What are your reasons for supporting or not supporting Ron Paul?

[mark3748]

It seems that every time someone mentions Ron Paul, they are called a conspiracy nut, out of touch with reality, or a myriad of other things. This has gotten me to the question, what are the reasons YOU have for either supporting or not supporting Congressman Ron Paul's presidential candidacy?

My reasons are simple, his views are nearly identical to mine, and they always have been. He was the only congressman that even read the USA PATRIOT act before it was passed. He's the only candidate that still believes the constitution should be used to restrain government (as it was intended), and not the people of the United States.

This isn't to say that I agree with everything he says, but who agrees with everything anyone says?

That being said, I hope this doesn't end up like the other threads, name calling, etc. All I really want is everyones views on why RP would be a good president, or why he wouldn't.

[Milton Bradley]

I agree with everything I have heard him speak about except religion.


Plus, I like the fact that he has a solid track record, he's well known, and seems to be as honest a man as you could ever expect to find in politics these days.


Ron Paul 08

[Cephus]

Ron Paul has a lot of good ideas in general, he just has no chance in hell of ever getting elected and even if he did by some miracle, he'd never get anything done. Therefore, he's just a space-filler. It really doesn't matter who gets into office this time, they're inheriting a disaster and won't be viewed as anything worthwhile.

My biggest problem with Paul, and libertarians in general, is they are social liberals. I have zero respect for hardline social liberals.

[mark3748]

Quote by: Cephus My biggest problem with Paul, and libertarians in general, is they are social liberals. I have zero respect for hardline social liberals.

Why do you say he is a social liberal? I personally don't see it, he is more of a classical liberal in that he wants to protect individual freedom. Same with all Libertarians

[GPIRS88]

Quote by: Cephus Ron Paul has a lot of good ideas in general, he just has no chance in hell of ever getting elected and even if he did by some miracle, he'd never get anything done. Therefore, he's just a space-filler. It really doesn't matter who gets into office this time, they're inheriting a disaster and won't be viewed as anything worthwhile. My biggest problem with Paul, and libertarians in general, is they are social liberals. I have zero respect for hardline social liberals.

why?

[Muser]

Quote by: mark3748 It seems that every time someone mentions Ron Paul, they are called a conspiracy nut, out of touch with reality, or a myriad of other things. This has gotten me to the question, what are the reasons YOU have for either supporting or not supporting Congressman Ron Paul's presidential candidacy? My reasons are simple, his views are nearly identical to mine, and they always have been. He was the only congressman that even read the USA PATRIOT act before it was passed. He's the only candidate that still believes the constitution should be used to restrain government (as it was intended), and not the people of the United States. This isn't to say that I agree with everything he says, but who agrees with everything anyone says? That being said, I hope this doesn't end up like the other threads, name calling, etc. All I really want is everyones views on why RP would be a good president, or why he wouldn't.

For those in need of a summation of where he stands on the issues:

Political positions of Ron Paul

[Osborn F Enready]

I support Paul for three reasons:

1)He is a picture of integrity.

2)I agree with him on all issues but religion, and some other minor issues.

3)His career exemplifies, as does his voting record, his dedication to Constitutional Limitations.

[GHook93]

(1) Radical Paul is not rational on the environment!
He wants to repeal the EPA (which would repeal CERLA, The Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act etc.) - I have recently taken a environmental law class, yes EPA has its downfalls, but it is successful in many many, such as putting America as #1 in cleanest waters in the world. RP only point out the down sides but gives no real solutions.

(2) RP wants to leave the nation defenseless!
He wants to get rid of the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI and CIA. That is insane. In a world where terrorist are trying to kill us, any prohibition on that is not just careless its plain stupid.

(3) Wants to drastically limit business regulations!
Yes business regulations should be decreased, but not the the drastic level RP is talking about, such as repealling minimum wage. In the 1800, when there very little to no business. What happened the top exploited the little man and there were 2 classes: 1. the Haves and 2. the Have nots.

Paul also opposes equal pay for equal work, a minimum wage, and, naturally, trade unions. In 2007, he voted against restricting employers' rights to interfere in union drives and against raising the federal minimum wage to $7.25.

Radical Paul is for removing any legislative barriers that may restrict business owners' profits, but are openly hostile to alleviating economic restrictions that oppress most workers. Only a boss could embrace RP's perverse concept of "freedom."

All that he would accomplish is shrinking the middle class, moving more of the wealth to the top and increasing the lower class 10 fold!

(4) Wants to take the Feds out of Education!
Yes education is a mess and needs changes. I think a prime reasons is they are underfunded! What is Radical Paul's solution, give them less money. Now that is an idea!

(5) He wants to get rid of necessary government agencies like OSHA & SEC!
Again stating a problem and his solution just get rid of it.

(6) Wants to eliminate the IRS!
Yes I had paying taxes, but I do. What would prevent people from not paying their taxes or cheating even more on their taxes if there was no IRS? Nothing!

(7) Wants to eliminate the Federal Reserve!

(8) His solution to Global Warming, do nothing, get more research!
McCain stated it best, "If global warming turns out to be false, then at least we cleaned the environment for our children. If it turns out to be true and we do nothing we doomed the future for our children."

(9) RP wants to cut and run when things are starting to turn in Iraq!
Yep the invasion of Iraq was stupid and a mistake. Sadam was the buffer in the ME against Iran that Bush said he we need now. HOWEVER, that is history, while the surge is working, we owe it to the Iraqis to help them stabilize their country.

(10) Never considering mission to stop Genocide!
1. He is against any intervention in Danfur
2. He stated he would have voted against any intervention to stop the Genocide in Rwanda
3. He was against the Clinton intervention in Kosovo!
4. He would have voted against stopping the Holocaust!

Forget the BS on what would Jefferson have done. Back in Jefferson's day to get to Europe it would take months, now it takes hours. Communication was different. Everything was different yet Radical Paul want to put everything in a vacuum and state what would Jefferson do. If Jefferson would have voted against stopping the Rwanda Genocide, then I say to hell with Jefferson that is not a person I would base my views on anyways.

(11) Radical Paul state we shouldn't have fought the civil war!
The Democratic Party | Ron Paul Talks About Current Affairs, Like the Civil War
LOL, do African Americans agree with this?

(12) Leaving the UN!!! His Isolationist approach, yes the lefties attempt to make it sound better by calling it non-interventionalst (same as they do with their anti-semitic views by calling it anti-zionism), but it Isolationism!
Smart guy says we should leave the UN, and sheep believe that is a good idea. This is not the 1800s, the world is much smaller we are a global society. Isolationism is what got us in trouble before WW II. Leaving the UN just contributes to the anti-American view that we are arrogant. Not a good idea to turn our back to the international community.

(13) He is against abortion in all cases! He wants it to be deemed murder.
Easy for a guy to say. Even if abortion is outlawed having it deemed murder is just plain ignorant!

(14) He wants to get rid ]the U.S. Department of Energy!
LOL, bad idea!

(15) Wants to get rid Sarbanes-Oxley Act
Yes because Enron and Worldcom have taught him nothing. Make it easy for millionare crooks to rob the little man!

(16) Radical Paul wants to get rid of social security and medicare!
LOL, easy for a rich guy to say. Again if a system is not working well his solution is to just get rid of it, regardless of the necessity of the program. What do you tell an old person who can't work any more and has too little saving to pay for enormously high medical insurance and medical bills and for the cost of living. "Tough luck grandpa, I heard they have nice cardboard boxes next to Walmart, but don't worry your old you will probably die soon anyways." The majority of senior citizens find themselves in this situation. Trust me, most of you Ron Paul supporters will be in the same position. This is different then welfare for young and unemployed people, this is for old people that can't work because of their age and health and have already made their contribution to society. Another heartless suggestion Radical Paul.

The lefties jump on Radical Paul's strong anti-war stance and then believe all the garbage he spews and eat it up. If you really take a look at him he is not a refreshing change to American Politics rather the worst candidate from either party! Nuff said!


Sherry Wolf: Why the Left Should Reject Ron Paul
I Think Ron Paul Might Actually Be Nuts. | My Two Dollars

[grandpa]

Quote by: GHook93 (1) Radical Paul is not rational on the environment! He wants to repeal the EPA (which would repeal CERLA, The Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act etc.)

That being said, I still think the US is doing a lousy job of promoting sustainability policies and
planning.

Grandpa h.

[GHook93]

Quote by: grandpa That being said, I still think the US is doing a lousy job of promoting sustainability policies and planning. Grandpa h.

The EPA has many flaws. Study the history of environmental protection and you will see its no easy task. But the EPA is directly responsible for making American waterways the cleanest in American, which was not even close to the case in the 60s. NEPA regulations have a significant effect on corruptions out of compliance. CERCLA has done an amazing job of making sure corporations done emit hazardous chemicals into the environment. The Clean Air Act has done an amazing job of cleaning up American air. You really hear about the problem of acid rain!

Getting rid of it, because it has flaws, but not giving any reasonable solution in its place is bad politics!

[GHook93]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I 1)He is a picture of integrity.

True he is, but if a guy is stating he stands by all the wrong issues, his integrity means nothing!

2)I agree with him on all issues but religion, and some other minor issues.

Take a better look at his issues!

3)His career exemplifies, as does his voting record, his dedication to Constitutional Limitations.

Go back to integrity.

[brien]

Quote by: GHook93 (1) Radical Paul is not rational on the environment! He wants to repeal the EPA (which would repeal CERLA, The Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act etc.) - I have recently taken a environmental law class, yes EPA has its downfalls, but it is successful in many many, such as putting America as #1 in cleanest waters in the world. RP only point out the down sides but gives no real solutions. (2) RP wants to leave the nation defenseless! He wants to get rid of the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI and CIA. That is insane. In a world where terrorist are trying to kill us, any prohibition on that is not just careless its plain stupid. (3) Wants to drastically limit business regulations! Yes business regulations should be decreased, but not the the drastic level RP is talking about, such as repealling minimum wage. In the 1800, when there very little to no business. What happened the top exploited the little man and there were 2 classes: 1. the Haves and 2. the Have nots. Paul also opposes equal pay for equal work, a minimum wage, and, naturally, trade unions. In 2007, he voted against restricting employers' rights to interfere in union drives and against raising the federal minimum wage to $7.25. Radical Paul is for removing any legislative barriers that may restrict business owners' profits, but are openly hostile to alleviating economic restrictions that oppress most workers. Only a boss could embrace RP's perverse concept of "freedom." All that he would accomplish is shrinking the middle class, moving more of the wealth to the top and increasing the lower class 10 fold! (4) Wants to take the Feds out of Education! Yes education is a mess and needs changes. I think a prime reasons is they are underfunded! What is Radical Paul's solution, give them less money. Now that is an idea! (5) He wants to get rid of necessary government agencies like OSHA & SEC! Again stating a problem and his solution just get rid of it. (6) Wants to eliminate the IRS! Yes I had paying taxes, but I do. What would prevent people from not paying their taxes or cheating even more on their taxes if there was no IRS? Nothing! (7) Wants to eliminate the Federal Reserve! (8) His solution to Global Warming, do nothing, get more research! McCain stated it best, "If global warming turns out to be false, then at least we cleaned the environment for our children. If it turns out to be true and we do nothing we doomed the future for our children." (9) RP wants to cut and run when things are starting to turn in Iraq! Yep the invasion of Iraq was stupid and a mistake. Sadam was the buffer in the ME against Iran that Bush said he we need now. HOWEVER, that is history, while the surge is working, we owe it to the Iraqis to help them stabilize their country. (10) Never considering mission to stop Genocide! 1. He is against any intervention in Danfur 2. He stated he would have voted against any intervention to stop the Genocide in Rwanda 3. He was against the Clinton intervention in Kosovo! 4. He would have voted against stopping the Holocaust! Forget the BS on what would Jefferson have done. Back in Jefferson's day to get to Europe it would take months, now it takes hours. Communication was different. Everything was different yet Radical Paul want to put everything in a vacuum and state what would Jefferson do. If Jefferson would have voted against stopping the Rwanda Genocide, then I say to hell with Jefferson that is not a person I would base my views on anyways. (11) Radical Paul state we shouldn't have fought the civil war! The Democratic Party | Ron Paul Talks About Current Affairs, Like the Civil War LOL, do African Americans agree with this? (12) Leaving the UN!!! His Isolationist approach, yes the lefties attempt to make it sound better by calling it non-interventionalst (same as they do with their anti-semitic views by calling it anti-zionism), but it Isolationism! Smart guy says we should leave the UN, and sheep believe that is a good idea. This is not the 1800s, the world is much smaller we are a global society. Isolationism is what got us in trouble before WW II. Leaving the UN just contributes to the anti-American view that we are arrogant. Not a good idea to turn our back to the international community. (13) He is against abortion in all cases! He wants it to be deemed murder. Easy for a guy to say. Even if abortion is outlawed having it deemed murder is just plain ignorant! (14) He wants to get rid ]the U.S. Department of Energy! LOL, bad idea! (15) Wants to get rid Sarbanes-Oxley Act Yes because Enron and Worldcom have taught him nothing. Make it easy for millionare crooks to rob the little man! (16) Radical Paul wants to get rid of social security and medicare! LOL, easy for a rich guy to say. Again if a system is not working well his solution is to just get rid of it, regardless of the necessity of the program. What do you tell an old person who can't work any more and has too little saving to pay for enormously high medical insurance and medical bills and for the cost of living. "Tough luck grandpa, I heard they have nice cardboard boxes next to Walmart, but don't worry your old you will probably die soon anyways." The majority of senior citizens find themselves in this situation. Trust me, most of you Ron Paul supporters will be in the same position. This is different then welfare for young and unemployed people, this is for old people that can't work because of their age and health and have already made their contribution to society. Another heartless suggestion Radical Paul. The lefties jump on Radical Paul's strong anti-war stance and then believe all the garbage he spews and eat it up. If you really take a look at him he is not a refreshing change to American Politics rather the worst candidate from either party! Nuff said! Sherry Wolf: Why the Left Should Reject Ron Paul I Think Ron Paul Might Actually Be Nuts. | My Two Dollars

Ghook has successfully parroted the establishment's disortions of Dr Paul in everything he wrote. I am not going to argue his distortions point by point because it isn't worth my time but the answers are found at:

Official Website of the Libertarian National Committee

I consider Dr Paul a Libertarian and not a Republican. I believe he only ran in the Republican Party so he could get elected in Texas. It is more difficult for Americans to accept Libertarian Party candidates. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who represents real change for the US. This is why he has a groundswell of support from the youngest of the Americans. It is the older generations who have their heads up their ass and are only willing to consider two parties who are basically the same. I have hope in the youngsters.

[Chancellor]

While I like Ron Paul's positions on most things, I will be supporting the Libertarian Party candidate when we choose one.

Third parties become viable when people actually vote for them. Of course, most Americans are too stupid to understand that and they idiotically believe they have to vote based on who the media idiots tell them has the best chance of winning!

[mark3748]

Quote by: Chancellor While I like Ron Paul's positions on most things, I will be supporting the Libertarian Party candidate when we choose one. Third parties become viable when people actually vote for them. Of course, most Americans are too stupid to understand that and they idiotically believe they have to vote based on who the media idiots tell them has the best chance of winning!

I completely agree with you, but this is also the problem with Republicans and Democrats, they tend to vote for someone based on their label, not their politics.

That being said, I will vote for RP whether he ends up running as an independent, Republican, or Libertarian. Any other candidate I vote for will be Libertarian. I've been active in supporting the LP since I was about 8, if that tells you anything

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Mark It seems that every time someone mentions Ron Paul, they are called a conspiracy nut,

That would be because all the confirmed conspiracy nuts on this board are supporting Ron Paul.

Go figure.


.

[Dieval]

I like his idea on the border and legal immigration....but didn't find too much else that I agreed with...

[mark3748]

Quote by: Sonart . That would be because all the confirmed conspiracy nuts on this board are supporting Ron Paul. Go figure.

I guess I just don't understand what that has to do with a persons support of a candidate. Maybe I missed something...

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: mark3748 I guess I just don't understand what that has to do with a persons support of a candidate. Maybe I missed something...

People that put party affiliation before individual opinion, or common sense don't understand the concept of making an unbiased judgement.


Group think.

[Cephus]

Quote by: mark3748 Why do you say he is a social liberal? I personally don't see it, he is more of a classical liberal in that he wants to protect individual freedom. Same with all Libertarians

Certainly not all libertarians, libertarianism encompasses a very wide range of beliefs. Without specifically pointing to Ron Paul, I see most libertarians fighting for individual rights, most often at the expense of societal stability. They're out for "me! me! me!" and ignoring the fact that living in a society inherently means that you give up some rights for the stability and wellbeing of the whole. If you do not have a balance, the whole house of cards falls.

That said, I'm just never going to agree with the whole philosophy of "do whatever you want, screw everyone else" that I see coming out of the mouths of a lot of self-professed libertarians.

[Cephus]

Quote by: Chancellor Third parties become viable when people actually vote for them. Of course, most Americans are too stupid to understand that and they idiotically believe they have to vote based on who the media idiots tell them has the best chance of winning!

Third parties are only viable when they present something worth voting for. Most third parties in America are one-issue wonders and once you get past that single issue, they don't have much of a platform.