Share this
Mister Wong
Digg
Del.icio.us
Slashdot
Furl
Yahoo
Technorati
Newsvine
Googlize this
Blinklist
Facebook
Wikio
Export PDF
Print
E-mail
Tags
Hutchinson: Paul is a Racist, No Matter What He Says
by Kurt Nimmo
Let’s face it. Guys like Earl Ofari Hutchinson will not be placated until Ron Paul is prostrate and sacrifices himself on the altar of political correctness. Earl writes today for the Huffington Post:
by Kurt Nimmo
Let’s face it. Guys like Earl Ofari Hutchinson will not be placated until Ron Paul is prostrate and sacrifices himself on the altar of political correctness. Earl writes today for the Huffington Post: "Ron Paul and his backers can sail through the ceiling, scream foul until their lungs burst, and say that it’s all a big conspiracy by mainstream media hit artists, a Paul hating and fearful political establishment, and on the make Republican and Democrats to smear and slander their hero as a racist. But the one that has done more to fan charges that Paul is a closet bigot is Paul himself in writings and sentiments that express racist views that purportedly carried Paul’s stamp on them."
Earl Ofari Hutchinson refuses to except Ron Paul’s explanation that he had nothing to do with the purportedly racist writings that appeared in a newsletter associated with the Texan Republican.
For Mr. Hutchinson, the mere fact Dr. Paul is a libertarian is suspect:
In other words, according to Mr. Hutchinson, most blacks believe the government has the right to tell its subjects what they can or cannot put in their bodies. Is Hutchinson unaware of the well documented fact the CIA and criminal bankers are responsible for the massive infusion of drugs into this country? Hutchinson and crew play right into this scam by insisting there be “crackdowns on crime and drugs,” as the crackdown — necessitating a police state — is part of the whole scheme. If indeed Mr. Hutchinson was interested in ending the “pain and suffering among African-Americans,” he would demand the government stop importing drugs and dumping them on those of us least able to resist.
Few if any have defended the newsletters and Dr. Paul has bent over backwards to disavow and repudiate them, but that is of course not enough for Hutchinson and crew, determined to keep race-based politics at the center of American political life. One has to wonder who Earl Ofari Hutchinson will vote for come November. Obama? Hillary? Obviously none of the troglodytes currently selected on the Republican side of the One Party system, as they represent racism, or so the political fairy tale would have it.
In fact, all of the candidates — in fact selected horses in a rigged race — are minions to the man and woman of the New World Order, the globalist scam to turn the entire planet into a slave labor gulag. It matters not to them if a slave is brown, white, yellow, or purple with green polka dots — all are ciphers and fodder to be used for the emerging global order.
Is Ron Paul a perfect candidate? No. But he is the best in the current line-up, consisting mostly of criminals, shills, and factotums for the global slave plantation. Ron Paul understands that the best chance we have to turn the tide of perpetual war and economic servitude based on fractional banking and debt is a return to our Constitutional heritage, albeit that heritage was long ago subverted and is now but a ghostly shadow.
I bet Earl Ofari Hutchinson would beg to differ. After all, many of the founders were slave holders and that alone discredits the idea of a constitutionally limited republic.
A republic based on constitutional principles will also put an end to race-based political favoritism, essentially a form of totalitarianism.
- "Even if Paul, as he claims, didn’t write or utter one of the offensive words, or hold the sentiments, that are attributed to him, his odd mish mash of ultra conservatism and libertarian spoutings marks him as suspect. The cornerstone of the jumble is his view of government and what it should or should not do about civil rights. Paul holds that government should have minimal or better still no role in civil rights laws and enforcement. The government passed and enforced civil rights laws, did nothing to solve the country’s racial ills, and worse, fueled even more racial polarization, he says. That old, worn, and thoroughly discredited view warms the hearts of the packs of closet bigots that pine for the old days when racial and gender discrimination was the American norm and government did little to protect black and gay rights."
In
other words, libertarianism, for Earl, is predicated on racism, a
politically brain-dead or at least disingenuous allusion with
absolutely no basis in reality. In fact, the government is not
interested in civil rights or for that matter individual rights based
on natural law — as history repeatedly demonstrates, government exists
to ensure the continuation of its own criminal enterprise and it
considers the citizenry — regardless of race, creed, or gender — as
little more than a cash cow and, at certain times, a slave labor force
to be exploited and cast aside. Earl may not like it, but the hard cold
fact is that civil rights laws were enacted as political expediency in
response to the fact outraged citizens of color were burning down
cities and endangering the empire. LBJ was not an advocate of civil
liberties. He was a political horse trader. Same can be said for the
Kennedy brothers, who are idolized by many blacks.
- "Paul piles even more suspicion on his denial of racial bias when he even more absurdly tries to claim that he is pounded as a racist because more and more blacks cheer him for blasting the drug laws as biased and harmful to blacks. The disparities in drug law enforcement are gaping, and demand reform, but urging that they be totally scrapped is a far different matter.
- The drug plague and the crime, violence, and family wreckage that has come with it has torn poor black communities and has caused much pain and suffering among African-Americans. The last thing that the majority of African-Americans want to see is open and unchecked illicit drug selling bizarres operating in their communities. Blacks have been among those that have shouted the loudest for crackdowns on crime and drugs."
In other words, according to Mr. Hutchinson, most blacks believe the government has the right to tell its subjects what they can or cannot put in their bodies. Is Hutchinson unaware of the well documented fact the CIA and criminal bankers are responsible for the massive infusion of drugs into this country? Hutchinson and crew play right into this scam by insisting there be “crackdowns on crime and drugs,” as the crackdown — necessitating a police state — is part of the whole scheme. If indeed Mr. Hutchinson was interested in ending the “pain and suffering among African-Americans,” he would demand the government stop importing drugs and dumping them on those of us least able to resist.
- The Paul newsletters are damning enough, and if any of the racist stuff in them is true, that instantly disqualifies him as fit to run for any national office. And those that defend those views should be branded as what they are, bigots and crackpots.
Few if any have defended the newsletters and Dr. Paul has bent over backwards to disavow and repudiate them, but that is of course not enough for Hutchinson and crew, determined to keep race-based politics at the center of American political life. One has to wonder who Earl Ofari Hutchinson will vote for come November. Obama? Hillary? Obviously none of the troglodytes currently selected on the Republican side of the One Party system, as they represent racism, or so the political fairy tale would have it.
In fact, all of the candidates — in fact selected horses in a rigged race — are minions to the man and woman of the New World Order, the globalist scam to turn the entire planet into a slave labor gulag. It matters not to them if a slave is brown, white, yellow, or purple with green polka dots — all are ciphers and fodder to be used for the emerging global order.
Is Ron Paul a perfect candidate? No. But he is the best in the current line-up, consisting mostly of criminals, shills, and factotums for the global slave plantation. Ron Paul understands that the best chance we have to turn the tide of perpetual war and economic servitude based on fractional banking and debt is a return to our Constitutional heritage, albeit that heritage was long ago subverted and is now but a ghostly shadow.
I bet Earl Ofari Hutchinson would beg to differ. After all, many of the founders were slave holders and that alone discredits the idea of a constitutionally limited republic.
A republic based on constitutional principles will also put an end to race-based political favoritism, essentially a form of totalitarianism.
Kurt Nimmo
Truth News
January 11, 2008
Truth News
January 11, 2008
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email This
Comments (11)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Steve Grycel, January 12, 2008
Good writing there Kurt!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
written by Devils Advocate, January 12, 2008
I have really been struggling with these articles that were published and after careful consideration of the facts presented. James Kirchick is absolutely correct in his assessment. RP is a candidate that we would not want in the Whitehouse. The articles do have strong racial overtones and gay hysteria. Ron Paul did not pen them but he might as well have.
America cannot tolerate, must not tolerate a President that would stop the war on drugs. Why would any reasonable person want a President to pardon these common criminals? We also must not tolerate a President that would prevent a constitutional amendment defining marriage between a man and a woman and by proxy of the amendment declare gays as criminals. These dregs of our society deserving of the same punishment as those incarcerated on drug related charges.
Thank you James Kirchick for your reasoning and logic for bringing these issues out into the open. Well done Kirchick, well done. Your bold vision of America is what we need. I now fully understand what you believe as truth. Racism and gay bashing must continue, it would be a tragic mistake to elect Ron Paul.
America cannot tolerate, must not tolerate a President that would stop the war on drugs. Why would any reasonable person want a President to pardon these common criminals? We also must not tolerate a President that would prevent a constitutional amendment defining marriage between a man and a woman and by proxy of the amendment declare gays as criminals. These dregs of our society deserving of the same punishment as those incarcerated on drug related charges.
Thank you James Kirchick for your reasoning and logic for bringing these issues out into the open. Well done Kirchick, well done. Your bold vision of America is what we need. I now fully understand what you believe as truth. Racism and gay bashing must continue, it would be a tragic mistake to elect Ron Paul.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +12
written by Martin, January 12, 2008
Wait...let me get this straight. Your saying we can't tolerate Ron Paul and the ideas under his name? How is being intolerant of Ron Paul any better than his so-called intolerance of minorities? I believe that is the definition of racism.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +6
written by Andy, January 12, 2008
I don't get it. What about the ILLEGAL immigrants that broke laws by entering and contributing to the drug problem? Sounds like we need to control our borders first, something Ron Paul supports probably more than the amnesty (pay a fine, get to the back of the line) candidates. And as Ron Paul has said, what you put into your body is your own business, and not the governments. I don't crime and drugs in my neighborhood, but there might be less crime is it's legalized and there's not an underground drug market.
As far as race is concerned, the government loves to split people up in groups...white, black, gay, straight, married, single, Christian, not Christian, etc. Ever have to fill out a tax form or a census or hear about other candidates pandering to a group based on race, etc.? Ron Paul wants to forget about race and just treat everyone as an equal human being. His heroes include Rosa Parks, Ghandi, and MLK because of their civil disobedience. And BTW, he didn't want to pay for Rosa Parks to get a congressional medal...only because we shouldn't be using taxpayer's money to do that!! He offered to pay money out of his own pocket instead.
And just because something has someone's name it, doesn't mean they wrote it. Saying "Ron Paul did not pen them but he might as well have." doesn't make much sense either. I could post blogs all over the internet saying they were written by "Kurt Nimmo", but that doesn't mean he wrote them!
As far as race is concerned, the government loves to split people up in groups...white, black, gay, straight, married, single, Christian, not Christian, etc. Ever have to fill out a tax form or a census or hear about other candidates pandering to a group based on race, etc.? Ron Paul wants to forget about race and just treat everyone as an equal human being. His heroes include Rosa Parks, Ghandi, and MLK because of their civil disobedience. And BTW, he didn't want to pay for Rosa Parks to get a congressional medal...only because we shouldn't be using taxpayer's money to do that!! He offered to pay money out of his own pocket instead.
And just because something has someone's name it, doesn't mean they wrote it. Saying "Ron Paul did not pen them but he might as well have." doesn't make much sense either. I could post blogs all over the internet saying they were written by "Kurt Nimmo", but that doesn't mean he wrote them!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
written by Brock, January 12, 2008
Devils Advocate, show me in the consitution where any power is given to the president to block the passing of an Amendment. Do that and I will show you a green dog. Kirchick has no bold vision, he is an opportunist making money working for NewsCorp and digging up dirt on candidates. How could anyone have found those papers if he had not been LOOKING for them. Why would he be looking for them? How did he know they existed? The only person who would look so hard for such dirt is a person who feared Dr. Paul. Something is wrong with our nation and you condone such radical and scandalous behavior.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
written by brokencage, January 12, 2008
All anyone needs do is take a look at RP's voting record over the last 20 years.This is not the voting record of racist!Wake up folks they are trying to divide his suport.I for one will suport him all the way to the end.even if I have to right in his name.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Mick Russom, January 12, 2008
Princeton exposes how bad the Diebold machines are:
http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNYA5ggwG84
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JESZiLpBLE
This is Princeton University , not some wingnut moonbat conspiracy club.
The physical key for *ALL* diebold machines is the same:
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3489
http://nuclearsnake.com/plain.html
The CIA, political campaigns try and deface and remove information about Diebold on wikipedia:
http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/08/wiki_tracker
The NH primary was stolen.
Walden O'Dell, CEO, Diebold, August, 2003 : "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year"
Walden has since resigned as he the company he lead is facing securities fraud litigation surrounding charges of insider trading.
80% of all votes in America are counted by only two companies: Diebold and ES&S.
There is no federal agency with regulatory authority or oversight of the US voting machine industry.
The vice-president of Diebold and the president of ES&S are brothers.
35% of ES&S is owned by Senator Chuck Hagel, who became Senator based on votes counted by ES&S machines.
Senator Chuck Hagel was caught lying about his ownership of ES&S by the Senate Ethics Committee.
ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in the US and counts almost 60% of all US votes.
Diebold's new touch screen voting machines have no paper trail of any votes. In other words, there is no way to verify that the data coming out of the machine is the same as what was legitimately put in by voters.
Diebold also makes ATMs, checkout scanners, and ticket machines, all of which log each transaction and can generate a paper trail.
Diebold's Senior Vice-President, Jeff Dean, was convicted of 23 counts of felony theft in the first degree.
Diebold Senior Vice-President Jeff Dean was convicted of planting back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection over a period of 2 years.
California banned the use of Diebold machines because the security was so bad. Despite Diebold's claims that the audit logs could not be hacked, a chimpanzee was able to do it! (See the movie at http://blackboxvoting.org/baxter/baxterVPR.mov )
30% of all US votes are carried out on unverifiable touch screen voting machines with no paper trail.
The Help America Vote Act of 2002 has as its goal to replace all machines with the new electronic touch screen systems with no paper trail
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
written by Elaine McKillop, Esq., January 12, 2008
As an attorney I believe the correct name for the War on Drugs should be the War on the Constitution, especially the Fourth Amendment. Philosophically just laws should protect an individual's right to their life, liberty and property. The mere possession of a substance does not violate the rights of any other individual and therefore should not be criminalize. The propaganda machines have brainwashed most people into thinking that the government should control what individuals do with their own body, that the collective should determine individual behavior. The Constitution rejects that philosophy as doe its champion, Dr. Paul. First read the Constitution, (many of you have not) the Federal Government does not have jurisdiction. Prohibition required a Constitutional Amendment. Americans were not as dumbed down back then and knew a ban on liquor was not within the power of the Federal Government. Second, read the Bill of Rights the War on Drugs has caused the biggest usurpation of this right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure then any other issue up until the War on Terror which ended any rights we had left. I ask this question, why have we created laws that have imprisoned so many non violent inmates? My answer to that is that the people do not have a voice in our government anymore, we are controlled by corporate fascist. We are housing these non violent inmates, who have not harmed the life, liberty, or property of another so that they can be used by corporations as SLAVE LABOR in prison factories. Do not try to label me a "conspiracy theorist". These are facts in existence. These injustices do not occur by accident. Ron Paul is the only candidate that belongs to the people and not the fascist bankers and corporations that are hell bent on enslaving us all. Wake up America, there are reason for this attempt at character assassination and the reasons is that the despots do not want us freed. Dr. Paul message of liberty must not be stopped!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
written by SpeakingObjectively, January 13, 2008
Before the days of electronic identity theft, or posing as someone else on a website (I lost count at about 18 or so "Hillary" or "Hillary Clinton" myspace profiles with her photo), people did things like dumpster diving, for correspondence, letter head, or credit cards. People also had to want to pose as someone else in some cases to reap the reward of whatever it is that person had in mind with that information or that "identity". to conceal themselves behind.
Does that include stupid people who write idiotic, racist, things on some else's newsletter template with the words Ron Paul's name printed across the top. Sounds easy, especially if you didn't have the dumpster dive for the letter head.
Also, how many have his name in the byline (not the letterhead) as you review each newsletter?
He says he didn't write them. And as I read these newsletters, it doesn't "sound" like his writing or speaking style. Did you notice that?
Speaking of sound, you can hear him speaking on the floor of the house...wait about a minute or two, and you'll see why he admires Martin Luther King, and Rosa Parks. He has conviction for holding them in high regard. He has a motive for liking them.
http://recap.fednet.net/archive/Buildasx.asp?sProxy=80_hflr052207_141.wmv,80_hflr052207_142.wmv,80_hflr052207_143.wmv,80_hflr052207_144.wmv,80_hflr052207_145.wmv,80_hflr052207_146.wmv&sTime=00:04:42.0&eTime=00:04:18&duration=00:24:27.0&UserName=jenni&sLocation=&sExpire=1
So I'm a skeptic for the two reasons, and for the following...
Just for the hell of it, I took time to read some things. Here are dozens of Congressman's Pauls House testimonies that are written down and recorded, which I think qualifies as a real byline don't you think?
http://www.house.gov/paul/legis.shtml
Also, for the hell of it, click on the "sponsored" buttons. These dozens of H.R. bills might be the reason he seems "odd"? to the political environment in the
beltway? Seems to be standing up for something doesn't he?
Now, what did he vote against that might seem like a problem and prove
he's a racist?
Well, voting against a bill that wanted to award a gold medal to Rosa Parks, of course:
Against Rosa Parks Gold Medal
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec99/cr042099.htm
But then he voted against these other medals too (his reason? Congress shouldn't spend taxpayers money...I don't agree with him...but that his reason in his own words)
Against Ronald Reagan Gold Medal
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2000/cr040300.htm
Against Tony Blair Gold Medal
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr062503.htm
The full text is eye opening...do a Control-F for Mr. Paul
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=0718227435 32 0 0&WAISaction=retrieve
Against the Dalai Lama Gold Medal (do a Control-F for Mr. Paul)
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=0716719158 0 0 0&WAISaction=retrieve
He was against the Pope's Gold Medal too. There's more like these if you have a few hours to kill.
And before you think his reasons for not awarding gold medals was somehow missed, here's the Washington Post putting that Paul mind set in perspective
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/08/AR2006070800966.html
Finally:
Here's some articled that I found useful to help me understand what is going on with this:
Kirchick's (cut and pasted) email exchange with Log Cabin Republicans:
http://gays-for-ron.blogspot.com/2008/01/jamie-kirchick-i-dont-think-ron-paul-is.html
A balanced, well researched, (not perfect) blog article about the situation:
http://www.redpills.org/?p=728
Does that include stupid people who write idiotic, racist, things on some else's newsletter template with the words Ron Paul's name printed across the top. Sounds easy, especially if you didn't have the dumpster dive for the letter head.
Also, how many have his name in the byline (not the letterhead) as you review each newsletter?
He says he didn't write them. And as I read these newsletters, it doesn't "sound" like his writing or speaking style. Did you notice that?
Speaking of sound, you can hear him speaking on the floor of the house...wait about a minute or two, and you'll see why he admires Martin Luther King, and Rosa Parks. He has conviction for holding them in high regard. He has a motive for liking them.
http://recap.fednet.net/archive/Buildasx.asp?sProxy=80_hflr052207_141.wmv,80_hflr052207_142.wmv,80_hflr052207_143.wmv,80_hflr052207_144.wmv,80_hflr052207_145.wmv,80_hflr052207_146.wmv&sTime=00:04:42.0&eTime=00:04:18&duration=00:24:27.0&UserName=jenni&sLocation=&sExpire=1
So I'm a skeptic for the two reasons, and for the following...
Just for the hell of it, I took time to read some things. Here are dozens of Congressman's Pauls House testimonies that are written down and recorded, which I think qualifies as a real byline don't you think?
http://www.house.gov/paul/legis.shtml
Also, for the hell of it, click on the "sponsored" buttons. These dozens of H.R. bills might be the reason he seems "odd"? to the political environment in the
beltway? Seems to be standing up for something doesn't he?
Now, what did he vote against that might seem like a problem and prove
he's a racist?
Well, voting against a bill that wanted to award a gold medal to Rosa Parks, of course:
Against Rosa Parks Gold Medal
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec99/cr042099.htm
But then he voted against these other medals too (his reason? Congress shouldn't spend taxpayers money...I don't agree with him...but that his reason in his own words)
Against Ronald Reagan Gold Medal
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2000/cr040300.htm
Against Tony Blair Gold Medal
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr062503.htm
The full text is eye opening...do a Control-F for Mr. Paul
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=0718227435 32 0 0&WAISaction=retrieve
Against the Dalai Lama Gold Medal (do a Control-F for Mr. Paul)
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=0716719158 0 0 0&WAISaction=retrieve
He was against the Pope's Gold Medal too. There's more like these if you have a few hours to kill.
And before you think his reasons for not awarding gold medals was somehow missed, here's the Washington Post putting that Paul mind set in perspective
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/08/AR2006070800966.html
Finally:
Here's some articled that I found useful to help me understand what is going on with this:
Kirchick's (cut and pasted) email exchange with Log Cabin Republicans:
http://gays-for-ron.blogspot.com/2008/01/jamie-kirchick-i-dont-think-ron-paul-is.html
A balanced, well researched, (not perfect) blog article about the situation:
http://www.redpills.org/?p=728
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Dan, January 13, 2008
OK... Let me review the whole Ron Paul thing...
Pros:
1/ Says we should READ and obey the Constitution and the Bill of Rights that were the basis in which the United States of America defined themselves and to which every oath to office swears to uphold..
----
....Hmmm.. yup, I like that.
----
2/ Ron professes that the world perception of the USA has degraded over the years, and current U.S. foreign policy makes them a target for extremists within other countries to focus the radicals against Americans. The people who flew aircraft into the WTC were murderers, even perhaps pirates (by the old world definition), and should have been dealt with as such, rather than a "knee jerk" reaction to declare preemptive war on a country that had little, if anything to do with the act.. .
----
.. Check on that one too!
----
3/ The U.S.A. should stop spending money it does not have putting troops in other countries, and use the military to monitor its OWN border instead. The best ambassador for the country should be the example it sets in free trade, travel and commerce, and not an invisible bomb dropped at mach speeds from 30,000 feet....
----
...OK on that one for me!!!
----
4/ Ron Paul warns of a looming economic disaster, a warning based on an encyclopedic understanding of monetary policy, world history, and actual governmental experience as a 10 year veteran in a political arena. Money should be tied to a standard (Gold, Silver,..something... ) and not allowed to float at the whim of a fiat dollar, or a Federal Reserve printing press...
----
... This one is a bit of a "thinker", but I understand what he is saying,,, yeah, it takes some reading on my part.. but I agree..
----
5/ The concepts of "Entitlements" and the role of government involvement in providing health care, welfare, etc. need to be reviewed and redefined in the U.S.A.
Dr. Ron reminds everyone that any "promise" from an elected official to fund or reward person "A" for something has got to be balanced by a hidden tax to persons "B thru Z" to pay for it!! There is no "free lunch" despite what the government posters say!
Instead, most programs dealing with medicine, charity, etc. should be brought down to the State, local, or even free enterprise level.. Completive pressures work on goods and services best without governmental interference and what works for bringing the price of a computer down works in making medical care cheaper... The biggest problem with governmental control of just about *any* program you can think of is that the end product is *always* delivered not as the "best item for the least money" but as the "worst thing for the highest cost"! Just think about all the horror stories you have heard
about government sponsored suppliers selling "$200 dollar hammers" and "$2000 dollar toilet seats" !! If it is funded by big government, companies take advantage of that and charge outrageous amounts because it is easily justified in the huge paper trail mess that is the bureaucracy.
---
Ok, I understand that one too..
---
6/ The War on Drugs does not work for the same reason Prohibition did not work in the Thirties. Legalizing many of the aspects of the drug trade (marijuana possession, for eg.) would mean that the high prices that the criminal element charges for the product (because of the risk involved if caught) would evaporate instantly -- and just a quickly end the careers of many of the pushers and traffickers of said products! The biggest hurdle for those who HATE the drug culture and what it is doing to the world is that by de-criminalizing much of the activity, it would actually *end* much of the problem!! (Why try to get someone hooked on a product if there is no money in it for the dealer ?)
------
This one's a toughie, but I get it!
------
7/ I could go on and on about the "big think" items, but I'll only add that Ron Paul strikes me (after uncountable views of speeches, debates and interviews) as a sweet old guy in the mold of a "Jimmy Stewart" movie personage, and by golly, I just plain like the guy !!
------------------------------------------
OK.. the Cons...
1/ Some jerk digs up some 20 year old dirt from a God-knows-what newsletter written by someone in a style that is entirely inconsistent with *anything* Ron Paul has done publicly, and inconsistent with any policy or comment ever recorded by legions of cameras and microphones on him...
-----
uhhhhh... ok, whatever..
-----
2/ hmmm... have to think.. He *is* kinda old... err.. well so are some of the other candidates.. hmmmm...
Ok... I'll have to mull these all over, I'll let you know ...
Pros:
1/ Says we should READ and obey the Constitution and the Bill of Rights that were the basis in which the United States of America defined themselves and to which every oath to office swears to uphold..
----
....Hmmm.. yup, I like that.
----
2/ Ron professes that the world perception of the USA has degraded over the years, and current U.S. foreign policy makes them a target for extremists within other countries to focus the radicals against Americans. The people who flew aircraft into the WTC were murderers, even perhaps pirates (by the old world definition), and should have been dealt with as such, rather than a "knee jerk" reaction to declare preemptive war on a country that had little, if anything to do with the act.. .
----
.. Check on that one too!
----
3/ The U.S.A. should stop spending money it does not have putting troops in other countries, and use the military to monitor its OWN border instead. The best ambassador for the country should be the example it sets in free trade, travel and commerce, and not an invisible bomb dropped at mach speeds from 30,000 feet....
----
...OK on that one for me!!!
----
4/ Ron Paul warns of a looming economic disaster, a warning based on an encyclopedic understanding of monetary policy, world history, and actual governmental experience as a 10 year veteran in a political arena. Money should be tied to a standard (Gold, Silver,..something... ) and not allowed to float at the whim of a fiat dollar, or a Federal Reserve printing press...
----
... This one is a bit of a "thinker", but I understand what he is saying,,, yeah, it takes some reading on my part.. but I agree..
----
5/ The concepts of "Entitlements" and the role of government involvement in providing health care, welfare, etc. need to be reviewed and redefined in the U.S.A.
Dr. Ron reminds everyone that any "promise" from an elected official to fund or reward person "A" for something has got to be balanced by a hidden tax to persons "B thru Z" to pay for it!! There is no "free lunch" despite what the government posters say!
Instead, most programs dealing with medicine, charity, etc. should be brought down to the State, local, or even free enterprise level.. Completive pressures work on goods and services best without governmental interference and what works for bringing the price of a computer down works in making medical care cheaper... The biggest problem with governmental control of just about *any* program you can think of is that the end product is *always* delivered not as the "best item for the least money" but as the "worst thing for the highest cost"! Just think about all the horror stories you have heard
about government sponsored suppliers selling "$200 dollar hammers" and "$2000 dollar toilet seats" !! If it is funded by big government, companies take advantage of that and charge outrageous amounts because it is easily justified in the huge paper trail mess that is the bureaucracy.
---
Ok, I understand that one too..
---
6/ The War on Drugs does not work for the same reason Prohibition did not work in the Thirties. Legalizing many of the aspects of the drug trade (marijuana possession, for eg.) would mean that the high prices that the criminal element charges for the product (because of the risk involved if caught) would evaporate instantly -- and just a quickly end the careers of many of the pushers and traffickers of said products! The biggest hurdle for those who HATE the drug culture and what it is doing to the world is that by de-criminalizing much of the activity, it would actually *end* much of the problem!! (Why try to get someone hooked on a product if there is no money in it for the dealer ?)
------
This one's a toughie, but I get it!
------
7/ I could go on and on about the "big think" items, but I'll only add that Ron Paul strikes me (after uncountable views of speeches, debates and interviews) as a sweet old guy in the mold of a "Jimmy Stewart" movie personage, and by golly, I just plain like the guy !!
------------------------------------------
OK.. the Cons...
1/ Some jerk digs up some 20 year old dirt from a God-knows-what newsletter written by someone in a style that is entirely inconsistent with *anything* Ron Paul has done publicly, and inconsistent with any policy or comment ever recorded by legions of cameras and microphones on him...
-----
uhhhhh... ok, whatever..
-----
2/ hmmm... have to think.. He *is* kinda old... err.. well so are some of the other candidates.. hmmmm...
Ok... I'll have to mull these all over, I'll let you know ...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Write comment
