25
Feb
08

THOROUGH Assessment of Ron Paul

This is quite a long blog because it’s one I take very seriously. I’ve bolded each issue though, in the case you don’t want to read every word (most of you, i’m sure!)

I’ve been avoiding writing this, hoping Ron Paul and his followers would see the writing on the wall at some point and exit stage left. But noooooo, they’re on some strange campaignphetamine and have forsaken all hold on reality in hopes their insanity will somehow be affirmed by a miraculous success that “the media can’t ignore!”

The followers want the Republican nomination to remain unsettled until the convention have launched a movement calling on all followers to try and become delegates at the National Convention. I won’t go so far as to say they want to steal the nomination, but they are trying to round up enough delegates who will vote Ron Paul either after their first choices have dropped out or even abdicate the position of the voters in their state or district, which they represent. You can read the views of these “enthusiasts” on the “Become a Delegate or Ron Paul will NOT be President” site and this Ron Paul Forum entry from Feb. 5 which the author titles “Things going according to plan. Don’t lose hope.” The rules for Republican delegate obligations are varied and described a bit on The Republican Source.

In light of the intent by Ron Paul supporters’ to attempt (no matter how serious) to hijack the Republican Convention, it’s time for me to pitch in chronicle my assessment of this cracker jack.

The Bush Effect

In the early stages of the campaign, I knew Ron Paul didn’t have a chance in hell of garnering the Repub nomination. Paul’s following is a result of what I call “The Bush Effect.” If it were not for the turmoil perpetrated by Bush and Cheney over the last seven years, much of what we’re seeing on the political landscape today wouldn’t have been possible. I never would have considered Hillary for president, a fairly green senator from Illinois would have to put in a few more years on the national level before being taken seriously, and the immense increase of democrat voter turnout over Republican voter turnout would have been a dream.

Ron Paul’s candidacy falls into this category. Never would such a rabid following of enthusiasts who have very little understanding of the development of civilization, the dynamics of a successful government and electoral science have been able to coalesce around a fringe, Libertarian candidate so well that he garners more votes than Mayor 9/11 himself, Giuliani, and participates in all meaningful Republican debates.

The unendingly wretched decisions of Goober Bush and Diablo Cheney have made the impossible possible.

Initial Interest and Approval

Ron Paul at a glance seems like a great candidate for change. He labels himself a Libertarian and a smaller, limited governmental beast always seems a good idea. He thinks we never should have gone to Iraq and should get out immediately. I agree the U.S. cannot act as the world’s police (a line Bush used in running for the 2000 nomination). While not for legalized abortion and gay marriage, he believes these decisions should be left to the states – a much better stance than the typical conservative Republican. He signed the American Freedom Agenda Pledge, which I wholeheartedly support and he’s against eminent domain. If nothing else, I appreciated the conversation Ron Paul brought to the Republican Party. From the outset of the campaign, I intended on voting Democrat in order to balance the Supreme Court, but I try to give every candidate across all party lines their due consideration. Ron Paul wudn’t bad, as we say in Texas. The “wudn’t” part, that is.

In the efforts of full disclosure, my boyfriend and partner, Brendan is from Lake Jackson. Ron Paul was the obstetrician who delivered some his friends. So, we heard about him early on and, I must confess, I believe his geographical origins are the main reason for his support among some people we know. You always want to root for the home team. But not mindlessly, as I see many doing today.

Investigation, Research and Disappointment

As I took the mandatory squiz into Ron Paul’s stance on the issues, voting record, and basic history, it became clear this was a candidate I could never support.

Immediately, the support home schooling garners on his site struck me as a red flag. I’m not a huge proponent of home schooling, not necessarily in principle, but because the majority of home schooling is a result of parents who are closemindedly christian and do not want their children exposed to certain tenants in public education – evolution, abstinence, STDs, much of the literature. I’ve belonged to a number of churches in my past in which a number of the congregates home schooled and saw first hand how unexposed and brainwashed their children were. Brendan and I have experienced working and interacting with adults who were home schooled as children and to say they were socially inept is an understatement. We witnessed their failure to effectively interact with coworkers and socially and the subsequent shunning they experienced. While there are certain circumstances under which I would support home schooling – sometimes it’s a requirement for education because of geographical factors – but the widespread encouragement of home schooling (as you sometimes see here in Texas) is never a movement I could endorse because of the negative effects it has on the children.

Secondly, Ron Paul’s letter to gun owners on his website was a huge obstacle for me as a voter. Yes, here in Texas the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is significant. Ron Paul says the “high-and-mighty politicians” want to “Force law-abiding American citizens who want to protect themselves through more bureaucratic rigmarole and throw up more ‘gun free zone’ signs.” Well, the language of the letter is incendiary (who says high-and-mighty anymore?). I don’t believe there’s a gun owner around every corner threatening me and I certainly do not support ever law-abiding citizen’s right to own an uzi and any semi-automatic weapon. The tremendous amount of gun crimes is due largely to the availability of firearms which is due largely to the objection to gun control. (what i find really ironic is that most right to bear arms proponents are christian. so you ask them, what about the bible and an eye for an eye or women submitting completely to their husbands and sitting on their own side in church, shushed into silence. i always here, well that’s a reference to the situation of the times and doesn’t apply today) Bearing arms was a necessity when the Constitution was written. I’m not sure we should suspend the Right to Bear Arms, but let’s have a bit more historical context in our need to protect ourselves against a tyrannical government.

Then we have Ron Paul’s very unlibertarian stance on illegal immigration. I do not believe illegal immigration is a huge threat to the United States. Ron Paul’s very political existence, in his words, is to protect the foundations of this country – meaning the Constitution. Yet illegal immigration is a foundation of this country as well. The U.S. has experienced wave after wave of various illegal immigration groups and responded in fear and intolerance. Yet, each time, the economy and culture absorbed these immigrants well until the fear had passed and the group was accepted. What our economy cannot tolerate is the deportation of over 12 million workers who are here illegally. Farmers, restaurateurs, construction and other industries would be threatened at every level. It is fear-mongering that has the country lashing out at undocumented workers needlessly. Ron Paul contributes to perpetration of such lies – while his supporters accuse everyone else of lying about him.

Having studied intently on the subject of economics, Ron Paul’s approach is strictly in support of free-market Capitalism, as well as the elimination of the Federal Reserve, income tax, the IRS and many departments of the U.S. government. I do not support any pure economic theory, whether its Capitalism or Communism, as it fails to truly interpret and react to the human pysche. These theories assume far too much about human behavior to be effectively applied without hindrance. Economic activity must be a balance of many elements, including capitalism and socialism, to truly benefit the society to which they are applied.

Hypocrisy

Ron Paul has claimed repeatedly to believe that abortion is a legal question best left to the states. Yet, he is the sponsor of unsuccessful The Sanctity of Life Act which would define life at conception and protects life from conception to birth. A federal law defining life at conception would basically handicap any state law legalizing abortion because it would amount to murder. Paul’s repeated statements that he believes abortion should be a states’ right is a lie – evidenced by his intent to change federal law to prevent the surgical act and private right. Also, Ron Paul asserts a “partial birth abortion is never a necessary procedure.” He goes on to say, “The lack of respect for life that permits abortion significantly contributes to our violent culture…” If anyone of you has read Freakonomics, you would know that abortion actually contributes to a decrease in violent crime. Just FYI. He is even a member of the Association of American Physicians – a right-wing group of doctors that are opposed to abortion and believe in the free market so they may choose whatever price they want to provide medical services.

Now I will address the controversial newsletters published between 1988 and 1996 under Ron Paul’s name that have questionable messages and innuendos. The newsletters were at various times survivalist or pro-militia, anti-semitic, racist, homophobic, conspiracy theorist and isolationist. Ron Paul says he didn’t write the newsletters and doesn’t know who did (which I believe to be a patent lie) and believes that should be the end of the story. “A Libertarian can’t be racist.” And his supporters think so too. That the American voter should not be concerned with the fact that such ugly, hateful, putrid language was published under a presidential candidate’s name is sheer ridiculousness. Paul has also said he would make all the newsletters available and has not made one effort towards fulfilling his word – leaving it up to The New Republic to dig them up. First of all, his explanation is NOT enough. Second of all, the fact that he’s still a minor player in the race without much attention from the other candidates and media shows how little he is being taken seriously in this race. If he were a real factor, everyone would be going to town on this guy’s past and he would have been forced out long ago. The newsletters are so offensive, I am amazed people would sully their name by endorsing this fellow!

Voting Record

Then I decided to visit Club For Growth and view his voting record, where I discovered many votes on which I personally would have differed. Though I did approve of many of his votes, these are the ones that irked me a bit:

  • Voted for an amendment to prohibit the use of appropriated funds for the development of national reading and math tests
  • Votes against all free trade agreements because he thinks trade is inherently free and we don’t need all these silly stipulation. An isolationist view with clear miscalculating of our increasingly globalized world
  • Voted against a minimum wage increase
  • Voted against an amendment that imposed costly arsenic standards on small water systems
  • Voted against an amendment imposing new mileage standards on automobiles
  • Voted against a bill to criminalize so-called price gouging among oil companies
  • Voted for a bill to prohibit federal officials from nominating U.S. lands for protection without prior congressional approval
  • Paul opposes tort reform

Ron Paul Supporters – Hate Groups

Overwhelmingly, white supremacists, pro-militia groups, conspiracy theorists, 9/11 thruthers, and Neo-Nazis support Ron Paul. I would list all the white supremacist groups who support him here if it wouldn’t make me throw up. Should he have to pay for the sins of his followers? Should he have to return their contributions or publicly denounce them? Denounce them, yes.

It is a real and significant question to ask if a person who garners the favor of hate group after hate group would be the best representative for the people of the U.S. and even the free world. This alone, in my opinion, negates him as a viable candidate for president. He never discusses this branch of his support and this, coupled with his past newsletters, indicates to me he speaks Libertarian like the CATO Institute, yet lives and thinks the Libertarian of the Ted Kaczynski/Timothy McVeigh style. “R”evol“ution”? My ass.

And as we see more credible Libertarians abandon his campaign, it is more easily understood that Paul is not for limited government, but for no government. We all have our compounds and apply our own laws. Does he think the South should have had the right to secede? I question how badly he wants to protect the Constitution and his flavor of Libertarianism in general.

Misc. Points

Stealing the Republican Nomination
Ron Paul has many intriguing positions and declarations that allow me to understand his appeal and his cultish following – especially in today’s corporatocracy. Taking into consideration ALL that I have found – and there is a wealth on his positions because he writes so often (a practice to encourage among politicians – he is not a candidate I could support now or ever. Having seen the results of his campaign, it would seem a point moot at this time.

Think again.

In what seems good enough fodder for a conspiracy theory, many his followers want to amass enough delegates at the Republican Convention to give him the nomination anyway! Some think he is the only Republican candidate who could beat the Democratic Nominee. Talk about drinking the Kool-Aid.

I realize many Ron Paul supporters are normal, rational people. I don’t know many of them, but I’m sure they exist. It is with the crazies who want to amass delegates at the Convention that I have a quarrel.

In the Republican primaries so far, give or take a few minor errors, I have calculated 618,094 voters have cast their ballot for Ron Paul. 7,434,090 have voted for McCain and 2,874,007 have voted for Huckabee. Ron Paul has earned less than 4.5 percent of the overall nearly-14 million votes in the Republican primary. And yet his followers still want him to be the Republican nominee. As a Government major in college, you can understand how blasphemous I feel such strategy is!

The U.S. is a representative democracy. For the most part, we choose our elections through a majority or plurality votes. For Ron Paul supporters to think it’s right that they get together to usurp the nomination in direct contravention with the overall will of Republican voters, is shameful. Paul says he will remain in the race as long as his supporters want him to and will use his newfound influence and money to affect other political races. Such is his right.

But end this hope for the Republican nomination. It is wrong at its very base regardless of delegate equations. Only if Ron Paul were to gather a majority of the votes, even if he wasn’t allotted a majority of the delegates, would it be understandable to make a grab for the nomination. This cannot and will not happen.

Ron Paul has been good for discussion and a benefit to the process. But that’s it.

Advertisements

18 Responses to “THOROUGH Assessment of Ron Paul”


  1. February 25, 2008 at 5:46 pm

    Holy hell… talk about incendiary. I don’t even know where to begin…

    #1. Home schooling – While I agree most children (that i’ve met) come out of homeschooling naive and underexposed, It is their parents right to be able to teach them the way they see fit. So, his support of home schooling is a constitutional one. I’ve heard him he say many times over that he would like to bring about privatizing the education system. Where schools would have to compete over students and according to the free-market system the school that taught the best, and espoused views that the parents wanted instilled in their child would win out. (Marketplace theory of the first amendment as well)

    #2. Your second argument about crime being tied directly to the amount of citizens who legally own a gun is laughable. Check some government statistics… the crime committed with illegal firearms quadruple that of crimes with legal guns. Seriously read some government statistics.

    #3. You are again incorrect on immigration. Since the mid 19th century most of the immigrants obtained legal citizenship. Only in the last several decades as illegal immigration been anywhere near as rampant a problem as it is now. This is a constitutional problem, why reward criminals with the privilege of becoming a US citizen? What kind of message does that send? When you really need something, just go ahead and take it… don’t worry about the law because we will amend it for you. A lot of his immigration stance is more or less a commentary on the republicans position that we are in Iraq for our safety. He correctly points out that wouldn’t America be more safe if we had soldiers on our border stopping illegal immigration, drugs and terrorists, et al.

    I’ve got to stop there for now… but if you want to continue this debate i’ll discuss some economic theory and address some more of your points. I would however like to add, although i agree with hardly anything you wrote, you are a very articulated and seemingly intelligent person.

    -James
    http://www.thepoliticus.org

  2. February 25, 2008 at 7:41 pm

    “Never would such a rabid following of enthusiasts who have very little understanding of the development of civilization, the dynamics of a successful government and electoral science have been able to…” Blah, blah, blah.

    I am sooooooo very,very tired of this sort of sophomoric blather from someone who goes on to show a thorough misunderstanding of civilization, government and “electoral science,” whatever that is.

    Yes, I can see a Ron Paul supporter approaching a polling place now.

    “Uh, I’d like to vote, please.”

    “Gee, too bad, buddy. You have no understanding whatsoever of the development of civilization and have no place in our representational democracy. It’s people like you who set electoral science back thirty years just by your mere presence.”

    Representational democracy?

    Please.

    What a tired, tired rehash of the least creative of the recent Ron Paul smears.

    I especially liked the bit about Dr. Paul not “believing” in evolution.

    Sad indeed.

  3. 3 charles ranalli
    February 25, 2008 at 8:56 pm

    boy are you wrong.
    Ron Paul is the only candidate who is even close to right on the real issues.
    but i see you have no problem with murdering a partially born baby –
    so i guess that says it all.
    charles ranalli
    albuquerque

  4. 4 Paige
    February 25, 2008 at 9:21 pm

    To jposty and meredith
    Weeellllllll, that was long. So is mine…

    Small point of grammar and etiquette, but a doctor who is a medical doctor gets addressed as “Dr.”

    As for home-schooling, I have considered it over the past 2.5 years, But thought that my children need to be exposed to other folks’ hysteria too, just to know how to deal. That having been said, what is the purpose of our public school system? Some folks, commies and libertarian alike would say that as it stands, the purpose of the system is to create sheep who think that they are thinking for themselves, but are really only learning the jingoistic pablum that keeps the powers that be firmly entrenched. Did Jefferson really want an educated electorate? I’m sure he did. But I’m not sure how the federally mandated but unfunded NCLB and/or public funds going for private schooling (i.e. vouchers)would help.

    But IF we go with vouchers as the cure to all our public education ills, like the Libertarians seem to espouse (and various others, too), then it seems to me that we are adopting a “survival of the fittest” mode. That is to say that those who are thinkers and carers and have the money and time(everyone should take the time) to explore various schooling options for their kids will have better educated kids, and those that don’t? Well, their kids will probably remain the generational poor. Too bad for them.

    That seems to me a bit like saying to a Jehovah’s Witness, “Okey doke, no blood transfusion for your kid then…how would you like to proceed with the funeral arrangements?”

    Also about illegal immigration- maybe we need to rethink the way INS (or whatever it is now) and the immigration process work. I know white, legal, highly educated immigrants who are very afraid of the INS. I can understand how those who came here legally, through an often tortuous path, want those who are here without documantation to be deported. It does seem to go against Liberatian principles though. Shouldn’t folks be able to travel and hire out their labor to the highest bidder, no matter what the consequences? Maybe I’m misunderstanding the completely free-market, or maybe it’s just freer for some than others. If you want to curtail illegal immigration, crack down on the folks who hire the people in the first place.

    Oh, and I don’t really like the legality of semi-automatic weapons either.

  5. February 25, 2008 at 9:50 pm

    Fighting a technocratic oppression, how else would you resist government oppression but without semi-automatic weapons. Because, that was the only reason amendment two made it into the bill of rights. It was the to ensure our ability to revolt against an oppressive and illegal government that usurps the people and violates its mandates per the constitution.

    As for your comments on the free-market system… slightly misguided. Free-markets still need to adhere to national law. They are allowed to hire foreign workers, they are free to build factories in other lands… but are still subjected to domestic laws. The issue with the current laws regulating our economy is that they go well and beyond their mandate. The constitution says it can regulate interstate commerce and protect the borders… other than that and a few others (anti-monopoly, et al) that was the end of their mandate.

    -James
    http://www.thepoliticus.org

  6. 6 Jon
    February 25, 2008 at 9:59 pm

    That anyone thinks that a mayor especially Guiliani is more qualified to be
    president than a 10 term rhouse member is laughable.

    As far as your comment that the right to bear arms is behind the times, the right to
    bear arms had nothing to do with hunting but rather for citizens to protect themselves
    from an oppressive government and is needed today more than ever as the average citizen
    is already severely disadvantaged compared to our modern military.

    and lastly people support Ron Paul because they are sick of the federal government
    taking money from one group and giving it to another group with strings attached.
    Why should the federal government give money to the state when the state collects
    it’s own taxes? Why are we subsidizing tobacco farmers, do you really think the
    tobacco companies will let tobacco farmers go out of business? Why are we protecting
    South Korea from North Korea when South Korea has an economy 30 times larger than
    North Korea, don’t you think they can protect themselves?

  7. 7 heath
    February 26, 2008 at 12:50 am

    i liked this blog entry. it was linked from google news election area. i did not think i was going to like it by the title either. i liked how you sourced some of your points too. that’s missing these days. too bad people do not source their comments when they criticize your blog. they tell you to go look up this or that. as if you want to do anymore work on something you already wrote. strong arguments and validity get lost somewhere discussions these days. i still like how ron paul tells his party that they are wrong. america needs to hear other people opinions. even if they are different, and even if we think they are wrong.

  8. 8 jkhutz
    February 26, 2008 at 4:24 am

    You have a whole lot of “indoctrinated” (and to me weird) positions on a host of things.

    1 Home Schooling: I’ve worked with a lot of youth over the years, and ALWAYS the private schooled kids are slightly more advanced and more mature than the public schooled ones, and the home schooled kids are SUBSTANTIALLY more advanced and more mature for their age than EITHER the private or the public schooled children. Don’t know (maybe it your locale) where you get the idea that it is all “fundy closeminded christians” that home school — in MY state it is a whole variety of parents, and increasingly is driven by their concerns over the strictly ACADEMIC issues with schools (their children unable to understand basic math and reading, etc.)

    2 Gun Control: Again you’ve swallowed a whole load of oversimplified BS. Gun control does NOT lower crime. Different violent crimes have a variety of root causes, but the mere existence or ownership of guns is definitely NOT one of them.

    And the rest of your problems show equal confusion and seeking of government to “solve” all of your problems. Good luck with that.

  9. 9 Edward M.
    February 26, 2008 at 6:59 am

    “But noooooo, they’re on some strange campaignphetamine . . .”

    Meredith, do you only play games you know you’ll win? Well, given your angry-left outlook, you probably do. It’s only natural that you react this way towards a candidate who threatens the entitlement system you cherish.

  10. 10 zoey
    February 26, 2008 at 9:28 am

    Ron Paul believes taxes on tips= legalized theft!
    Authored the Health Freedom Protection Act, H.R. 2117, to ensure Americans have access to uncensored information about supplements and natural remedies.
    Supports the Access to Medical Treatment Act, H.R. 2717, which expands the ability of Americans to use alternative medicine and new treatments.
    Ron Paul will: Bring the troops home now.
    Stop the looting of Social Security.
    Save $trillion overseas, reducing our debt, helping veterans, children and seniors, and cutting taxes. End forced health screening and vaccinations.
    Oppose WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA, and the NAU.
    Fight for freedom to choose health care. Stop corporate welfare and polluters.
    Protect our privacy and civil liberties.
    Stop the national ID card.
    Oppose internet taxes and regulation.
    And soooooo much more.
    Please check out Ron Paul2008.com
    Ron Paul
    HOPE FOR AMERICA
    Be a part of it

  11. 11 roland
    February 26, 2008 at 10:22 am

    Meredith, is it really that hard to admit that you don’t like Ron Paul? You are entitled to your opinion and that is what this blog is all about. It’s your OPINION. Ron Paul(and the Constitution) and you obvoiusly have different views about what the Federal Government should be. Even still, Ron Paul and his supporters are fighting for your right to express that opinion. There have been many laws passed since 9/11 in the name of “security” that do nothing more than give the Federal Gevernment more control of you. If you are so for individual rights you would be best to support Ron Paul. Not one person running for office has fought for personal liberty more than Dr. Paul.

    Are you for partial birth abortion? Do you even know how they do that? Google it sometime. If it’s a womans choice to abort why not is it then to have her children Homeschooled? You obviously have a problem with homeschooled kids, so does the Department of Education. Which is another Government agency making decisions for you.

    A scenario for you: A woman is on her way to the clinic to have an abortion, she’s in the first trimester. On her way there she is hit and killed by a drunk driver. He doesn’t die. Why is he charged with TWO counts of Capital Murder? By your logic, shouldn’t he be charged with ONE? If the fetus isn’t alive til it’s born therefore abortionable throughout the entire pregnancy, why is the drunk driver charged with killing 2 people. The mother was on her way to the clinic to have it killed anyway, why charge him with 2? If you ignore everything I say, please answer this for me.

    One more thing; you forgot to mention that even though ALL the hate groups in the United States support Ron Paul his top 3 groups of supporters are the UNITED STATES AIR FORCE……THE ARMY……AND THE NAVY! According to the FEC Ron Paul has more support in terms of $ and actual votes than the dems/rep COMBINED. Was that by mistake? no, probably not. You also stated that Ron Paul doesn’t get scrutinized by the MSM because he is not a “top tier” candidate there for still has support. Well, how do you explain the lack of scrutiny of Obama, McCain and Hillary? They have really incriminating secrets that are readily available for the picking. If the media was so concerned about the people of this country they would be exposing the 2 SOCIALISTS and the KNOWN BRIBE ACCEPTING SENATOR that has again accepted bribes. Why no big breaking by the MSM, or any mention of it by you?

    Sorry, you would probably have to research these things to, so i guess we won’t be getting an ‘Unbiased” report.

  12. 12 David Hannes
    February 26, 2008 at 10:24 am

    Talk about ‘brainwashed’… geeez. You believe it’s more important to be well socialized than be well educated? That’s the what I got out of your analysis of home-schooled kids. Priorities are reversed there, don’t you think?

    What is so difficult to understand about ‘Gun Control’ being the end of freedom? We have the right to possess any kind of weapon the the military uses. That’s what assures us that we won’t be run over by our own government. Look at history. Before the holocaust, Hitler instituted gun control. Stalin, the same thing. On and on. Before a tyrannical government can take over a country they must first disarm them. But then, maybe you wouldn’t mind that.

  13. 13 roland
    February 26, 2008 at 10:38 am

    meredith, i hope i don’t offend you. that wasn’t my intention, i just get really tired of being called a RACIST and SPAMMER. I really do like your writing style, it’s really good. Fact is throughout this entire campaign we’ve been called really hateful and demeaning things just for supporting a candidate that supports the Constitution.
    That is how far off course we have gone. We no longer chart the waters by the guidelines setforth by the Constitution. We have a true Captain that has been silenced and belittled by the pirates in charge. They have hid the only Captain that knows the real treasure is the treasure protected by the map that gave birth to this journey, the Constitution. The crew fights and bickers and just when you think mutiny will set us on our proper course the crew is given “freebies” to settle down and get back to being good little row-boaters. every now and then a pirate is “sacrificed” to apease the crew. There are a few crew members who have learned the truth and will keep up the fight to inform others of the hijacking that has taken place.

    yeah, it’s kinda long.
    Good luck with your wiritng Meredith, if you truly believe you are doing the correct thing keep doing it. peace.

  14. 14 E.Velez
    February 26, 2008 at 11:05 am

    I expected a different kind of post. The arguments in the beginning were a little weak (as they applied to other candidates as well) but they got stronger toward the end. There was a strong anti-religious bias in your writing and I’m not certain you can blame christians for so many ills. It’s not like they are a cult like Scientology. Outside of a belief in Jesus/God (to varying degrees), this group assimilates well into the rest of society. Anyway…

    Home schooling can be effective for some if done with a mix of social activities. I look at the educational system today and I see gangs, fights, drugs, bullies, suspect teachers, racism, sexism, cliques[sic], misshapened[sic] priorities and so much more. These kids are tomorrow’s society.

    Your point of view regarding illegal border crossings might change if the influx of folks coming over were from the middle-east. I know this is going to sound extremely prejudiced (don’t care) but my experience with midde easterners (40 years) is that they bring a tremendous amount of hatred to the US (anti-jewish, anti-black, anti-women, anti-America). I have seen this so often that I hold little regard for these people in general. What applies to one group should apply to all groups.

    In the end, I couldn’t support Ron Paul because he is an isolationist. He really wants nothing to do with any other country (socially and economically). The US can’t afford to isolate itself and this seems to be his agenda. At home… his views are strongly big business. He doesn’t even match well with other candidates in his tech views (which are anti-people and pro-business). There’s a war going on in regard to digital rights and Ron Paul has already chosen the rights of business over consumers: http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9864581-38.html

    If it was 1776 and we were building everything from scratch, I might support him… but we learn from experience and Ron Paul seems to want to toss 230+ years away and turn back the clock to the dark ages.

    Ron Paul’s anti-war message is a good one but it really isn’t an anti-war message – it’s an isolationist message.

  15. 15 RM
    February 26, 2008 at 11:30 am

    “THOROUGH”….um, no. Not even partially original. Nearly every word you typed was fed to you by the media establishment. Matter of fact, it seems to me that you have lost your gag reflex.

    But I will always find it amazing that sheep can learn to type. Good trick Meredith!

  16. February 26, 2008 at 11:42 am

    E.Velezsaid – How is Dr. Paul an isolationist when he advocates trade and diplomacy with all nations, the abolition of trade-embargo practices and the end to bribing governments to do our biding?

    Those are just some of the few things that continually pop into my head when people start spouting off some isolationist nonsense.

    -James
    http://www.thepoliticus.org

  17. February 26, 2008 at 12:10 pm

    Read the Constitution and get out more. The U.S. is a constitutional republic, founded on Republican beliefs, where individual rights are protected. It was not intended to be a democracy where 51% of the people could control the rights of the other 49%. The founders thought that this was a very bad idea. What is happening in this country will reach you sooner than you think.

    Ron Paul’s Constitutional based ideas about freedom and natural human rights will attract extremists who believe that their rights are being abused. His ideas will also attract intelligent individuals who have not been indoctrinated and everyday human beings who have had their rights trampled on. It’s unfortunate that so many will have to suffer before they will realize that he is representing the truth.

    Most Ron Paul supporters have exceeded their goals. A movement to return the federal government to its intended and rightful level of power and control over our lives has grown exponentially. True Republicans are now preparing to run for Congress in many more states.

    In the Dallas/Fort Worth area, after citizens were allowed to carry guns, the crime rate dropped instantly and it didn’t just drop a little bit. If you followed the development of the area, you would have noticed that the increase in the crime rate coincided with the influx of foreign investment, the disenfranchisement of the population, and the increase in illegal immigration. It had nothing to do with controlling or not controlling guns.

    School drop out rates are on the increase because the public school system has become oppressive and children do not respond well to oppression. The smarter ones refuse to be indoctrinated. If children resist the process of oppression and indoctrination, the school system attempts to drug them. Bullying of weaker but more individual children not only goes unchecked but, the children who attempt to defend themselves are punished. The number of people choosing home schooling in order to protect their children is increasing as a result.

    Evolution is a reasonable theory. It is still being investigated and developed but is far from being fact. The idea that it is taught as fact and the number of children and young adults who now believe that it is a fact is alarming. This will result in the stagnation of science with future scientists laboring to prove an existing theory instead of coming up with new ideas. We have already seen this with the 100 year old Big Bang theory, which was, interestingly, proposed by a Catholic priest. This theory is not even reasonable as it exceeds all known physical laws. Another by-product is that teachers smirk as children are ostracized by their peers for being religious while the Catholic church says that both theories are consistent with its teachings.

    What is at question is when a human being becomes a human being. If this happens at conception, that human being has inalienable rights and is protected by the Constitution. If this doesn’t happen at conception, you can’t convict a murderer for killing a fetus when he/she kills its mother before the fetus has reached human being status. The federal government is supposed to protect the individual rights of human beings in this country. A mother does not have the right to kill her children. Her children’s rights are protected by the Constitution.

    The federal government is supposed to protect this country’s sovereignty, its borders, and its Citizens’ rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This means that 20,000,000 Mexicans, Chinese, Koreans, Russians, Canadians, Irish, Iraqis, etc. cannot just come here and take over. We accept immigrants through a legal immigration process. Anyone who comes here otherwise is a criminal and a threat to the country. A country can be defeated economically.

    Again, read the Constitution. It is the law. It is a contract between the states and the federal government that specifies what powers that the federal government has and protects our individual rights within the states. The states and the federal government all agreed to this. It is not some new, radical, extremist idea. When the federal government assumes powers not provided to it by the Constitution, it is violating the law.

    After you read the Constitution, you will discover that Ron Paul is the only Congressman who has properly represented his constituents.

  18. 18 tu-lips
    February 26, 2008 at 12:18 pm

    Speaking of Kool-Aid – looks like you’ve been imbibing a little, yourself…just a slightly different flavor is all…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Scarlet Letter of Atheism

a

Bloggers' Rights at EFF

Blog Stats

  • 95,129 hits
WordPress Political Blogger

Top Clicks

  • None

%d bloggers like this: