Fuck Ron Paul

[chlamor]

Here is the introduction to my thread with above title that I started at Progressive Independent with the link to follow. BTW Paul's campaign committee or whoever has to date refused to release more of the newsletters that he was responsible for but the past issues of "The Ron Paul Survival Report" survive in archives at the University of Wisconsin.

Intro:
As an introduction let me simply state that all of the information and comments that I shall produce in this thread over the next few days regarding Ron Paul should be thoroughly questioned, disputed and examined with all the healthy skepticism of a curious mind. This would entail, I hope, an inquiry of one's own as to who this guy is, who supports him and why, what ideologies he has been promoting for years, why he has been promoting these ideologies and how that is a reflection of our political state of affairs.

It seems that there are many on "the left" who have fallen in thrall to Dr. Paul and for that reason it might be relevant for us to question why it is that this is the case and it might speak to an indictment not only of the good doctor but a much deeper and far more troubling indictment of the self-professed "left" who have become endeared to a far-right fringe candidate.

Let the show begin, in no particular order.

Here's the link to the thread with lots of info on Ron Paul:
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/d ... ic_id=5594


While I think the evidence that Paul is incredibly insensitive on racial issues -- ranging from a racially incendiary newsletter to his willingness to appear before neo-Confederate and white-supremacist groups -- is simply overwhelming, it isn't as simple to make the case that he is an outright racist, since he does not often indulge in hateful rhetoric -- and when he has, he tries to ameliorate it by placing it in the context of what he thinks are legitimate policy issues.

Ron Paul serves as the conduit for the transmission of extremist ideas into the mainstream. This poses a real danger. The lack of a clear anti-war voice in this nation is giving this element of the nativist right an opening to gain some new, uncritical coverage.

This is happening elsewhere in the world with New Labour in Britain, the Social Democrats in Germany and the Socialists in France, among others.

Ron Paul gets a 5% rating from the LCV;

0% from NARAL;

100% from John Birch Society;

76% from Christian coalition

[Seamus OBlimey]

As a lifelong (occasionally lapsed) non-voter I'm with MP all the way. I can understand the attraction of Paul to many here, myself included, as a breath of fresh air, but let's face it, like Nader, he's just another cog in the machine. I see them as a sort of safety valve to allow us to let off a measurable amount of steam.

Sandymac said:

General strikes
Massive boycotts
None-of-the-above voting
Non-cooperation
Non-compliance

That's one way to tell them we're not apathetic, we're angry, and a lot more satisfying than not voting. Can you spoil your ballot with electronic voting or do we have to leave that to someone else?

[nomo]

HL Menken Predicted the Bush Presidency


From an article in the July 26, 1920 edition of the Baltimore Evening Sun:

The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

http://www.cynical-c.com/?p=8401

[theeKultleeder]

As a Canadian, if I had my pick, I'd put Mike Gravel in office. His foreign policy is similar to RP's on the face of it, but he actually seems to have the depth of knowledge to wind his way through the minefield, whereas RP sounds like someone who read up on foreign policy issues just to find the right buzzwords to appeal to the 'anti-war left', and is more informed by a ridged ideology than actual, well, history.

Though I'm no huge fan of Barack Obama, I think that if he were President, and Gravel was Veep (and had even 1 tenth the influence over Obama that Cheney does the current presidency), it could be a good combination.

I like this, too. Gravel's personality works great on stage and in his present office, but he seems to me to be too flamboyant to fit a 'president image.' I like how he doesn't too carefully groom what he says and how he acts. You can listen to Obama go around and around an issue without saying anything yet appearing to please everyone.

[chlamor]

Note attendees and keynote speakers:



http://www.freedomfest.com/

[overcoming hope]

P.S. Wondering what all of you sane Canadians and Northern European Socialists think of this topic (or any of its tangents)?

There was a comment on the blog a while ago, suggesting Americans ought to put aside political differences to unite behind Paul because of his integrity. I replied that the extremist right has often found cross-over appeal to the middle and even the left by playing the integrity card and downplaying "mere politics." Paul's convictions and vision for government are not trifling things. I don't know why American progressives would consider abandoning their own beliefs in order to support him, unless they don't know what he believes, or what they believe themselves.

Something that's often forgotten is that fascism is also a populist movement.

Will be the only candidate in 08 that opposes the Real ID

enough for me.

[ninakat]

Ron Paul's Anti-Atheist Bigotry, Homophobia, and Other Right-Wing Ideology

Ron Paul has a swarm of zealots on the Internet, spewing pro-Paul propaganda in all sorts of liberal and progressive forums. The Paul worshipers will accurately point out his opposition to the Iraq War and the Unpatriotic Act, but they conveniently omit the vast majority of Paul's views, which are hateful and wacky right-wing. The deception is starting to offend a lot of liberals, and I'm one of them. After all, if Paul could get a 75% rating in 2005 from the “Family Research Council,” a Christian Right hate-group, that should give you some idea of where Paul really stands.

Here are some other ratings of interest:

Secular Coalition for America: 20% (2004)

Americans for the Arts Action Fund: 0% (2000, 01, 02, 03, 04)

Leadership Conference on Civil Rights: 38% (2005)

Human Rights Campaign: 25% (2003-04), 0% in previous years

John Birch Society: 100% (2004-2006 in quarterly ratings, except for 88% in Spring 04)

National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws: 14% (2004), 30% (2005)

Campaign for America's Future: 0% (2005-06, energy issues)

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America: F (2006)

Bigotry Against Atheists

It should be noted that each of the following three positions contradict Paul's claims that he is a libertarian and that he supports individual freedom.

Opposes Restoring the Pledge of Allegience to the Version Without “Under God”
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2002/pr062702.htm

Co-Sponsored Constitutional Amendment Pushing Coerced Prayer in the Public Schools
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... L&summ2=m&

Voted to Allow Bigoted Alabama Judge to Post “Ten Commandments” in Courtroom
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/iss ... gress=1091

Homophobia

Here are a couple of examples of Ron Paul's views, aside from his opposition to ENDA.

Opposes Hate Crimes Laws
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst050707.htm

Supports “Don't Ask, Don't Tell”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... y_equality

Voted for Amendment Attempting to Block DC Government from Allowing Same-sex Partners to Adopt
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/iss ... gress=1061

Other Right-Wing Extremism,
from his congressional web site:

Opposing Federal Funding for Stem Cell Research:
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congr ... 052405.htm

Anti-UN:
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2006/pr061506.htm

Pro-Tax Cuts, Nearly All of Which Go to the Rich:
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2006/pr042606.htm

Favors Cutting Gas Taxes:
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2005/pr090705.htm

Against Corporate Accountability:
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2005/pr041405.htm

http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2004/pr091604.htm

Glorifying Ronald Reagan:
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2004/pr061004.htm

Supporting Corporate Efforts to Ship US Jobs to China
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congr ... 072605.htm

Attacking Gun Control and DC Self Rule
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congr ... 100404.htm

Anti-Union
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst98/tst072798.htm

[AlanStrangis]

Will be the only candidate in 08 that opposes the Real ID

enough for me.

If his newsletter is any indication, everything you need to pick out the 'bad apples' is right there in the skin tone.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

...I think the whole libertarian thing is just dandy in theory but in reality survival of the fittest is for animals, not a civilised people...

Bingo. (Thanks, Telexx.)

Both Libertarian and Republican = Everyone for themselves = Social Darwinism = Naziism.

Humans ARE animals but they are SOCIAL animals and that's why socialism, taking care of those who need it, is natural and moral, the family as extended family.

Let's look at things just a little bit harder, shall we?
This 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' thing is rampant-

>Progressives embracing CIA like Ray McGovern. AGH!
>Progressives sticking up for 'the press' like Judy Miller in prison. AGH!
>Progressives applauding Ron Paul. AGH!

Back to op-
FUCK RON PAUL.

On the bright side, that other 'F' word, FASCISM, is now in common use when just a coupla years ago it was considered extremist rhetoric.

[monster]

Ron Paul's Anti-Atheist Bigotry, Homophobia, and Other Right-Wing Ideology

I agreed with a lot of that stuff... nobody's perfect. He's the best candidate.

[11:11]

I suspect that most "progressives", were they to actually read the Constitution, would not like what they would find. The purpose of the Union was a common defense of the states, and to regulate trade. The rest was left to the states and the people (9th & 10th amedmendments) to determine how they chose to live and govern themselves, provided Constituional rights were not violated. If Wisconsin wants a state health care plan, they can have it. If California wants to legalize weed, no feds can stop them. If Mississsippi wants to pray in school, or Michigan wants to accomodate Muslim prayer routines, nobody can prevent it, because, as much as anyone might not like that expression, the first amendment says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


It's a live and let live philosophy, which suits neither neoCON fundies, nor progressive socilaists - both of whom rely on Big Brother to force their will on those who are less powerful and well funded (through the barrel of a gun, no less). What all of you control freaks don't seem to get is how sick so many of us are of your imposing your will on the rest of us. Ron Paul is popular because people are fed up with the stranglehold of big government, and other people telling us how we should live, and stealing the fruits of our labor and creativity to do it. Be it war without end, forced vaccinations, Codex controlled food and suppliments, profiteers from banksters to bureaucrats, the struggle to be free will not go away. It's been a wild ride watching the globalist left, and the globalist right, bring us to the brink of totalitarianism and total enslavement, and I see a showdown coming. I do not like living in these kinds of times, that the left and right created for all of the rest of us. I'm not looking forward to standing my ground against Real ID (promoted by the left AND the right), nuclear war for Israel, the NWO global government. All of you control freaks have brought the world to this point, out of your complete lack of respect for the fact that, as JFK said, mankind was born to be free and independent. Neither socialism or fascism suits that unalienable right.

[philipacentaur]

Nothing wins me over like a rant that repeatedly insults my intelligence.

[11:11]

I accept the definition of patriotism as that effort
to resist oppressive state power.

The true patritot is motivated by a sense of responsibility
and out of self interest for himself, his family, and the future
of his country to resist government abuse of power. He rejects the
notion that patriotism means obedience to the state.

- Ron Paul


Fuck Ron Paul? No, fuck those who seek to control others and steal their self determination - be they on the left or the right. Two jackboots on the same thug.

[Truth4Youth]

OK, the first bit of this post is going to be me voicing an opinion in an emotional (and I admit somewhat eccentric) way, so just move down some and you'll get the good stuff if you want to skip this:

Oh yep, just because Ron Paul gets support from the far-right means he's an EVIL NAZI MILITIA LOVER... OOGA BOOGA BOOGA! YOU BETTER WATCH OUT, OOGA BOOGA BOOGA!

Listen, you guys have got some crap wrong here. First of seen people pushing the Ron Paul racist stuff a while back. They had their own agenda as well so let's get that straight. I don't buy it a bit.

Second, why is it a big deal if he is against gay marriage and abortion? I'm pretty liberal myself and I don't agree with abortion. I guess I'm just one of those far-right militia types though, right guys? I'm just a white supremacist, right guys? Oh, and I'm a neo-nazi because I don't supprt hate speech laws, right guys? You've got me all figured out, don't you guys?

You guys think you're the "high-brow" end of parapolitical research. You guys think you're crap doesn't stink. NEWSFLASH- IT DOES! Get off your high horse already! You scream, "THE FASCISTS ARE COMING, THE FASCISTS ARE COMING!" The right screams, "THE COMMIES ARE COMING, THE COMMIES ARE COMING!" Everyone wants to pin this down in simple political terms. AIN'T HAPPENING! This is about money and power. Do you really think that's only on one side of the politcal spectrum?

Now onto the good stuff:

First, you guys complain about Ron Paul being against abortion and gay marriage. Well, as far as I know he was going to let the states decide whether those things should be allowed or not INSTEAD of the federal government. If I'm wrong on this point call me on it.

Second, for those complaining that he is in total support of corporations because he is a libertarian, back off. Libertarian radio host Scott Horton got into this whole "liberatarians support corporations no matter what" thing on his show when he interviewed Lew Rockwell- http://dissentradio.com/radio/07_08_20_rockwell2.mp3.

Now onto another topic: the dreaded "Zionist ravers". I'd love to see you call James Petras or Scott Ritter a Zionist raver. What about Cindy Sheehan? Are they just "Zionist ravers"?

And finally, here's some words of wisdom for you all:

[Hammer of Los]

Well, I'm English, as you may know, so I wasn't going to comment on this, but since you asked, I wouldn't vote for Ron Paul, no. I'm more of a progressive liberal I guess, as far as I can see, Dennis Kucinich would be nice, but what do I know.

It seems to me that the UK has moved more towards a one party state in recent years. My feeling is that any difference in policy between the two main parties are purely cosmetic. I guess they are both beholden to the same special interests and hidden controllers. The third party, the Liberal Democrats, are allowed to have policies that differ somewhat, to promote the myth of genuine democratic choice, but even they are probably infiltrated and if by some miracle came to power, they wouldn't be able to effect any policies that would be opposed by those special interests and hidden controllers.

I shan't be voting either, and I agree with Masonic Plot's comments in this regard. In fact, when a voting official came round to confirm the details of the voter registration of myself and my wife, I informed them that I am happy to be on the voter roll, because I shall certainly go down to the voting booth to spoil my ballot. Perhaps I shall just write in block capitals;

ONE PARTY STATE

Well, its a statement, isnt it? I certainly don't want to lend whatever entirely negligible support my vote represents to the current system. On the other hand, increasing non-voting certainly represents a problem to those who seek to maintain the illusion of participatory, representative, democratic government.