP FOR SALE TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER.
Again Ron Paul will eliminate programs and resources that are for PEOPLE and give then to CORPORATIONS.

~Eliminate the Bureau of Mines... The Bureau of Mines insures mine safety (Sets minimum standards for miners safety)
Paul will eliminate any Federal program for PEOPLE who work in mines in favor of CORPORATIONS who own the mines.
rpforpres... how would you feel if your son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father, mother... went into a
mine every day to make a living and their safety depended on some safety officer who works for the mine owner?
(Note, Ron Paul isn't going after waste in the dept, or reforming the dept, he would eliminate it)

The Dept of Energy:
The mission of the Energy Department is to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy,
environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.
Just one aspect of the dept of energy...
~ Insuring the integrity and safety of the country's nuclear weapons
~Promoting international nuclear safety
~Advancing nuclear non-proliferation
~Continuing to provide safe, efficient and effective nuclear power plants for the United States Navy.
Yea, Paul would turn this over to the states or the Power Plant Owners...
Who would benefit from eliminating the Dept of Energy?
CORPORATIONS.
Who would lose?
PEOPLE.

HUD
HUD helps People.  Senior citizen housing, first time buyers, HUD protects against rental discrimination of families with
children, minorities or people with disabilities, and much more.
(Note, Ron Paul isn't going after waste in the dept, or reforming the dept, he would eliminate it)

The dept of commerce...
Eliminating the Dept of Commerce would hurt PEOPLE and help CORPORATIONS
~Paul would eliminate U.S. Census Bureau.  Since the Census is required every 10 years by law, this program would
still be required (no dollars saved here). I'm sure some CORPORATION could be found to run this program... For A Price.
~Paul would eliminate NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). Your weather forecasts.   There are
commercial CORPORATIONS that would take it's place... FOR A PRICE. Your weather (Hurricane forecasts,  storm
forecasts, tornado warnings) would now be put up for bid and a fee charged for that service.  YOU'D PAY FOR YOUR
WEATHER FORECAST.
(Note, Ron Paul isn't going after waste in the dept, or reforming the dept, he would eliminate it)

rpforpres... I've only touched on a very few examples of PEOPLE programs that would be eliminated in favor of
CORPORATIONS.  
The repercussions of eliminating these 5 departments has not even been studied.  Much of the services provided
would not be eliminated, but shifted to the states... and each state would have a director, a budget, a fund, a
tax requirement...
No one, not even Ron Paul knows the end result of just stopping these government offices and the consequences
would be felt for years as the USA works to rebound from their elimination.

One More Time...
Ron Paul isn't going after waste in the dept, or reforming the dept, or improving the dept, or fixing problems in the
dept...  he would eliminate them, regardless of the impact on America.

My guess... much of the $Trillion dollars that Paul promotes as savings, would be spent duplicating these same
services 50 times, as each state scrambles to recover from their loss.

Quoted from Box A Rox

rpforpres... how would you feel if your son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father, mother... went into a mine every day to make a living and their safety depended on some safety officer who works for the mine owner?(Note, Ron Paul isn't going after waste in the dept, or reforming the dept, he would eliminate it)

FEAR FEAR FEAR - SCARE SCARE SCARE!!!  

Nahhhhhh...Good left wing liberals don't use fear politics to justify the power of the state.   Only conservatives do that.   You need the federal government protecting you from those EVIL CORPORATIONS, or your son or daughter will die in those mines!!!  Your safety depends on Washington DC bureaucrats looking out for you.  FEAR FEAR FEAR.  

Box, how does it feel going through life depending on the Federal Government for your safety and security?  It has to be a vulnerable feeling.  I feel sorry for you.

Have you ever heard of "going postal"?  Who protects us from the postman?  Who protects us from a government that assassinates its citizens?

Quoted from CICERO

FEAR FEAR FEAR - SCARE SCARE SCARE!!!  

Nahhhhhh...Good left wing liberals don't use fear politics to justify the power of the state.   Only conservatives do that.   You need the federal government protecting you from those EVIL CORPORATIONS, or your son or daughter will die in those mines!!!  Your safety depends on Washington DC bureaucrats looking out for you.  FEAR FEAR FEAR.  

Box, how does it feel going through life depending on the Federal Government for your safety and security?  It has to be a vulnerable feeling.  I feel sorry for you.

Mines will always be dangerous places.  Federal standards and inspection have cut those dangers for the miners at
a slight increase in costs to the mine owners.
Chart: Mine disasters in the U.S.

I miss Molly Ivins... a funny Texan with a uncanny grasp of political perspective.

This piece is too long to post here but if you're interested in what Molly (and many Americans) think of Paul, it's worth a read.
("The Trouble with Ron" Wednesday, June 2007 )

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/06/trouble-with-ron.html

Quoted from Box A Rox

Mines will always be dangerous places.  Federal standards and inspection have cut those dangers for the miners at a slight increase in costs to the mine owners. [/img]

This is another example of box twisting statistics to fit the predetermined conclusion.  The fact is, mining accidents WORLDWIDE have gone down since 1900.  Why???  Because of technological advancements in the industry, NOT government regulation.  

Once again, box's conclusion was built on a false premise.

History of Mine Safety and Health Legislation


In 1891, Congress passed the first federal statute governing mine safety, marking the beginning of what was to be an extended evolution of increasingly comprehensive federal legislation regulating mining activities. The 1891 law was relatively modest legislation that applied only to mines in U.S. territories, and, among other things, established minimum ventilation requirements at underground coal mines and prohibited operators from employing children under 12 years of age.
In 1910, following a decade in which the number of coal mine fatalities exceeded 2,000 annually, Congress established the Bureau of Mines as a new agency in the Department of the Interior. The Bureau was charged with the responsibility to conduct research and to reduce accidents in the coal mining industry, but was given no inspection authority until 1941, when Congress empowered federal inspectors to enter mines. In 1947, Congress authorized the formulation of the first code of federal regulations for mine safety.

The Federal Coal Mine Safety Act of 1952 provided for annual inspections in certain underground coal mines, and gave the Bureau limited enforcement authority, including power to issue violation notices and imminent danger withdrawal orders. The 1952 Act also authorized the assessment of civil penalties against mine operators for noncompliance with withdrawal orders or for refusing to give inspectors access to mine property, although no provision was made for monetary penalties for noncompliance with the safety provisions. In 1966, Congress extended coverage of the 1952 Coal Act to all underground coal mines.

The first federal statute directly regulating non-coal mines did not appear until the passage of the Federal Metal and Nonmetallic Mine Safety Act of 1966. The 1966 Act provided for the promulgation of standards, many of which were advisory, and for inspections and investigations; however, its enforcement authority was minimal.

The Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969, generally referred to as the Coal Act, was more comprehensive and more stringent than any previous Federal legislation governing the mining industry. The Coal Act included surface as well as underground coal mines within its scope, required two annual inspections of every surface coal mine and four at every underground coal mine, and dramatically increased federal enforcement powers in coal mines. The Coal Act also required monetary penalties for all violations, and established criminal penalties for knowing and willful violations. The safety standards for all coal mines were strengthened, and health standards were adopted. The Coal Act included specific procedures for the development of improved mandatory health and safety standards, and provided compensation for miners who were totally and permanently disabled by the progressive respiratory disease caused by the inhalation of fine coal dust pneumoconiosis or "black lung".

In 1973, the Secretary of the Interior, through administrative action, created the Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration (MESA) as a new departmental agency separate from the Bureau of Mines. MESA assumed the safety and health enforcement functions formerly carried out by the Bureau to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest between the enforcement of mine safety and health standards and the Bureau's responsibilities for mineral resource development.

Next, Congress passed the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act), the legislation which currently governs MSHA's activities. The Mine Act amended the 1969 Coal Act in a number of significant ways, and consolidated all federal health and safety regulations of the mining industry, coal as well as non-coal mining, under a single statutory scheme. The Mine Act strengthened and expanded the rights of miners, and enhanced the protection of miners from retaliation for exercising such rights. Mining fatalities dropped sharply under the Mine Act from 272 in 1977 to 86 in 2000. The Mine Act also transferred responsibility for carrying out its mandates from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Labor, and named the new agency the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). Additionally, the Mine Act established the independent Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission to provide for independent review of the majority of MSHA's enforcement actions.

In 2006, Congress passed the Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act (MINER Act). The MINER Act amended the Mine Act to require mine-specific emergency response plans in underground coal mines; added new regulations regarding mine rescue teams and sealing of abandoned areas; required prompt notification of mine accidents; and enhanced civil penalties.

In the last decade, over 10,000 miners have died of coal workers' pneumoconiosis, or what is commonly called black lung
disease.
Black lung disease, which is caused by inhaling coal mine dust, results in scarring of the lungs and emphysema, shortness
of breath, disability, and premature death.
The prevalence of black lung disease had decreased by about 90% from 1969
to 1995 following the enactment of the Coal Mine Health and Safety Act.

This is the same bullshit OSHA publishes.  They take the industry advancements in safety and technology and claim that they were responsible for it.  It's a great trick, and many people buy into it, especially statists that believe people only act properly and morally when threatened by the state.  Box isn't alone in thinking this way, regardless how much proof and information that disproves that.  And when the state controls the education curriculum, you can be sure that people are only given the states perspective on the effect of legislation.  That's why so many people naturally believe state regulation solved the problem.  

Quoted from Box A Rox

The prevalence of black lung disease had decreased by about 90% from 1969
to 1995 following the enactment of the Coal Mine Health and Safety Act.

Of course there were no advancements of respirators or mine venting over that period of time.  It HAD to be a piece of legislation that cured black lung, that’s the only explanation.  Apparently there were NO other factors that contributed to the decrease.  The bureaucrat in Washington is saving us all.  Thank God for Washington DC.

Quoted from Box A Rox

I miss Molly Ivins... a funny Texan with a uncanny grasp of political perspective.

This piece is too long to post here but if you're interested in what Molly (and many Americans) think of Paul, it's worth a read.
("The Trouble with Ron" Wednesday, June 2007 )

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/06/trouble-with-ron.html

Never was interested in anything Molly Ivins had to say and never will be...she, like you and all liberals wants the masses to believe they represent the
majority of Americans.