Posted on 04/15/2009 7:39:25 AM PDT by AmericanHunter
Last year at this time, a presidential campaign captured the interest of many in the nation. Tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of voters like me supported the candidacy of Dr. Ron Paul, a long time Republican congressman from Texas. Those of us who are interested in liberty and personal independence put quite a bit of our hope for a better tomorrow into his candidacy, and in my opinion, rightfully so. Dr. Paul has a long standing record of voting in a pro liberty manner on many of the important issues of our day. Many may have been disappointed by the events that took place, but perhaps they should not be surprised. Even though Dr. Paul did not become president, or even the Republican presidential nominee, his campaign has opened the eyes of a great many people and his message continues to reverberate in the American consciousness, and indeed around the world. The freedom message is powerful and popular worldwide, not just in America.
It became evident quite early on in Ron Paul’s campaign that the establishment was not going to give into him easily, no matter his popularity. The establishment media did their best to marginalize him and his supporters and minimize the impact he had on the political discourse. They did their jobs well, as far as that went, and managed to prevent huge numbers of common folk from discovering the only candidate that could really be trusted to make a difference. But since Ron Paul was a Republican, they couldn’t keep him out of the debates like they do so many other worthy candidates with a freedom message. Unfortunately, it may have been too little, too late against an establishment that was simply too powerful.
Still, Ron Paul managed to awaken a multitude who may have otherwise remained apathetic and feeling helpless against the rising tide of political disenfranchisement that continues to pervade not just the United States of America, but the entire world. Despite the fact that he was given less time than other candidates at the debates, despite the fact that he was asked more insignificant questions having nothing to do with the main issues of the day than the other candidates, despite the media’s efforts to make him and his supporters look crazy and/or radical, he managed to deliver a liberty message that resonated in the fibers of the American people. He managed to deliver a message of smaller, more transparent government that most freedom loving individuals can agree with. Ron Paul’s candidacy was a success in so many ways simply because the establishment and their media cronies did not want the common folk exposed to such ideas and they could do nothing to stop it. The idea of freedom has always been dangerous to those in power.
Yet Ron Paul did more than just deliver the message of freedom to the masses. He was able to make some predictions about the direction this country was taking. More surprisingly, he showed that the American people are interested in economics and how money works, particularly young Americans. After all, it is the younger generations who are going to have to pay for the follies the government engages in today. What do people think debt is anyway? What do people expect from a system where money creation is based on debt? Like the old fairy tale of the Pied Piper of Hamelin, debts are to be paid as promised else likely the children will suffer the consequences. Perhaps the people of this nation understand more than the establishment gives them credit for and that is why there was such an outcry against the recent bailouts.
It is only now, after we have seen many of Ron Paul´s economic predictions come to pass, that he is given credibility by those who interview him in the mainstream media. It is only after an election has been held and establishment supported politicians have remained firmly in place that the mainstream media begins to give any credence to the free market proponents who had been warning all along of the impending crisis. Even now, as Ron Paul, Peter Schiff and others warn of a deepening economic crisis, the politicians continue a policy of increasing the debt burden and trying to maintain an unworkable, credit driven monetary system. Even though thoughtful, common sense solutions have been proffered by such gentlemen and reported on in establishment media these men are ignored by the political and banking elite as their solutions would curtail the power and control the establishment maintains over our lives and so no real change will take place despite the apparent prophetic nature of past predictions.
It´s not just the economy that Ron Paul made dire predictions about, however. He also made predictions and continues to warn about the likelihood that our freedoms will be lost. As it stands, the United States government still honors a few of the freedoms we used to take for granted, but even those freedoms are tenuously honored at best as the elite who control the mechanisms of state would love to stifle all dissent and silence all who would dare protest. Civil liberties which were supposed to be protected by the rules of governance that were outlined in the Bill of Rights which were eviscerated by the Bush administration have not been restored. It seems to me likely that those who broke the law by violating those rights which they had sworn an oath to uphold will never be brought to justice. Worse still, the burdensome tomes legislators and their friends create and then refer to as laws are not being repealed. In fact, I am certain more cryptic laws are being crafted as you read this to create larger bureaucracies with less transparency and more power than ever.
There are remedies available for these problems also. Dr. Ron Paul understands what these remedies entail and gave us his recommendations during the debates. On top of my list is to bring all our troops home from all around the world. As a nation the United States has over extended its budget and its authority by trying to administer an empire it should never have built in the first place. It is time to give the rest of the world the freedom to police their own nations and to keep our troops here to defend ours. It is time to deal with other nations fairly on a private business level, letting them sell their resources for what open markets will determine is a fair price, rather than trying to force them to bow to the will of our corporations. If this causes higher energy prices, then so be it. Perhaps if that were the case we would develop better alternative renewable energy sources. We should have fair trade with all nations, entangling alliances with none.
It is long past time we ended our wars of aggression. Too much life and treasure has already been lost on an activity which by its very nature can only destroy. Wars of any kind only serve to generate an atmosphere of fear and animosity that darkens the future for all mankind. This kind of paranoia only serves to stifle the overall productivity of the world. Rather than concentrate on producing products and services to improve the lives of others, products and services that destroy are emphasized. Rather than concentrate on products that bring joy and value to one´s life, mechanisms and policies that bring about misery to others are pursued.
Fear is the biggest threat our society faces. It is this unreasonable, irrational emotion that has eroded the American way of life faster than any enemy ever could. Because of its grip, we have allowed the protection of our freedoms to be undermined by an unscrupulous few with their own agenda. Because of its continuing presence we can expect more restrictions on the exercising of our rights.
On more than one occasion last year, Dr. Paul referenced the United States Constitution as part of his answer to a question. As far as I could tell, he was the only candidate to do so. He is, in fact, a self proclaimed defender of the Constitution. Enshrined within the body of the Constitution is the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments which are meant to restrict government’s activities and protect an individual whose natural rights might otherwise be violated by a far more powerful and possibly tyrannical entity. While the Constitution may not be a perfect document as evidenced by its past and present inability to prevent government abuses of civil liberties from taking place, it is a document those who have been unjustly persecuted can point to in their defense when making such claims. It is, at the very least, a good outline of how a just government ought to treat individuals under its auspices.
Many have come to believe that the Constitution is the document that grants American citizens their rights. This is not so. To suggest this would be to suggest that government can take rights and freedoms from its people. These rights and freedoms aren’t granted by government, but are a natural part of the human spirit. This is the case worldwide, not just in America. It is a condition that has been known to philosophers and hidden by tyrants for millennia. The question is not whether or not humans have rights that can be given and taken; the question is whether or not one can openly exercise his individual rights without fear of retribution from those who hold stations of power. This is a measure of the amount of freedom one has in a given society, and in today’s United States of America many have become afraid to exercise their rights due to the flagrant disregard the federal government shows for its own rules as outlined in the Constitution.
Last year in the debates Ron Paul was right about the direction the economy was taking. He was right about the federal government disregarding freedoms. He remains right about establishing a new, sound monetary system based on something other than debt. He remains right about curtailing government abuses by adhering to the Constitution, the highest law of the land. Just following those two simple steps would do so much to begin to bring fiscal sanity back to our economy and peace of mind back to our society. If the government continues to ignore such sound advice, perhaps it is time that common men begin to ignore government dictates and implement their own free market institutions based upon these principles which most politicians no longer care to uphold.
You made the claim, I'm calling bullsh*t. You prove that the LP wants completely unrestricted abortion. You prove that the LP wants everyone to do drugs or marry someone of the same sex.
You are a LIAR. Period. You've let your desire for a Nanny State cloud your reason.
Libertarian Party Platform 2008:
Immigration: 3.4 Free Trade and Migration
We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a threat to security, health or property.
Homosexuals: 1.3 Personal Relationships
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the rights of individuals by government, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships.
Abortion: 1.4 Abortion
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.
Drugs: 1.2 Personal Privacy
We support the protections provided by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, and property. Only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.
Pornograpy: see 1,2 above and 2.1 below.
Advertising: 2.1 Property and Contract
Property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights. The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others. We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates. We advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting the advertising of prices, products, or services. We oppose all violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of trade. The right to trade includes the right not to trade — for any reasons whatsoever. Where property, including land, has been taken from its rightful owners by the government or private action in violation of individual rights, we favor restitution to the rightful owners.
Military Strength: 3.1 National Defense
We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. The United States should both abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world and avoid entangling alliances. We oppose any form of compulsory national service.
In addition; 3.2 “We oppose the government’s use of secret classifications to keep from the public information that it should have, especially that which shows that the government has violated the law.”
In addition; 3.3 International Affairs
American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world and its defense against attack from abroad. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid. We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use of terrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committed by governments or by political or revolutionary groups.
Never.
But if it’s the Democrats that control everything, then it would seem that they would want to help their party. That’s one thing politicians are good, helping themselves and their party members (so long as those members are reasonably loyal), so it baffles me as to why Ron Paul ever gets his requests approved.
And if it’s the Republicans who control things, why are they letting ANY earmarks (for pork) in!?
Which member of the House has CONSISTENTLY voted against EVERY expansion of the Federal Budget? For his entire career, not just when it's politically convenient?
That's right, Dr. Ron Paul.
Note how much the ACTUAL platform doesn't match up to your characterization of it.
Because they "went Washington" and need to be reminded who (i.e. we) is boss.
It matches it perfectly, you are full of nonsense and denial.
Well, first of all, that right there is something of a non sequitur. By "expansion of the federal budget", are you including increases, say, in the military budget and other constitutionally appropriate spending?
That's right, Dr. Ron Paul.
Sorry, but no. You can't claim that RoPaul has "consistently voted against every expansion of the federal budget" when he is on record (you can go to house.gov and look it up for yourself, if you like) as having voted for pork spending that benefits his district at various times in the past.
Hate to break it to you, but Ron Paul is no more pure as the driven snow than any other career politician in DC.
Sounds like abortion on demand.
There is a lot of room between a politician as "a virgin", vs. a politician as "a whore".
RP may not be a virgin -- and frankly any member of Congress whose been there as long as he has, won't be. But he is a lot closer to the virgin status than he is to the usual stable of DC whores, who will turn a trick for whoever finances them.
LOL, interesting choice of imagery. So, you're saying that RoPaul is still pretty much of a good girl?
/ducks
Yes, in that he only "puts out" for his constituency and his country. He's not in any globalist lobbyist's pocket -- and that's the best we can realistically hope for today.
Well, wait until I turn 35 and can Constitutionally run (plus, I can produce a bona fide birth certificate!)
Most of the libertarians I know and have spoken to have no problem with personal responsibility. In fact, most libertarians would do away with welfare programs, government subsidized medical care, etc. because they believe people should face the consequences for their own actions. A lot of conservatives aren't comfortable with holding people to that degree of personal responsibility.
Libertarians have a singular ability to fail to comprehend the extended ramifications of their own actions, and that so-called "victimless" actions may only seem "victimless" at that particular instant in time, but are not so "victimless" on down the road.
It's not so much that libertarians fail to recognize the cumulative or long-term consequences of certain actions (although some do suffer from this blindness), it's just that they don't believe it is prudent to impose criminal sanctions to address these problems.
Just as some libertarians fail to see the long term consequences of certain "victimless" actions, some conservatives fail to see the long-term consequences of empowering the government to interfere with a person's liberty when there is no immediate threat to another person.
Since pretty much everything we do ultimately affects other people in one way or another, empowering the government to restrict liberty based on the consequences "down the road" really empowers the government to regulate everything. Libertarians recognize the need for a more restrictive standard to keep the government's power from extending over every aspect of our life. The (simplified) standard they support is requiring immediate harm or threat of harm before the state can penalize certain behavior.
That's a significant (but not the only reason) libertarians oppose criminalizing so-called "victimless" acts.
Which makes you the liar in the first bullet point...
Voting for the inclusion of certain items, then voting down the bill is hardly the chicanery you are accusing him of. No matter how often you try this lame tactic.
Hey, never too early to start campaigning!
I've got a Tea Party to go to, now!
I cannot go that far, but I will concede to my Libertarian FRiends that Ron Paul is right on more than enough to be considered worthy.
The War on Drugs is a failed policy.
I agree with you in principle, but not on the reason. It is absurd to remove restrictions on drugs. The reason those restrictions are not working is because they are not truly being enforced, and because the power structure resides in the federal government rather than in the states, where it belongs.
The fed's authority resides only in interstate and international trafficking. The rest must be decided between the states respectively (together), and any control or monies must remain in the states themselves, whether pooled together or not.
Re “protecting our country”, RP is the ONLY one talking about securing our borders and limiting immigration so that our culture does not become overwhelmed by an invasion
With respect, while his position is as you say, any number of Reaganites stand actively with him, and with you.
Shooting them over there while we invite them in here, is NOT “protecting our country”!
This is most certainly true, and I am adamantly in agreement with your observation. More than any other thing that is missing in this war effort, the clear necessity of the patriotic Libertarian view is most evident. Others may curse it as "chaining up the dogs of war", but I do not see it that way, I really don't. Libertarian "b*tching" is legitimate- And it keeps us honest.
That being said, I must differ with you again- We have begun the thing. We are committed. Once committed, we owe it to our soldiers to back them to the 9's. We sent them into harm's way. Their blood is on the ground. It is not honorable to turn them back now. They must be allowed to succeed.
The solution is to enforce the law- close the border, and root out the illegal aliens here at home, like we actually mean this whole WOT thing. Stop supporting Al Qeda in Chechnya and Kosovo, and turn against them there too. Untie our soldiers hands and let them prosecute the war according to their abilities so they can come home quickly and in victory.
Under the current political scheme, America will always be “at war”, because that is how they perpetuate the fear and investment in the current power structure
This is certainly true, and the lack of libertarian (and soon Judeo-Christian) conscience permits it. This is all about removing the conscience that keeps our country's might in righteous check.
As always, I must conclude that Reagan is the happy medium, the place where all the conservative factions must meet, and it is the only place where we will all find agreement, and thereby move forward. That cannot happen unless and until libertarians are given their rightful place at the table. That chair, according to the libertarians at least, it seems, probably belongs to Ron Paul.
Those who work so hard to disrespect him and his advocates do us all a great disservice.
Well, although he talks about the Constitution and refers to it generally when arguing his points, I find his specific application of written text to be lacking. I also find that as a Libertarian (in spirit if not in party) he’s soft on limited constitutional government because Libertarians seem to be for no government.
I'm attempting to do just that.
his angry outreach approach doesn't work.
Do you have anything else about his record?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.