Forum Thread

How well do you know Ron Paul?

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 22 1 2 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I note that Ron Paul is now now taking his turn leading in the pack in Iowa polls. As each candidate has taken the lead, it forces more scrutiny of the candidate. While his libertarian views on war and a non-intervention foreign policy are well known and supported by many liberals, I'll share a few tidbits that I dug up on his positions on other less known issues:

    Ron Paul would eliminate the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Internal Revenue Service, calling them "unnecessary bureaucracies".

    Ron Paul would not only abolish the Department of Education but also all student loan programs. Having been Home schooled himself, Ron Paul is a strong advocate of home schooling and promotes tax credits for families that home school. When asked how a student could pay for his college education, Ron Paul said, "The way you pay for cellphones and computers. You have the marketplace there. There's competition. Quality goes up. The price goes down."

    Ron Paul responding to a question on ABC on whether public education was socialist said, "When the state runs things, that's a socialist thing." He added, "I preach home schooling and private schooling and competition."

    Ron Paul was also a sponsor of a proposed amendment that would permit "individual or group prayer in public schools or other public institutions."

    Ron Paul is a sponsor of the proposed Sanctity of Life Act that define life as beginning at conception. He maintains that libertarians should oppose abortion because abortion is "an act of aggression" against a fetus, which is alive, human, and he believes possesses legal rights."

    Ron Paul supported the Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996.

    Ron Paul would abolish the Federal Reserve and supports a return to a commodity based currency. He has repeatedly introduced the Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act since 1999, to enable "America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our Nation's founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold." He opposes dependency on paper fiat money and argues that hard money, such as backed by gold or silver, would prevent inflation..."I wouldn't exactly go back on the gold standard but I would legalize the constitution where gold and silver should and could be legal tender."

    Ron Paul is a self described "free-market environmentalist," and believes that polluters could be held accountable by enforcing private property rights through tort law...which would "increase the cost of polluting activities—thus decreasing pollution."

    Ron Paul on the EPA said: "You wouldn't need it. Environmental protection in the U.S. should function according to the same premise as "prior restraint" in a newspaper." To be fair, he didn't say he would outright abolish the EPA.

    Ron Paul on the SCOTUS Citizens United ruling said, "Well, I think the person who labels themselves a corporation would have equal rights whether they’re an independent business group or a newspaper company."

    Ron Paul opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 stating that it violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty.

    Ron Paul has called for the repeal of the 17th Amendment which replaced state election of U.S. Senators with popular election. Instead Paul would have members of state legislatures vote for U.S. Senators.

    Ron Paul opposed the renewal of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, originally passed to remove barriers to voting participation for minorities.

    Ron Paul as President would reduce his salary to $39,336, the median income of the American worker.

    Ron Paul would also turn Social Security, veterans’ benefits and Medicare into voluntary programs that would allow younger workers to opt out of the entitlements, while fulfilling promises to present-day seniors and veterans. Paul rejects universal health care, believing that the more government interferes in medicine, the higher prices rise and the less efficient care becomes.

    Ron Paul believes that climate change is not a "major problem threatening civilization,"

    Ron Paul when asked whether individuals should be allowed to own machine guns, responded, "Whether it's an automatic weapon or not is, I think, irrelevant."

    I could add more detail but this is just a start. Yes there are some additional issues that resonate well with liberals, but if they are one issue voters, then the list above won't matter. I have deliberately refrained from adding any of my own comments/opinions to this documented list of Ron Paul positions on the issues. You decide.






  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt:


    The interesting thing about Ron Paul is that a few of his ideas  actually make sense, which could explain why he is leading the polls in Iowa ..

    Unfortunately, most of his ideas DON'T make sense.

    On balance, I'd have to say that the majority of his ideas fall into the "are you nuts ?" category, so I don't think that he'll be much of a threat, especially since he is already 76 years old.

    Truth be told, the Republican Party simply does not have a credible candidate for President. Unless the Grand Old Party can somehow discover a viable "dark horse" candidate, Barack, Michelle, Sasha, Malia, and Bo will be spending at least 4 more years at the White House, and that's good for both us liberals, and the rest of the country.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Regular readers, contributors, and D-Hub members will remember:
    "Bad-Gonzo Craziness on the Dark Side of the Spectrum" from September 2010.

    http://www.democratichub.com/posts/3664/default.aspx
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    It's incredible how so many people who call themselves "liberal" advocate violence and force to achieve their ends.

    Ron Paul's ideas don't make sense only to those people who lack information, understanding or both. All of Paul's ideas spring from the promotion of freedom, which is diametrically opposed to force and violence. It is those who are impatient with the freedom of others who turn to force to get what they want. And the greatest promoter of violence in this world is government.

    If you want government to do your bidding, then at least stand up and declare out loud that you are promoting violence, that you are willing to use the force of the state to get what you want, that you are willing to throw people in prison for disagreeing with you or for disobeying your edicts, that you are willing to pull the trigger if they resist.

    Paul will confine government to its constitutionally limited powers to promote freedom, peace and prosperity for all. Paul will exercise restraint in the use of government power, unlike the present occupant of the White House and all of the other Republican candidates. I agree with virtually everything Paul advocates because he is consistently pro-freedom and pro-peace. The alternative is slavery and war.

    This is not about Ron Paul - it is about his message. Ask yourself: Why is he being attacked from all sides of the establishment? MSNBC says he is too far to the right; Dick Morris says he is too far to the left. WTF? Neither makes any sense because the whole left-right spectrum is a scam. The country is being run by banksters through the federal reserve, and the federal government is just a tool of enslavement. Obama, like Gingrich and Romney, is a tool. The establishment doesn't care if a Republican or Democrat wins in November, as long as it is not Ron Paul. He is determined to cut off our shackles and that conflicts with their plans.

    Love and Peace.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Lysander23:

    Thank you. My sentiments exactly. Well said.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Look, the newsletters under his name, probably written by Lew Rockwell, disqualify Ron Paul from the presidency. period. 
    By the way, he didn't start to say that he had not written them until his 1996 campaign. 

    And the media is not reporting on the half of the newsletters, let alone on Ron Paul's connection to various nefarious characters. 

    This man is aligned AT THE HIP with Alex Jones. I don't know about you, but the idea of internet conspiracy propogandists being that close to the presidency bothers the hell out of me.  To put it bluntly, you have got to be smoking crack if you don't understand my concerns.

    Get it now?  

    If a Democrat had wrote this stuff there would be hell to pay.  Nothing J-Wright said comes close to the garbage in RP's Political Survival newsletter.  No equivalency. 

    Ron Paul is insane. Sometimes insane people get a few things right.  Media's confusion/American people's confusion over the left-right spectrum is nothing new. 

    "Train to Nowhere"-Savoy Brown
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Here's Maddow doing her job well:

    "Racism Charge Haunts Ron Paul"- video
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Arizona and El Prezidente,

    Thanks for both for your comments. I'm with you. And yes, El Prezidente, I give you credit for revealing the other side of Ron Paul back in September 2010. I had forgotten about your posting. Ron Paul, however, does have a few good points that resonate with a certain group of young voters. I admire their passion and energy, but as I had to ask the question: How well do they know Ron Paul? Are they just dismissing all the extra baggage or maybe they just don't know or it doesn't matter. For me personally, however, and for those of us that look at the whole Ron Paul package, we are horrified.

    Ron Paul's Plan to "Restore America" would in my opinion actually destroy America. ..basically a prelude to a state controlled by corporations with the government acting on behalf of corporations instead of "We the people."

    So let me repeat some facts: Ron Paul has said he would eliminate the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Internal Revenue Service, calling them "unnecessary bureaucracies." Add to that the Department of Interior. His own website shows zero proposed funding in 2013 onwards for the Departments of Education, Energy, Commerce, Interior and Housing and Urban Development. By eliminating these departments he claims it would save the federal government $1 trillion in the first year. Wow he's going to move fast, assuming we elect a Congress that would actually support him on these crazy ideas.

    Ron Paul's website also says he would repeal ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank, and Sarbanes-Oxley. Have any libertarians taken just a few minutes to investigate the implications of these repeals?

    I've already addressed the concerns of eliminating the Department of Education above. Young voters should take heed of what that will do to their quest for a decent education.

    And getting rid of the Department of Energy will mean oil companies will have to police themselves. Yeah we know how well that works. Not only oil companies but also the nuclear energy industry. Who needs Big Government looking over their shoulder? To his credit Paul has voted against all subsidies for oil and gas companies, but the nuclear energy industry is even more subsidized. He says he supports nuclear power, but would he eliminate those subsidies as well? He is against regulations but he hasn't said if he would repeal the Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act, which puts a cap on the liability of the nuclear power companies in the event of a catastrophe...shifting the big costs to the taxpayers...kind of like a bail-out for screwing up. Without that indemnity, the nuclear power industry would effectively be killed off.

    Ron Paul would slash Medicaid to $181 billion per year from 2013 through 2016 (currently $285 billion) and transfer the money in block grants to the states to administer.

    Ron Paul would slash the Food Stamp program from $64.7 billion per year in 2010 to $30 billion per year 2013 through 2016 and also transfer the money to the states in block grants.

    Ron Paul calls Social Security and Medicare unconstitutional and compares them to slavery. By allowing young people to opt out of Social Security, the current pay-as-you-go basis would drastically reduce funding for seniors. I guess they'll have to fare for themselves in a survival of the fittest world...eventually throwing grandma under the bus.

    Getting rid of ObamaCare and more specifically the individual mandate means young people don't have to carry or pay for insurance...and if they do have to go to the emergency room well it's tough shit...they took the risk. No care. No treatment. "That's what freedom is all about, taking your own risks," Paul replied to Wolf Blitzer on that point. Is this the Utopian view of an a future America that Ron Paul libertarians endorse? Really? Kind of like those communities that have "pay for" fire departments that will watch your house burn down if you hadn't paid the fee. No pay...no treatment...then you die. That's the Ron Paul world...but hey he did mention that maybe faith based organizations might help out. Join a church.

    And getting rid of the Federal Reserve while also converting back to a currency backed by gold and silver? Wow, not a single country's currency in the world today is on the gold or silver standard, and for good reason. It's stupid!! It makes no sense and there is not a reputable economist in the world that would endorse going backwards in time to that ridiculous standard. Wow.

    Oh and Ron Paul advocate for citizens to carry machine guns. I suppose that would make sense as the Top 1 Percenters will have to arm themselves in fortified gated communities when the American workers rise up to protest the enormous additional transfer of wealth upwards that would result from the full implementation of the Ron Paul Plan.

    Republicans are fielding a group of candidates out of touch with the 99 percenters, but Ron Paul in my mind is amongst the worst of them. I could go on and on, about the other departments he would eliminate but I'll just close with a quote from Nick Hanauer in his recently released book, The Gardens of Democracy: "Libertarianism is Machinebrain thinking at it's worst. Machinebrain allows you to rationalize atomized selfishness and neglect of larger problems. It accepts social ills like poverty, environmental degradation, and ignorance as the inevitable outcome of the efficient marketplace. It is fatalistic and reductionist..."

    For many of the Ron Paul disciples, of course, none of this matters...



  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Still working on a response to your inquiries on MMT. Hoping to have something for you to think about over the weekend.
    ....
    Something else on Paul:

    He's a Federal-Level Libertarian and a State's Rights Conservative, or more simply a Neo-Confederate.

    His arguments that he is against Jim Crow but against regulating private business to desegregate fall flat on their face. Recently, Paul told Lawrence O'donnell that Jim Crow laws were unconstitutional. Really, so Paul believes that the 13th, 14th, & 15th Amendments were constitutionally passed? So States don't have a right to secede from the Union? WTF. That's not what he has said in the past. This does not make sense. It is totally ridiculous for a presidential candidate to be this INCOHERENT about our history, constitution, and values, all of which deeply pertains to minority rights. He's no Libertarian in my book. American Anarcho-Capitalists stole the word from European Anarcho-Socialists. "Libertarian-Socialism" is the true Libertarian tradition.
    ....
    Whatever the facts regarding the newsletters, Ron Paul's story keeps changing. He's lieing, incompetant, or senile. And the idea that people would still vote for him shows just how whacked out and widely misinformed this country really is.

    The Big Stupid, Big Weird, Big Darkness is almost upon us. "The possibilitiy of complete mental and physical collapse is now very real."-HST

    Here from you in 2012. It will be worse than I ever imagined. The Edge is just around the corner.

    "What the Hell Have I"- Alice in Chains
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I'll say it again: it is not about Ron Paul - it is the message of freedom, peace and prosperity that is important. That is why his supporters are so fervent. Unlike Obamamania, the Ron Paul campaign is not a cult of personality. Having said that, I have to point out that much of what was posted here by El Prezidente and Schmidt about Ron Paul is pure fabrication. It seems the most damning thing they have against the guy is a newsletter that he didn't write, didn't read, and doesn't endorse.

    If that's the best they can do, perhaps they should focus instead on the message. Tell us why it is preferable to force people into Social Security rather than allow them to choose. Tell us what punishments are appropriate for someone who just wants to opt out. How would you administer those punishments? What if they resisted those punishments? Would you go so far as to imprison them? If they resisted, would you shoot them?

    These are the fundamental questions that need to be answered by every advocate of government violence against others. If you won't be honest with us, at least be honest with yourself.

    And anyone that mocks the idea that the Federal Reserve is a problem should probably wear a helmet every time they leave the house. The Federal Reserve is the tool of the 1% which makes possible their wholesale theft of the people's wealth. Mocking the gold standard is not serious criticism. At the very least, a gold system cannot be manipulated so easily by the banksters, and gold or commodity backed currency represents wealth, not debt. Federal Reserve Notes come into being as debt. Without understanding how the Federal Reserve rips us all off, you cannot get a clear read on the big picture. Take the time to get educated about this extremely dull subject and find out why it is so important.
    Take care.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Check it out:

    Audit of the Federal Reserve Reveals $16 Trillion in Secret Bailouts

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2825696/posts?page=21
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    lysander,

    I stand behind every fact that I presented in my two postings above. I check reliable sources and double check if there is any uncertainty. I check actual quotes by Paul and make sure they were not taken out of context. I have nothing against Ron Paul personally. He seems like a very nice personable guy. I just do not like his policies for the reasons stated. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but providing me an article written by a Freeper doesn't cut it with me. The Free Republic is to the right of Fox News.

    On that issue of the Federal Reserve I would suggest you do some real research on how it came into being in 1913. Start with Wikipedia and then follow their links. Does the Federal Reserve have some problems? Yes, of course, but nothing that would suggest the draconian measures that you and Ron Paul suggest. Any institution is only as good as the people that staff it. If we were to follow your logic, then our entire Congress should be dismantled because public opinion of it is at an all time low. Ditto for SCOTUS...don't like it? Get rid of it. Don't like the IRS? Get rid of it. Don't like the EPA? Get rid of it. Don't like Social Security? Get rid of it.

    Those are easy solutions for anonymous Freepers...like the Monday morning quarterbacks in the coffee room. Lots of feel good demagoguery, but nothing of substance to back it up. It is more difficult to work within these institutions, to analyze facts, and to then mold them by consensus to be more responsive to the majority of Americans. That takes hard work...intellectual thought...and ultimately compromise solutions that have been carefully vetted. And it takes a public to vote in good politicians that are responsive to continually fixing those institutions...not dismantling them. It takes years to grow a tree. An ax can cut it down in seconds.

    Those that like to criticize seldom offer any well thought out alternative solutions. They criticize under the mantra of "freedom" but freedom doesn't mean you are free from paying for anything. Our Democracy does not come free, and those that want to opt out of paying their share in my mind are freeloaders...or to borrow a term from the right...."closet socialists." We take care of our senior citizens under social security and medicare because it is the right thing to do...because we are Americans...and we don't opt out of some taxes or fees that we don't believe in paying.

    On the subject of individual mandates, just who do you expect to pay for your so called "freedom" when you go into the emergency room without any insurance? Me the "other guy"...the insured...the tax payer? I am a proud tax payer...and I believe that America was founded on the principle of "We the people" and not survival of the fittest.

    We are our neighbors keeper when they are in need...and yes the emergency care of hospitals can and should continue to take care of those that cannot afford insurance...and ditto for the freeloaders if they are on a stretcher in critical condition. So don't lecture me on it. I am one that has paid for years with higher insurance premiums. I understand that...but I also know that if everyone paid their share, everyone's insurance premium would be lower. That's why the individual mandate exists...it is not about your idea of "freedom"...it is about shared responsibility...shared costs...We the people.

    Ron Paul has a niche following, and some of those shared views on foreign wars are commendable...I might even support them in part. But the rest of his views are way out of step with mainstream America...both left and right. So go ahead and vote for Ron Paul in the elections, and when he and his think a likes get beat by a mile, accept defeat...that's our democracy at work. If you want to opt out of legislation approved and signed into law, go ahead...but I believe you'll then have to pay a fine, go to jail or leave this beautiful place called the United States of America. You certainly have that freedom to choose.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Look, I like a lot of the Ron Paul people. I met dozens out there Occupying.

    Most of them seem to agree with principles of campaign finance reform, even if their candidate does not.

    I even share a lot of their disgust with the Federal Reserve.

    And back in my anti-war days, I did a lot of protesting with some Ron Paul people. In fact, I've come to appreciate Ron Paul and his son. Their nay votes on the NDAA win praise from me. 

    I just call it like I see it, as does Schmidt, whose thoroughness is without question. Please don't lump him in with me. His posts are always well-sourced with numerous quality links.
    ............
    Not quite sure what it is I'm fabricating about Ron Paul. Much of the newsletters are written in the first person (I, Ron Paul, did such and such). Ron Paul only started saying he did not write the newsletters in his 1996 campaign. Now he says he never even read them until ten years after they were written. He's full of shit and his supporters are fooling themselves. 
    ......................
    By the way, two UMKC PhD students documented over 29 trillion in low cost FED lending (link @ NEP).
    We're living under Big Government for the Rich. Public-purpose is dead. Occupy Congress. 1/17/12. Bring Tent. 

    "Don't Tread on Me"-Metallica
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Just found this:

    Ron Paul: Civil Rights Act Of 1964 'Destroyed' Privacy @ Huffington Post.  



  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Paul says today's race problems result from the War on Drugs, the judicial system, and the military: what do these things have to do with the Civil Rights Act?

    Privacy was undermined?
    How is government telling people to segregate different than government protecting right of business owners to discriminate against minorities? 

    It's an offense against liberty, whether it is commanded by the state, or allowable under its law.  People got a right to enter businesses and shop, regardless of their skin color,ethnicity, or religion. Private business stands ontop of a mountain of public investment. Regulations, in fact, birth business contracts and corporations; and public-tax dollars are used to support those regulations.  Regulations allow for limited liability partnerships and corporations; this, in fact, introduces a moral hazard that those smoking the crack pipe filled with the gospel of the freemarketplace have long forgotten about in their "search for a moral justification of their greed."-John Kenneth Galbraith.   

    Furthermore, a member of every race, creed, and religion has died in battle defending this nation. Private business is supporting by rivers of American blood spilled all over the globe.  The terms of doing business in America is that racism, sexism, ethnic, and religious discrimination has no place in legal commerce.  No institution, region, or individual is above this fundamental rule of legal, economic, and political equality.  One nation, under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for All.