Ron Paul For America

[Makalakumu]

This has been one of the weirdest political seasons of my life. And I think that it reflects the height of my cynicism regarding American politics. Here I am, a Paul Wellstone-esque collectivist liberal and I'm supporting Ron Paul for president.

Why would I do this?

It's because I don't think that significant change can happen before even more major problems are dealt with in this country. Ron Paul is the only person with a plan that would correct those problems.

Mark my words, in 2008 and in the next presidential term, the financial state of this country will become the main priority of the next president. The bottom is dropping out on the value of our currency and the government is spending more and more money that it doesn't have.

You can't even think about universal health care, education, and/or poverty without first fixing these problems.

Our country is in desperate need of a priority change. We need to remember the principles our founding fathers set out to guide this country and then work from there.

I don't beleive in everything that Ron Paul beleives. Especially his social policies, but as far as a good overall candidate that will actually do something about facing the most major challenges this country has to face, Ron Paul is the only guy, IMHO.

Hopefully this thread starts some good discussion. The problems facing this country are such that even a liberal like me will make a last desperate gamble...

 

[Makalakumu]

The Federal Reserve and the state of our financial system.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...943&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Ron Paul owns the Fed

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=254789066215671796

 

[Makalakumu]

The depth of this problem...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...943&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=3

 

[Makalakumu]

Another major problem related to money that Ron Paul will deal with...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...947&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

 

[Makalakumu]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...=21&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Another major problem that Ron Paul wants to deal with. He wants to bring our defense policy back in line with how our constitution set it out to be. We need to remove ourselves from foriegn entanglements. We need to slash our "defense" budget so that our military only needs to defend us. We need to eliminate entire departments and agencies whose secrets corrupt the very heart of america...

 

[michaeledward]

Dr. Paul has so many positions that are so hard to stomach.

Certainly, he is informed on woman's reproductive rights ... and I disagree.

His position on the United Nations is another I disagree with.

His positions and proposals concerning the second amendment, I disagree with.

When he mentions 'property rights' in discussions about the environment, I hear about toxic pollutants filling our ecosystem.

I am sure, if I spent a few minutes more on his website, I could find a plethora more of ideas with which I disagree.


And despite all this, I actually checked to see if I could switch my party affiliation to vote for him in the First in the Nation New Hampshire Primary. I did miss the cutover date.

I think his position on monetary policy is critical to the nation. And, of course, I fully support and understand his position on Iraq. His positions on privacy and personal liberty strike a chord for a guy who has been screaming about warrantless wiretaps for two or three years, don't you think?


I believe Dr. Paul represents the best aspects of the Republican Party ideology, as I understand it. He wants a small, unobtrusive government, that is fiscally responsible.

Over the past few decades, I believe the Republican Party has found the way to mobilize a large portion of the religiously motivated members of our society. To a certain extent, I believe the power brokers in the Republican Party used the religious movement to gain power, more than to advance a religious agenda. Perhaps it is a Northeast Liberal idea to keep religion personal and private, but I see the religious aspects of the Republican Party have overpowered the small government aspects of the Republican Party. I wonder if it is a genie that won't get put back in the bottle; leading to the destruction of the 'Republican Party'.

I just can't seem to figure out why more of those on the right put their support behind Dr. Paul. Unless, small government and fiscal responsibility is not what the party is about, but just a talking point.

 

[Makalakumu]

While I also disagree with Dr. Paul on a plethora of issues, I just can't help but wonder if we are at a point right now in our history that those issues don't really matter.

Our country is just another playground for the elite without our constitution. That is why they despise it so much.

And the state of our nations finances are such that no social policies really even matter anymore. Not only can our country not afford it, we are looking at a situation where if nothing is done people are going to be hauling wheelbarrows of dollars into the supermarket to buy a loaf of bread.

And Dr. Paul's Iraq policy doens't just end at Iraq, Michael. He wants to withdraw troops from everywhere. Places where we've had troops for decades will be on target for this commander in cheif. Dr. Paul wants to deconstruct the American Empire (that we can't afford) and bring us back to just being a simple nation again.

What Dr. Paul suggests is nothing less then a total dismantling of the Military Industrial Complex.

 

[TaiChiTJ]

Awesome.

The last two posts state succinctly just exactly why, even if you don't agree with everything that Ron Paul stands for, it is still time to support his candidacy.

You guys are great!

 

[Hollywood1340]

But it does matter, always matter. You can't look at something like this and say "It doesn't matter" because no matter what's going on , it still will. Better or worse, it does matter. All of it. It would be voting for change simply to vote for change. An intersting road that.

 

[mrhnau]

I spent a bit of time researching Paul once a friend mentioned him. He ran previously on the Libertarian platform, from my understanding. Most of his policies still seem in-line with that party more so than the GOP, and there is talk that once he misses the GOP nod he will run with them again.

As for his policies, I am torn on a lot of them. I probably agree with him more so than any candidate I am aware of, which considering its likely around 50%, thats pretty sad (at least from a personal perspective). Considering the lack of other good options, given the choice, I'd vote for him.

That being said, if he is elected, he won't be able to get everything he desires done. The president does not write law (or is not supposed to anyways). He can push hard for it, but congress is stubborn against fundamental/radical change, IMHO.

 

[Big Don]

Ron Paul is at best a poor man's Michael Bloomberg, that is he ran (and was elected) as a republican, because there was no way he'd win in that area under his true colors.

 

[Makalakumu]

Ron Paul is at best a poor man's Michael Bloomberg, that is he ran (and was elected) as a republican, because there was no way he'd win in that area under his true colors.

I hope that Ron Paul runs as a 3rd party candidate. I switched my party affiliation to "Republican" in order to support him in Wisconsin, but in my heart, I know he's no republican. Not in the sense that anyone would think of them now days. He is a libertarian, plain and simple. My hope is that he moves all of his impetus into that party and gives it a much needed jumpstart.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I believe the Libertarians are interested in him running under their banner should he not get the RP nomination.

 

[Makalakumu]

I believe the Libertarians are interested in him running under their banner should he not get the RP nomination.

I hope so, I don't want to be a "Republican" for too long... :lookie:

 

[FearlessFreep]

I hope that Ron Paul runs as a 3rd party candidate. I switched my party affiliation to "Republican" in order to support him in Wisconsin, but in my heart, I know he's no republican. Not in the sense that anyone would think of them now days. He is a libertarian, plain and simple. My hope is that he moves all of his impetus into that party and gives it a much needed jumpstart.

Ironically he seems to be a very traditional Republican in a lot of ways. as opposed to many in the Republican Party now

 

[michaeledward]

I can't help but imagine that if John (upnorthkyosa) and I (michaeledward) agree that Congressman / Dr. Ron Paul is a great Republican candidate ... the rest of those who identify themselves as Republicans will Run Away like it's Larry Craig in the next stall.

And, Dr. Paul has not ruled out a Libertarian run, but he as a candidate in the Republican primary, he does really need to tap down any suggestions of running as a Libertarian. I am fairly confident that the Libertarian party has asked Dr. Paul to be their nominee, if he doesn't win the Republican nomination.

 

[Cruentus]

I can't help but imagine that if John (upnorthkyosa) and I (michaeledward) agree that Congressman / Dr. Ron Paul is a great Republican candidate ... the rest of those who identify themselves as Republicans will Run Away like it's Larry Craig in the next stall.

And, Dr. Paul has not ruled out a Libertarian run, but he as a candidate in the Republican primary, he does really need to tap down any suggestions of running as a Libertarian. I am fairly confident that the Libertarian party has asked Dr. Paul to be their nominee, if he doesn't win the Republican nomination.

lol... this is weird. John, Michael, and myself all agree that Ron Paul is a good candidate. Well, I don't know if stranger things have happened, but I think have checked the reports and it is official; Hell has frozen over... http://www.epodunk.com/cgi-bin/weatherInfo.php?locIndex=55275
:lol:

Anyhow, I think that if one is greatly unsatisfied for other RP or DM candidates, a vote for Ron Paul is a good one. He won't win, but it does send a message. My problem with Ron Paul is that I don't think that some of his policy solutions are practical for our current situation, particularly regarding foreign policy. Although I won't be voting for him, I do hope that he gets a larger margin of the vote then expected, as it will send a message to the parties that some of us do have liberitarian values.

I hope that he sticks to his word, though, and does not run on a third party ticket. I say this because he has explicitly expressed that he would not do this, so to turn around and do so would look bad for him as he would be turning on his word. I'd rather see him as vice President then to have him do that...

 

[TaiChiTJ]

I hope that Ron Paul runs as a 3rd party candidate. I switched my party affiliation to "Republican" in order to support him in Wisconsin, but in my heart, I know he's no republican. Not in the sense that anyone would think of them now days. He is a libertarian, plain and simple. My hope is that he moves all of his impetus into that party and gives it a much needed jumpstart.

"Not in the sense that anyone would think of them nowadays"

Well said! The U.S. public is going to, hopefully, discover what a real republican is.

It was hard for me to change too! Ha! Never thought I would see the day.

 

[Cryozombie]

I can't help but imagine that if John (upnorthkyosa) and I (michaeledward) agree that Congressman / Dr. Ron Paul is a great Republican candidate ... the rest of those who identify themselves as Republicans will Run Away like it's Larry Craig in the next stall.

yep. I was totlay gonna vote for him Until I found out the whackjobs liked him...

:lol2::lol2:

Oh wait... Im not a Republican, so that doesnt apply to me.

 

[TaiChiTJ]

One thing I have noticed in talking to people about Ron Paul, is that they can identify something they disagree with him on, however they may not understand that often he is coming at the issue from a states rights perspective.

In other words, its not so much that he is pointing his finger at some issue and saying I agree or disagree with this.

He is saying the federal government should get out of the business of pointing its finger and telling the country what to do. The various states can come up with their own position on a given issue.

My family had a reunion on the fourth of july last year in Michigan City, Indiana, and when Sunday rolled around we found out we could not buy liquor that Sunday morning. The community did not allow it. You had to drive into the state of Michigan if you wanted to buy a six pack or whatever.

Now, that is a small thing but it shows that state was sending a message about a behavior (alcohol consumption), and in some small way it does make a difference.

I think this is what a Ron Paul presidency is after, returning power to the states to decide what they want to do. It makes sense. The community of Berkely, California (referred to years ago as The Peoples Republic of Berkeley) is quite different than say, Salt Lake City. Why not let these communities decide what they want?