Dr. Ron Paul

1. 60

   Kyle Payneposted 12 years ago

   Please, I would love to hear your thoughts on Dr. Ron Paul, but please try to prohibit yourself from disrespect.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Wayne Brownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Paul is a real mixed bag. His strength is in his fiscal conservatism (if he could truly deliver it. Having a voting record of voting against everything does not show promise that anything can be accomplished other than blocking the door.  His other problem is his stance on foreign policy which when boiled down simply makes him an isolationist.  The USA could certainly exercise a better discretion in its world involvement but there are too many international threats that will come to our door steps if we do not confront them early on somewhere else. Opposing candidates will take Paul to the mat on that perspective and make him look quite wreckless.  With all respect, Paul also lacks a "presidential demeanor" at least for me. He is a bit of a "chicken little type" delivering the message that the sky is falling in a high pitched voice. This is not the image most Americans will want to back with confidence. Intelligence doe not always win the day and I believe that will prove to be the case for Dr. Paul.  I also believe that the true litmus test of his regard for the dominance of conservative principles will be what he does in lieu of gaining the Republican nomination in 2012. If he takes the high road, he steps aside and supports the dominant Republican candidate. The low road will be for him to declare himself an "independent" and run for President. This will most certainly splinter the conservative vote and hand the election to Obama. I, for one, hope that Dr. Paul sees that danger and acts with compassion and responsiblity toward the conservative cause. WB

      replyreport
   2. 75

      910chrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I believe that he is a man of honesty and integrity. He comes of as a politican that I can actually believe in, unlike 99% of those fools in Washington right now. I agree with 90% of the things he says and his idea's on smaller government are exactly what we need right now. I don't believe in giving away billions of our tax payer's money as well. He predicted the financial collapse that the bailout would bring about, and he was dead on. I think this man is exactly what we need right now, not more of the same.

      replyreport
2. 73

   JamesPoppellposted 12 years ago

   I like Dr. Paul. He has my attention on all the issues except one, foreign affairs. I am with him when he states that the U.S. should not be involved in giving hand outs to the world, but he seems to want to alienate Israel. I believe we need to maintain positive ties with Israel. Thirty years ago Secretary of State Alexander M. Haig had this to say,  "Israel is the largest American aircraft carrier in the world that cannot be sunk, does not carry even one American soldier, and is located in a critical region for American national security." I believe this comment by Secretary of State Haig still resonates today. Of course there are other reasons we should continue a good relationship with Israel but I do not want to drift off subject. Dr. Paul is a fine person and he has my respect.

   replyreport
3. 61

   knolyourselfposted 12 years ago

   Ron Paul may be the only honest politician on the national level. He is a libertarian and I am a socialist so I don't agree with him on much. However he is the only anti- war, murder and mayhem presidential candidate in either party.

   replyreport
4. 60

   Evan G Rogersposted 12 years ago

   RRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNN PPPPAAAAAAAAAAAUUUULLLLLLLLLL
   
   PRESIDENT RON PAUL.
   
   Has a nice ring to it.
   
   That would be epic to be one of the kids he delivered.

   replyreport
5. 60

   Repairguy47posted 12 years ago

   Ron Paul is just like all the rest.
   
   
   http://spectator.org/blog/2011/12/02/ro … -hypocrisy

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      What a dumb argument.
      
      The people who pay him the money give it to him as campaign cash, and then they get nothing in return.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Moderndayslaveposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Actually all the rest are the same except  Ron Paul
         http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eD_ybaXhXno

         replyreport
      2. 60

         Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

         They get something or they wouldn't give.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Ermm... that's not necessarily true, at least not in the "handout" sense.
            
            I've donated quite a bit of money to Ron Paul - as have millions of others - and we don't expect anything except his principled views to run roughshod over the bloated carcass of our federal government.
            
            If you want to talk about "handouts" then we can look at Obama, Clinton, Bush, Romney, Gingrich, Perry, and the rest of them.
            
            But not Paul.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Errrrrm, I didn't see your name on that list, I saw donors from Big everything. You may not be getting anything but they certainly are.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Moderndayslaveposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  We need to look at the candidates agendas not whether they have their parties " Endorsement ". The country has been run into the ground by both parties. They've done such a great job so far huh? We need to throw the biggest rock we can into the Business as usual swamp and that's Ron Paul. One man won't change it all either, all of congress needs to be fired.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     One man can change it all, the president can veto any bill coming from congress.

                     replyreport
                     1. 91

                        Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        That's not true.  If you really are that clueless as to our legislative process, it explains much.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           He can't veto any bill? Which ones can he not veto. Teach me

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              Yeah, that one kind of confused me...
                              
                              Presidents have the authority to:
                              
                              Refuse to enforce federal laws;
                              Veto and Pocket veto bills;
                              Appoint judges;
                              and Pardon criminals.
                              
                              It's insane to hear Pcunix deny the powers of the Executive here, yet demand the executive have powers elsewhere.

                              replyreport
               2. 60

                  Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Oh, you missed my name? Here it is:
                  
                  
                  (Also, the average donations to his campaign each money bomb is about $20-50, which means that all of the millions of dollars he generates come from hundreds of thousands of people who are putting their money where their mouths are).

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Touche

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        (it took me a while to find the photo!)

                        replyreport
6. 91

   Pcunixposted 12 years ago

   Is it disrespectful to note that most voters think his ideas are ridiculous and he has less chance of wining than Sarah Palin (who isn't even running) according to the bookmakers?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I would have to agree with you, its almost as ridiculous as thinking Barrack Obama will be a two term president.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         HA!

         replyreport
         1. 91

            Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            You'll be crying next year when he is elected again. I'm looking forward to it.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               You're looking forward to it, but not the "yet-unborn".
               
               Liberals think they can just keep spending their offspring's money without consequences.
               
               And, apparently, Liberals also think that sending their children to their deaths fighting Muslims is a good thing.
               
               When I was a liberal, we were anti-war.
               
               Good luck with that.

               replyreport
               1. 91

                  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Nope.  I don't want to wish the costs of war on our children. I want us to pay for it NOW, through progressive taxes - yet another area where the "brilliant" Doctor Paul is clueless.
                  
                  Nor am I in favor of war as a solution.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Then why do you support Obomba:
                     
                     He added Trillions of dollars of debt, and he's started numerous 'unconstitutional military escapades that are basically war but not really declared'.
                     
                     Your support of Obama is nothing but hypocrisy. It was this blatant hypocrisy that made me finally wake up to the nonsense that is our government system.

                     replyreport
   2. 60

      Kyle Payneposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Just curious, but why do you think so?

      replyreport
      1. 91

         Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Check the Vegas odds.

         replyreport
7. 93

   habeeposted 12 years ago

   I think Ron Paul is a good, honest man. I totally agree with some of his ideas, but I find some of his ideas "out there."

   replyreport
   1. 91

      Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I'm a good, honest man and I'm sure you'd like some of my ideas, too.  I'd make a lousy POTUS though.  So would Paul.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         That's because you don't understand economics or history.
         
         Paul does.

         replyreport
         1. 91

            Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I plainly understand some things  better than he does.  I know that a Libertarian society would destroy us and neither you nor he knows enough to realize that.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Actually, I destroyed that argument in your "libertarian" forum.
               
               Somalia - the anarchist nation - is better off in real terms relative to a) their government-loving neighbors, and b) compared to when they had government.
               
               So... stop saying that nonsense?

               replyreport
               1. 91

                  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  No, Evan, you didn't "destroy" anything.  You spouted off a bunch of typical Libertarian nonsewnse and SAID that you destroyed it.
                  
                  You killed no dragons, Don Quixote.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Blah blah blah - go check out the exchanges between me and Jeff.

                     replyreport
            2. 75

               910chrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Then are you saying the path we are on right now will not destroy us?

               replyreport
8. 59

   steveamyposted 12 years ago

   A genuine guy who is overly enamored of Ayn Rand and has many ideas that  are simplistic and will not work in the real world.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      mom101posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Just wondering here: Of the candidates that are running, including obama, which have served anytime in any of the armed forces? Anybody know?

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Kyle Payneposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Ron Paul was a flight surgeon and rick Perry was a pilot

         replyreport
         1. 60

            mom101posted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Thank you.

            replyreport
         2. 60

            Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Yes, I openly want to correct mistakes I've made.
            
            I hadn't realized that Perry is a vet, I thought the only vet was Paul.
            
            My bad.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               mom101posted 12 years agoin reply to this

               No, i wasn't referring to you. It just dawned on me that somewhere I had read one of the candidates beside Ron had served but couldn't remember which one.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Oh, I know, but I've made the mistake before, and this was a chance to correct myself.

                  replyreport
   2. 60

      mom101posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      What do people have against simple?
      
      We have got to get back to basics. Plain and SIMPLE.

      replyreport
9. 60

   Evan G Rogersposted 12 years ago

   A few headlines regarding Dr. Ron Paul - the primary message of this forum:
   
   http://communities.washingtontimes.com/ … long-haul/
   
   http://www.thestatecolumn.com/new-hamps … hampshire/
   
   http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/08/2 … econd.html
   
   When his responses to in the recent debates come out on youtube, I'll be sure to post them. He lit up the stage when he talked about rights.

   replyreport
10. 60

    Tom Koeckeposted 12 years ago

    I've voted for Ron Paul for President twice already. I think he has a good grasp on most everything.
    
    That said, I don't think libertarian economics is all it is cracked up to be. One reason is that it must, like communism, remain pure. So, do we handle dissenting thinkers the same way Stalin handled them, or, in the name of the Constitution, do we eliminate the right to speaking and gathering freely?
    
    Even the libertarian economics philosopher Robert Nozick seemed to think there may be reasons for the greater good to violate economic justice, even though his argument for economic justice was pretty much flawless. Perhaps it was the thought that redistribution might be necessary to prevent Marx's prediction from coming true here. Even if redistribution is unjust, it likely helps the rich more than it does the poor, but that is another subject.
    
    Ron Paul supporters are plentiful and loud, but there are not many who will be swayed to his way of thinking unless they are already on board. He is what he is - a potential third party candidate who will take votes away from both major parties.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       mom101posted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Tom,
       
       I have thought this during every election I can remember.
       
       Could it be, that they ems/repubs alike make sure their is one person who tells it like it is, tells us what we need to know, tells us of the corruption  and so on JUST to confuse those that are easily confused? I hate to think this but to throw the election.
       
       Wouldn't it be historical if that candidate actually won? i'd love to see it happen. Just once.

       replyreport
11. 59

    A Troubled Manposted 12 years ago

    I think Ron Paul is the only Republican candidate who has NOT publicly announced God is on his side and supports his nomination.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

       You ought to write a hub about that.

       replyreport
       1. 59

          A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          How so? Should I write about why Ron Paul wouldn't make such a ridiculous public statement or about why the other candidates did?

          replyreport
          1. 60

             Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

             Who cares, just write a hub.

             replyreport
             1. 59

                A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Exactly.

                replyreport
                1. 60

                   Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                   I'm changing my stance, I prefer that you do not write a hub.

                   replyreport
             2. 77

                Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Don Paul is too good to be president, his best bet is just keep informing the public.

                replyreport
                1. 60

                   Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                   I agree, who is Don Paul?

                   replyreport
                   1. 77

                      Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                      oowwps Ron
                      
                      He won't be the Don

                      replyreport
12. 65

    Ralph Deedsposted 12 years ago

    To borrow a phrase from Thomas Frank, Ron Paul's understanding of economics "borders on complete fantasy."

    replyreport
    1. 91

       Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       No, actually I think "borders on" is a bit too kind..

       replyreport
    2. 60

       Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Said the person who thinks that "printing money out of thin air" is a good thing...

       replyreport
13. 64

    Perspycaciousposted 12 years ago

    Ron Paul, to me, is in the right party because the Republicans are noted for believing in minimum government at the federal level and more local government (state and local) where government is more likely to reflect an accurate and up-to-date view of the governed.  Unfortunately, Ron Paul, to me, comes across as an isolationist whose views are inconsistent with the modern world of interconnectedness.  Republicans, when elected, will do much of what I find attractive in Ron Paul's views, without putting Ron Paul in charge of every responsibility of the Executive Branch. Romney has a well-stated plan for getting Americans back to work, so America can get a respite from a splintered Congress whose views are so set in stone that they are unable to turn off the money faucets... though three years has shown they knew how to replace them with even larger faucets (wastefully spilling lots in the process!)  We simply can't afford what we already have, and the promised "Change" led all of us deeper into the tunnel, not closer to the light.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       mom101posted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Ok, i can't stand it no more.
       
       Is the title or the label democrat   republican  independent  or any other label going to turn this country around?
       
       No, it is not. No it will not.
       
       The time for politics that our grandparents use to enjoy are history. It used to be a good thing to belong to one (the party of your choice). now, it is the person and what they will do. NOT WHAT THEY SAY THEY WILL DO.
       
       Another I can't believe they did this is, DON'T VOTE ON LOOKS.  These people don't know you exist, chances are they will never see you. Who cares what THEY look like.
       
       Debt? the only way to get rid of it is to pay it off and don' t do it again.
       
       Our debt was 0.  Upon leaving office a bill was passed. WHY was this bill passed. Please don't give me this story about to help our economy
       
       There is money in these here United States of America. There is. But, just as soon as it is made, it goes to just about any country you want to mention.
       
       Want to pay the debt, put a tax on the money that people here send out of this country.
       
       Want to get this country back to where it once was? You know, the time when we had rights. The solution is simple. But wait, it ain't juicy enough, or hip enough, or whatever enough. BASICS.

       replyreport
    2. 60

       Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Isolationist is NOT the same thing as "non-interventionist"
       
       Isolationism: Don't do anything with anyone; even ban international trade.
       
       Non-interventionist: let the other countries do as they wish so long as they don't interfere with our trade directly.

       replyreport