Interview: Who Is Ron Paul?

  • Thread starter Thread starter HydraBob
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HydraBob

Guest
nationalreview.com/articles/255968/who-ron-paul-interview
He’s America’s most prominent libertarian, and he has the college and yuppie fans — fond of styling themselves “fiscally conservative but socially liberal!” — who come along with that. But it’s not that simple; for example, Paul strongly opposes abortion rights. Many are surprised by that. But Paul continually tries to convey — despite the confusion of the mainstream media — that his pro-life advocacy is consistent with, indeed bound up with, his libertarianism: Both protect the right to self that every person (and Paul considers the unborn to be persons) possesses. The congressman is also surprisingly vociferous in his opposition to illegal immigration, which might be considered a turn away from laissez faire economics. On same-sex marriage and the death penalty, Paul’s political priority is to protect states’ rights to decide for themselves, but he personally leans right.
Click to expand...
IMO, in the political sphere, Ron Paul, or someone like him, is more or less the only hope there is of preventing the fall of the Republic.
 
Back in my less enlightened days, I thought he was great. Now I realise although his economic views and opinion on the fed are spot on, on foreign policy and terrorism he is a complete disaster.
 
grampben said:
Back in my less enlightened days, I thought he was great. Now I realise although his economic views and opinion on the fed are spot on, on foreign policy and terrorism he is a complete disaster.
Click to expand...
I agree. Despite the fact that his views on the economy are depressing, what he says in reguards of fiat currency are true. He does make some good points on foreign policy, but is too much of an idealist in that area. If we do as he suggests, and withdraw all our forces throughout the world, the world as we know it will fall apart or everyone will look at us as Ultranationalists and attack us.
 
Mike5575 said:
I agree. Despite the fact that his views on the economy are depressing, what he says in reguards of fiat currency are true. He does make some good points on foreign policy, but is too much of an idealist in that area. If we do as he suggests, and withdraw all our forces throughout the world, the world as we know it will fall apart or everyone will look at us as Ultranationalists and attack us.
Click to expand...
He refuses to condemn NK or Iran having nuclear capacity, and detests humanitarian intervention in genocidal regimes! Any such politician is a moral liability in my eyes.
 
first of all, we shouldn’t have troops in Germany or Japan anymore. Or anywhere in Europe.

Second, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are illegitimate and our troops should be sent home.

Our Army should be for our defense only.

What’s wrong with being nationalist?
 
Not_Sure said:
first of all, we shouldn’t have troops in Germany or Japan anymore. Or anywhere in Europe.

Second, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are illegitimate and our troops should be sent home.

Our Army should be for our defense only.

What’s wrong with being nationalist?
Click to expand...
So ending global tyranny is not in the interests of the free world?
 
Mike5575 said:
I agree. Despite the fact that his views on the economy are depressing, what he says in reguards of fiat currency are true. He does make some good points on foreign policy, but is too much of an idealist in that area. If we do as he suggests, and withdraw all our forces throughout the world, the world as we know it will fall apart or everyone will look at us as Ultranationalists and attack us.
Click to expand...
When did Congress declare war as the Constitution dictates? Or, like Bush, don’t you care about those particulars?
 
Mike5575 said:
. If we do as he suggests, and withdraw all our forces throughout the world, the world as we know it will fall apart or everyone will look at us as Ultranationalists and attack us.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that the world has already fallen apart, and partly because of U.S. Foreign policy.

The U.S. is exporting the Abortion Policy. Like we haven’t murdered enough of our own children, we now have to force other countries to do it - while in the presence of our troops.

The Homosexual Agenda is running rampant around the world.

Communism/Socialism is now being exported by the U.S…

Godless rules and legislation are being implemented, and exported around the world.

It seems to me like the U.S. as the world’s Police Force, isn’t working out so well. But then, there are no Government policies that do work out well.

Here is a quote from a recent article on the Pope:

"In a speech to Papal representatives from all over the world, the Pope spoke in the context of a the near total collapse in the Western world of any moral consensus rooted in Christian ethics and heritage.

In comments aimed directly at the secularization and abandonment of God by the West, Benedict stunned those in a attendance when he stated;"
 
I don’t agree with everything he believes, but I voted for him both times he ran for president, and would do so again.
 
Digitonomy said:
I don’t agree with everything he believes, but I voted for him and would do so again.
Click to expand...
As did I! Imagine, an honest and principled man in our Congress who will protect the Constitution and place America’s interests first.
 
grampben said:
He refuses to condemn NK or Iran having nuclear capacity, and detests humanitarian intervention in genocidal regimes! Any such politician is a moral liability in my eyes.
Click to expand...
In this, he has probably been a close follower and adherent of the ongoing analysis of the Iran-nuclear issue provided by Gordon Prather up until November of 2009. As I have been.
 
grampben said:
So ending global tyranny is not in the interests of the free world?
Click to expand...
The ultra-interventionist attitude that we have to end global tyranny with active military aggression is a right-ward application of the Trotskyist doctrine of incessant world revolution.

This slant is shown in the ideological pedigree of neoconservatism, which can be traced in the career of David Horowitz.
 
colmywaykurtz said:
The ultra-interventionist attitude that we have to end global tyranny with active military aggression is a right-ward application of the Trotskyist doctrine of incessant world revolution.

This slant is shown in the ideological pedigree of neoconservatism, which can be traced in the career of David Horowitz.
Click to expand...
I would hardly call the fathers of Neoconservatism Trotskyist. Many top neoconservatives were indeed formally liberals, but you could hardly call Irving Kristol a raving commie!
Freedom is good for us, but not good enough for people across the globe? You’re telling me we should have let that sicko Milosevic massacre thousands of Kosovans simply because you have a conspiratorial view of the history of neoconservatism?
 
colmywaykurtz said:
This slant is shown in the ideological pedigree of neoconservatism, which can be traced in the career of David Horowitz.
Click to expand...
And thus are gone the days when our defense policies are based upon the imminent threat to our own country and vital interests. I can’t help but wonder just how radical a political change Horowitz actually went through since his early indoctrination into Communism by his parents.
 
Tigg said:
And thus are gone the days when our defense policies are based upon the imminent threat to our own country and vital interests. I can’t help but wonder just how radical a political change Horowitz actually went through since his early indoctrination into Communism by his parents.
Click to expand...
Destroying totalitarianism is definitely a precept of communism. Yawn Enough of the Chomskyist-Buchanonite propaganda.
 
I have found that people who use the word “Neocon” are anti-Semites. Many of them are also 9/11 truthers, and a fair percentage, like Ron Paul, believe drugs should be legalized. The Venn diagram for those 3 groups is a heavy overlap.

p.s. Ron Paul is a Libertarian and has made pro-choice statements in the past. I have just now begun to hear that he is anti-abortion but this goes against the Libertarian platform of “just leave me alone and I will leave you alone.” I realize he is a doctor but so are abortionists, the head of PP here is an OB-GYN.
 
grampben said:
So ending global tyranny is not in the interests of the free world?
Click to expand...
How does one end global tyranny by invading their country indefinintely and dropping bombs on their civilians. In addition, some cultures lend themselves towards tyrannical regimes. Can a few smiling Americans reverse thousands of years of culture?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top