Sponsor |  Laukev7 | Dec 5, 2007 9:36pm | On many 'progressive' sites and on Stumbleupon, I find articles and posters that trash Ron Paul, going as far as calling them 'paulbots' and 'paultards'. Most of them focus on issues that are completely irrelevant compared to what is at stake for the United States and the rest of the world.
Now, we know about Ron Paul's deeply held views on issues like gay marriage and abortion, as well as his religious views and his highly capitalist economic views.
But what is this in comparison to the authoritarianism and the flouting of rule of law by the Bush regime that is unprecedented in American history? Or the numerous warnings by economists that the American economy is facing imminent collapse? Or the catastrophic foreign policy of the Bush regime that resulted in the deaths of at least half a million people in Iraq alone? Or the promulgation by stealth of the North American Union? Or the fraudulent elections that resulted in the takeover of said regime? And added to that, the increasing body of evidence that the event that justified all these things was staged by that very same regime in the first place?
What are the Democrats going to do to save the United States, when they voted for all the aforementioned policies, including the recent 'Thought Crimes' bill, even after they gained a House majority? What use is nationalised healthcare going to be when the government goes bankrupt, and especially in the hands of such a corrupt government? Is anyone here aware that China has had debates over same-sex unions even as the same state apparatus violently represses the Falun Gong?
The fact is that Ron Paul is the only real opposition who is not a puppet of ruling elite organisations like the CFR and the Bilderberg Group, and who is backed by significant grassroots support, including outside of the United States. His views on gay marriage and abortion and separation of church and state are irrelevant because of his strict constitutionalism, and the limited constitutional powers of the US presidency; he is known to vote against any federal law that oversteps federal authority. All the federal agencies he wants to dissolve might as well be anyway, because the federal government is corrupt beyond repair, and all those agencies can be replicated later, or at the state level as is done in other countries with better and less centralised social welfare.
Most importantly, he wants to abolish the Federal Reserve, being a unaccountable private institution responsible in major part for the decline of the US economy. He wants to immediately pull the troops out of Iraq. He promised an independent investigation of 9/11, although he does not believe himself that it was staged by the US. His track record shows him to be a honest candidate who strongly respects the US constitution and rule of law. Because of those qualities, he is constantly attacked and censored by the mainstream media.
All this to say that I can't believe the pettiness of the slurs against Ron Paul, for once that a truly democratic candidate is gaining support despite the dubious democratic process. This, in light of the fact that the United States is turning dictatorial, as confirmed by Naomi Wolf's book, and as I've been repeating for years. Isn't it time that democracy, rule of law and human rights become a priority, for the sake of US citizens and the world? |
|
| 
Sponsor | | ntltrmllgnc | Dec 5, 2007 10:10pm | I actually thought the interview on The View was pretty respectful though they got a little heated. Nobody has yet asked him what he would do as governor of a state where the laws and constitution of the state give him more leeway. That part about "you can't win" is irritating not in the least because he enables a lot of people to act. Cured apathy is serious business.
There are a few fetishes left over from various left and right wing national implosions. Rather fetishes for coping that morphed into tenets of urban philosophies. These fetishes like scars bleed when certain individuals of a one stripe or another are vocal and active. But that only explains the misunderstanding of blog commenters, not the vitriol coming from established talking heads on both sides. Stage 3 is always a rough ride.
People are sadly more familiar with the brochure version of a party's positions and this is what we see here.
At the end of the day it's proof that being articulate and being literate are competing values while the sum of both is steadily decreasing as far as citizens are concerned. |
|
|
Sponsor | | Laukev7 | Dec 5, 2007 10:18pm | Well, The View did allow Rosie O'Donnell to talk a bit about 9/11, before they fired her.
People are sadly more familiar with the brochure version of a party's positions and this is what we see here.
This is a good example:
ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm [ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm]
Look at it this way: it's like being in a communist country and supporting Lech Walesa despite his conservative views. |
|
|
Sponsor | | ntltrmllgnc | Dec 5, 2007 11:08pm | | I love the ratings at the end of the sections. There's a percentage yet it's still this black and white pro-con model. |
|
| 
|  utlan | Dec 6, 2007 9:51am | Please correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't what liberals think of Ron Paul sort of irrelevant? He is still only a Republican nomination, you have to be a member of the party to vote on who becomes the presidentail candidate.
(Again excuess me if i'm wrong, i'm not an American and don't know all the details of your system) |
|
|
Sponsor | | ntltrmllgnc | Dec 6, 2007 10:30am | | Depending on the state, you have open or closed primaries. Open you can nominate anyone you like. Closed you can nominate in the party. Who wins runs as the nominee. People from all parties have jumped ship to vote for Ron Paul. |
|
|
| | utlan | Dec 6, 2007 11:57am | | ok thanks for explaining that, i'd done some googling on the subject but searching for "election '08 info" gets you little but campaign pages. |
|
|
Sponsor | |
| 
Sponsor | | MarkPogue | Dec 8, 2007 7:02am | | Kucinich voted against HR 1955. |
|
|
Sponsor | | Laukev7 | Dec 8, 2007 8:13am | | So would have Mike Gravel. But realistically, neither of them have as much of a following as Ron Paul. By the way, Kucinich said he would consider Ron Paul as his running mate; Ron Paul answered likewise. |
| |
| |
Left Liberals → Discussion