Back to General

Ron Paul...a desperate article on...

Historical capture recovered from the Wayback Machine · captured 2012-01-07 · 9 posts
well, only a huge shit pulled me away from this article I am about to link, and I mean, I REALLY had to GO! I wonder what did it...maybe that Hummus was expired...maybe too much fiber lately, and super cold water just pushed it all down at once. oh well.

here it is

http://www.economist.com/node/21542199

"PEOPLE who say that politicians are all the same may be in for a surprise next week. Heading the polls in Iowa, whose caucuses on January 3rd mark the true start of the Republican race for a presidential candidate, is a 76-year-old libertarian from Texas with a worldview so wacky and a programme so radical that he was recently discounted as a no-hoper. Even if he wins in quirky Iowa, Ron Paul will never be America’s president. But his coming this far tells you something about the mood of Republican voters. A substantial number like a man who wants to abolish the Federal Reserve, introduce a new currency to compete with the dollar, eliminate five departments of the federal government within a year, pull out of the United Nations and close all America’s foreign bases, which he likens to “an empire”.

How did such a man rise to the top of the polls? One thing to note is that his support has a ceiling: in no state do more than about a third of Republican voters favour him, though in Iowa’s crowded race that could be all he needs. Also, liking the man does not require liking his policies. During the candidates’ debates of 2011, Mr Paul won plaudits for integrity. Where slicker rivals chop, change and pander, the rumpled Mr Paul hews to his principles even when they are unpopular. Unlike Newt Gingrich, who seldom misses a chance to play on fears of Islam, Mr Paul insists on the rule of law and civil liberties and due process for all—including suspected terrorists. Unlike Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum, who adore Israel and can sound impatient to bomb Iran, Mr Paul has no great love for the Jewish state, even though this hurts him with the evangelical voters of Iowa. He opposed the Iraq war from the start and wants America to shun expensive foreign entanglements that make the rest of the world resent it.

In this sectionInto Iowa
Backfiring brinksmen
Workingman’s blues
»Ron Paul’s big moment

Reprints

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related topics
Central banking
Public finance
Government and politics
Politics
Elections and voting

These, however, are sideshows compared to the central belief that animates Mr Paul’s politics. Born in 1935, he remembers the tail-end of the Depression and the shortages during the second world war. At five, he and his brothers were put to work helping their father run a small dairy from their basement. His job was to check that the bottles were clean. For each dirty one he spotted, he received a penny. Thus, he says in “Ending the Fed”, the book he wrote after the financial collapse of 2008, was born a fascination with numismatics. This flowered into a preoccupation with the money supply and a lifelong conviction that governments must be prevented from debasing the currency.

Not all of Mr Paul’s positions are unpopular. Like other conservatives, he defends the God-given right to keep and bear arms, “the guardian of every other right”. He is pro-life, which he believes begins at conception. He champions home-schooling. But only he combines a general dislike of the overweening federal government with a particular, obsessive hatred of what he considers the corrupt system of money at its secret heart.

Pauline conversion

In 1972, though hard at work as an obstetrician and gynaecologist, he travelled 50 miles to Houston to hear the elderly Ludwig von Mises offer an “inspiring” denunciation of socialism. Several years later he dined with Friedrich Hayek. The good doctor’s conversion to the Austrian school of economics turned him into a crusader who has come to see the operations of the Fed—indeed the entire banking system, with its reliance on paper money no longer backed by gold—as a dangerous confidence trick. The Fed has “ominous powers that Congress barely understands,” he says. “Trillions of dollars can be created and injected into the economy with no obligation by the Fed to reveal who benefits.” Though ending the Fed would take time, this is his panacea: it would end dollar depreciation, remove America’s ability to fund endless wars and stop the growth of government.

Explore our interactive map and guide to the race for the Republican candidacy
.

One consequence of Mr Paul’s rise in the polls has been a flurry of speculation about his true intentions. Having run for president twice before, he is not naive about politics. He has served a dozen terms in the House of Representatives, failing to find allies for his radical measures. He cannot expect actually to win the nomination, let alone become president. His real aim appears to be didactic: he wants the widest possible hearing for his ideas. And since the financial collapse of 2008, more Americans have indeed been listening. His quest for the Republican nomination that year gave him respectability and an audience he could not reach as the nominee of the Libertarian Party in 1988.

How long will Mr Paul stay in the race? Though the nomination may be out of his reach, he has dedicated supporters and the ability to raise lots of money through small donations. That could keep him going longer than most of his rivals, and perhaps give him enough delegates to shape August’s nominating convention in Tampa. Or he could run as a third-party candidate. But that would help Barack Obama, embitter a mainstream party on which he has at last made a big impact and damage his like-minded ophthalmologist son, Rand, now a Republican senator.

As Mr Gingrich has learned, rising poll numbers bring extra scrutiny. The Christmas period has revived interest in a group of newsletters published under Mr Paul’s name in the 1990s, some of which included toxic remarks about blacks and Jews. Mr Paul says that he neither wrote nor approved of those words, and that they do not reflect his opinions. That still leaves him with some explaining to do. It is true that in recent years Mr Paul has stuck to his core principles: sound money, small government, individual liberty and bringing the troops home. But the newsletters shed light on some of the unsavoury fellow-travellers he has collected on his long political road. In the end, Mr Paul’s obsession with the Fed is an anti-government conspiracy theory. And in America, anti-government conspiracy theories attract a lot of wingnuts, some of whom have never read Hayek or von Mises."

Post edited by Netscape at 1/3/2012 3:30:41 AM

_____________________________

Originally posted by: TotalCarnage
No respectable southerner would own that table and you know it
Originally posted by: Cummins
Im not a fucking southerner. I'm from South Detroit.
Originally posted by: TotalCarnage
That makes it even worse dude.
In short, it's all about the individual voters fundamental priorities:

If you believe that America's biggest are:

Unsustainable, insolvent, deficit spending and crippling debt levels.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Unjustifiable, unconstitutional, unsustainable wars in countless new countries, for countless more years.......

http://costofwar.com/en/

A fiat monetary system that is being directly controlled, devalued, and manipulated by the top 1% of America at the direct expense of everyone else.

http://money.cnn.com/news/storysupplement/economy/bailouttracker/

An economy that has essentially collapsed into a poor planned economy, welfare state, with an entirely unfair tax system that overly burdens and punishes the middle class.

Where people have essentially the same standard of living whether they work, don't work, try, don't try, care, don't care, take drugs, don't take drugs and where most people can no longer find a "decent" paying job with benefits anymore.


Then you should probably vote for Ron Paul.....because he is the only President openly willing to even discuss that any of things are prevalent in our society today.

Anyone else (Republican or Democrat) will only continue to ignore these issues......expand them even further......along with bigger and more intrusive government.....and that is why they are called the status-quo.
Post edited by Mockery at 1/3/2012 2:47:31 AM
In short...........

If you believe in collectivism over individualism.

If you believe in starting even more wars for "peace".

If you believe in sacrificing civil liberties for alleged civil rights (social engineering).

If you believe that government isn't nearly big enough, nor intrusive enough, in our everyday lives.

If you believe in even more bailouts and tax payer money subsidizing corporate cronyism.

If you believe in even more victim less church/safety laws, regulations, and legislation.

If you believe in more temporary safety, be it in the name of counter-terrorism, or otherwise, over essential liberty.

If you believe in fighting against gay marriage more than fighting against longterm inflation.

If you believe in ending abortion more than ending the Fed.......

Then you should continue to vote for everyone else.......Not Ron Paul.

While I would personally call any of these people fucking insane, I have realized that I'm apparently the crazy person in here, especially when compared to the relentless will of the Democratic majority. I used to fault the government for being so outright inept, imbecilic, and incompetent at their jobs.......but after arguing with people in here I now realize that our politicians really are reflecting the will of the majority in this country.

As fucked up beyond all recognition as I swear these priorities are......so appears to be the people who love our system exactly the way it is and values even more of the exact same bullshit that is crippling this country.

"I see dead statists and facist people everywhere"
Post edited by Mockery at 1/3/2012 3:05:00 AM
This comment summed it up for me (even better than I can....minus the scratched parts)

The article misses Ron Paul's appeal. No one really wants him to be president so saying the many good reasons why he shouldn't become the president is pointless.

People like him because he's the only one on the national stage who points out the elephants in the room.

Ron Paul is not the guy to deal with a ludicrously oversized defence budget, or massive budget deficits or reforming the tax code, but his presence forces the other candidates to acknowledge the problems.

The higher Ron Paul's national profile gets, the more people start thinking about whether America needs half of the Earth's defense spending, for instance. He takes America's sacred cows, (our huge defense budget, our unconditional alliance with Israel, our suspension of civil liberties, ) out to the woodshed and cuts off their heads.

He'd be a disaster in office, but he's amazing as a catalyst for honest debate.
Personally, I'm tired of all the typical politics. Somebody needs to tackle the problems that we really face. Obama has done nothing and will do nothing next term to help this country. If he really wanted to help the country, he would not seek re-election and let somebody else take the nomination that is willing to work. Too many politicians care only re-election. They really work a few days per year then focus all their energy on campaigning the rest.

I'm not saying Ron is the answer but he's willing to open the book and point out the real questions everyone is asking. I will not vote for a radical right wing republican who's sole mission is to force everyone read the bible and live by it(Ron is one of them also). Keep religion out of government and in churches where it belongs. IF I did vote, it would be for Ron unfortunately.

/personal rant
Originally posted by: Nuclear
Personally, I'm tired of all the typical politics. Somebody needs to tackle the problems that we really face. Obama has done nothing and will do nothing next term to help this country. If he really wanted to help the country, he would not seek re-election and let somebody else take the nomination that is willing to work. Too many politicians care only re-election. They really work a few days per year then focus all their energy on campaigning the rest.

I'm not saying Ron is the answer but he's willing to open the book and point out the real questions everyone is asking. I will not vote for a radical right wing republican who's sole mission is to force everyone read the bible and live by it(Ron is one of them also). Keep religion out of government and in churches where it belongs. IF I did vote, it would be for Ron unfortunately.

/personal rant
Well the republican frontrunner is a Mormon and to the people you describe, Mormonism is only a hair more Christian than Islam.

And although there are elements working to block him, I'd have to say that to have gotten as far as he has, your description seems over-stated.
Originally posted by: Nuclear
I will not vote for a radical right wing republican who's sole mission is to force everyone read the bible and live by it(Ron is one of them also).


No he isn't.

Post edited by Nathan Bedford Forrest at 1/3/2012 10:04:35 AM

_________________
Originally posted by: Jefferson Davis
All we ask is to be let alone.
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: Nuclear
I will not vote for a radical right wing republican who's sole mission is to force everyone read the bible and live by it(Ron is one of them also).

/personal rant


No he isn't.


Yeah if that's what you get from Ron Paul then you've missed A LOT! RP is an evengelical Christian but he believes in a complete seperation of Church and State and it has hurt him tremendously.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

This message was brought to you by the Society for the Reinstitution of Natural Selection

Seek out a kingdom worthy of your soul
Originally posted by: =NCG=Leonidas
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: Nuclear
I will not vote for a radical right wing republican who's sole mission is to force everyone read the bible and live by it(Ron is one of them also).

/personal rant


No he isn't.


Yeah if that's what you get from Ron Paul then you've missed A LOT! RP is an evengelical Christian but he believes in a complete seperation of Church and State and it has hurt him tremendously.


I agree with these two.

Ron Paul is not about forcing his religion or religion in general on people. He is completely for separation of church and state.


If you think Ron Paul is a bible thumping politician, you have not listened to the man at all.
Post edited by Bigguns 93 at 1/3/2012 2:42:47 PM

9 posts recovered