Skip to comments.Climb On Board The 'Ron Paul Revolution'
Posted on 09/16/2007 8:53:29 AM PDT by NapkinUser
When Americans evaluate today's political landscape, most feel something between impotence and disapproval. So, while citizens shake their heads or shrug at the mainstream media's top tier presidential candidates, it is extraordinary how many are becoming overjoyed about one lesser covered candidate.
Tens-of-thousands have joined the appropriately named Ron Paul Revolution, joining Meetup.com groups, putting up signs, and crossing states to attend rallies. Congressman Ron Paul's genuine message and untarnished record of promoting individual liberty for everyone, a free-market economy of wealth and abundance, and a foreign policy of non-intervention, peace and free trade, has attracted vast support from diverse individuals. Inspired libertarians, Democrats, independents, and previous nonvoters have registered Republican so they can vote for Ron Paul in the primaries.
For those who watch mostly mainstream media sources, Paul is one of the most searched humans in cyberspace, has won several straw polls, has been the subject of dozens of blogs, and has an amazing number of entertaining, amateur Youtube.com videos promoting him.
Ron Paul, a medical doctor, worked as a flight surgeon for the U.S. Air Force before becoming an obstetrician. As a 10-term congressman, he has consistently promoted individual rights and kept his oath to defend our Constitution. In 1988, he was the Libertarian Party's nominee for president. As a supporter of Dr. Paul's for more than a decade, I enjoy watching people first learn about this great statesman and appreciate the universal benefits of liberty.
So just what is it that many of us think Ron Paul gets? Why do we want a president who does not want to run our lives nor our economy? How can we make our lives on this planet more peaceful, fairer, greener, and more prosperous? Let me discuss (too) briefly a few important, and recently highlighted, issues.
Our foreign policies have gone well beyond matters of defense. Regardless of whether our intervention in the affairs of other countries is altruistic or self-interest, it is a negative for everyone. Not only do we not have the right, we have created enemies who are now aggressors against us, making us less safe; we have supported those who would oppress many; we have militarized areas of conflict; we have unwisely spent borrowed trillions; we have created opportunity for large-scale graft; many well-intentioned Americans and innocents have been killed or injured and otherwise have had their lives disrupted.
Military is for protection
The only appropriate use of our military is to protect Americans. It is immoral and illegal to order U.S. soldiers into battle for any other reason. If we truly want peace, to be safer, and to not drain the pockets of our children, we should redeploy our military personel back to our shores and waters and trade freely with all nations.
Consumers have enjoyed the benefits of lower prices and better quality in products and services offered by the least regulated industries. Unfortunately, two of our most important services are the most heavily regulated. Public education has innovated little in 50 years and student performance is poorer. Patients find it more and more difficult to access affordable health care.
To provide quality health care to the greatest number of people, the costs for all levels of care need to be less prohibitive, so that near everyone can achieve a level of care to which they are comfortable. This is accomplished by deregulating the industry, re-establishing competition amongst health care insurers and providers, and allowing patients more freedom in their health choices.
Corporations benefit unfairly from favorable legislation that drives out competitors, harming the consumer. There is only one way to end this inequity and to get money and corruption out of politics. Take back the power from politicians by returning government to its constitutional limits.
There is no surer way to have the money you have earned for yourself and your family be used to support that which you do not value and given to those who have not earned it than by allowing the government to tax your income.
They say a frog thrown into a pot of boiling water will immediately jump out, while a frog in a pot of water that is slowly brought to a boil will remain to be cooked. Authoritarian usurpations of our freedoms progresses.
Laws prevent adults from making decisions for themselves every day. They decide when you must use personal protective equipment, what you cannot eat or drink, what you cannot sell and buy, how much you are to get paid for a service, who is not allowed to provide services, and what medical therapies you may choose for yourself.
Right now there are untold numbers of people being imprisoned, without due process, by the U.S government that have not been charged with a crime. The Real ID Act has been passed and soon Americans will have to present their papers to be allowed the privilege to travel domestically. Citizens are spied upon by government officials without legal warrant.
In our often well-intentioned attempt to solve more quickly the few problems suffered by any free society, we have created wider-spread, deeper-rooted and longer-standing ones by burdening ourselves with the heavy fist of government. Many of us think an effective way to advance liberty and enjoy the benefits of a free society is to elect Ron Paul president. So, order a yard sign and a bumper sticker, donate to the campaign, join a local Meetup group, register Republican for the primary, and join the Ron Paul Revolution.
Marc Guttman is an emergency doctor and vice chairman of the Libertarian Party of Connecticut. He lives in East Lyme.
I’d vote for the Hildabeast before I’d vote for this isolationist kook. OK, I’d never vote for the beast, but you get my drift.
I think this train has left the station with a bunch of conductors and no passengers.
“Id vote for the Hildabeast before Id vote for this isolationist kook.”
Ha...I’d vote for rudi before I’d vote for Paul...and I’ll NEVER vote for rudi.
Perot Part Deaux. Its funny how history repeats itself. Like Peort, Paul will allow a Clinton into the White House. What else is funny is how we continue to fail in learning from history..
Like it or lump it he is build converts. I went out shooting with 3 friends last weekend, we were sighting in out deer rifles. I got to talkign to them about the race adn I found out 2 were leaning to Paul. They are conservatives tired of the war and tired of Washington.
I don’t think so.
Where do were park our sanity before we board the train?
He right now is in my number 2 spot, but I am keeping my eyes open.
Would that be on the tract to nowhere?
Yesterday I went out shooting with 4 friends, we were sighting in ouf deer rifles. I got to talking to them about the race and I found out 3 were leaning to Fred. They are libertarians tired of the anti-war sissies and goldbugs.
Freedom and Liberty bump!!
Ron Paul is running in the republican primary while Ross Perot was an independent candidate in the general election. You mind explaining to me how exactly Paul allows Hillary Clinton to win?
The problem with electing Ron Paul as president is that we’d end up with liberal government. That’s because Paul’s conservative stances have zero chance of being passed by Congress, while his liberal views would be readily accepted by the powers-that-be in Washington.
This is all theoretical, of course, since Paul isn’t going to be elected. I do admire his backers’ enthusiasm, though. And it’s a real enthusiasm, not the cynical “I’m gonna show how progressive I am by supporting a black guy” enthusiasm of Obama’s backers.
Anyway, Ron Paul is not going to be a factor in any primary, so even paying this much attention to him strikes me as a boring waste of energy.
Even if he loses in the primary, he will still run in the general. And he will siphon votes..from the Republicans, not Hillary..
The more the big government republicans speak out against RP, the more I think he’s got something going. The Rudybots etc are running scared. All they have is some graphics and spam speeches to counter Ron paul’s ideas.
LIKe I said like it or lump it, but these are conservative nra members nascar dads the the Republicans who have had their fill of Washington as usual. One sais it clearly, “I would not vote for GW or someone like him again if there was free sex from a supermodle as a reward.” And they do vote in the primaries dn the general election.
And what are his liberal views? Everything I've seen from Rep. Paul is based on conservative principle, some of it so long standing that even 'conservatives' have forgotten it was originally conservative principle
Are they "tired of the war" because of how much it's affecting them? or because it's "tiring" to see it on TV? Just curious.
A revolution is a circular motion and his campaign is taking on that motion (vortex).
How many times it will circle before it disappears down the "porcelain portal" is anyone's guess.
What other things do you know about the future that no one else does, oh great swami?
Like I said like it or lump it, but these are libertarian NORML members Rand Institute types, the Libertarians who have had their fill of Washington as usual. One says it clearly, I would not vote for L.Ron or someone like him again if there was free doobage for a year as a reward. And they do vote in the primaries in the general election.
Oh, and before when I said there were four, I misspoke. There were five.
You're right that on most things, Ron Paul is firmly grounded in conservative principle.
The one issue where I would say he is not, is in his advocacy of surrendering a war to barbarians for no good reason (i.e., because we're "tired of" it). There is nothing particularly conservative about that stance, except in the most uncharitable definition of what it means to be "conservative" (i.e. cowardly, insular, lazy, sedentary...).
And the thing is, it's that stance alone which has given him this mini-swell of popularity. It's not like the antiwar kiddies love Ron Paul for his anti-tax platform. Hell, it's not like they even know anything about his anti-tax platform, or anything else for that matter, besides the fact that he's "against the war".
The fact that you are so against Ron Paul is a sign of his merit in my eyes. You know a person by his enemies as well as his friends.
Give me a break, a third party candidate, even one with the right ideas will ensure a Hillary victory. Unless of course Al Gore runs..
We're all tired of Washington, granted, but I don't understand how people can be deluded into thinking this war is unnecessary. We sure as hell didn't start it, and unless we end it ASAP, on our terms, we are repeating the same mistakes of Euroweenies circa 1938.
You go ahead and run with that. LOL
No offense but there's nothing particularly conservative about carrying out Wilsonian nation building. Nothing to do with cowardly, lazy, or sedentary. But rather you declare war, you go to war, and you win the war only when necessary and not to 'stabilize' a region or remove a dictator that may or may not be supportive of actions against another nation not ours.
Tired of war? I didn't know we had a choice. I didn't know the fight against Islamic Jihad was something that we can just grow tired and quit. Yea but I understand those rationing lines we've experienced are a real pain.
I wouldn't want to share a foxhole with your friends.
All of those criteria are currently being met. Next.
Ok, you are *for Paul because Petronski is against him. So are you *for paul because the anti-war libs are *for him? Do you usually follow the libs lead?
Last known photo of the Ron Paul Revolution, overloaded with isolationist and defeatist ideology:
A defensive only military posture is a losing posture. The very reason our military has been so effective at protecting Americans is that they are forward deployed. Sitting on our shores waiting to be attacked is a losing strategy.
If this is an example of the depth of Ron Paul's intellect, then he has lost before he's even started.
Thomas Hart Benton: The Wreck of the Ole 97