Opinion | Op-eds

How Ron Paul rocked our family

Four years ago I voted for Obama primarily because of his foreign policy stance: While he had pledged to bring our troops home from Iraq upon taking office, his opponent seemed to be itching to start yet another land war in Asia, glibly altering an old Beach Boys song to “Bomb-Bomb-Iran.” As our country subsequently continued in the direction of increased military intervention, greater income disparity, restricted civil liberties, and more power appropriated by the executive branch, my only consolation was to think that it could have been worse.

Then last September my 17-year-old son asked me to watch a presidential primary debate with him. I was certainly not expecting truths we had found in hard-hitting documentaries like “Why We Fight,” “The Corporation,” and “Manufacturing Consent” to be spoken by a Republican candidate running for president, yet there was this congressman from Texas condemning preemptive, undeclared wars as militaristic nation-building that actually undermined our national security. Ron Paul—where had he been all this time?

The more accurate question, as it turned out, was “Where had we been?” Congressman Paul had been opposing the endless wars and other unconstitutional measures for decades. As an expert in monetary policy, moreover, he exposed the role of the Federal Reserve not only in war financing, but also in currency devaluation, vast debt accumulation, artificial boom-bust cycles, and even our loss of civil liberties, as he details in his book “End the Fed.” Given that a partial audit of the Fed—thanks to Paul’s relentless efforts—had revealed secret bailouts of trillions of dollars to both foreign and domestic banks and institutions, it began to concern me that Goldman Sachs and its cohorts—the same banks that profited from the government bailouts–were top contributors to both Obama’s and Romney’s campaigns.

Rereading Thomas More’s “Utopia” in preparation for my class, Nobility and Civility: East and West, I came upon the question of how a king would respond were he to be shown that “all this war-mongering, by which so many different nations were kept in turmoil for his sake, would exhaust his treasury and demoralize his people, yet in the end come to nothing through one mishap or another.” What if rather than a king, we have a two-party political class serving monolithic corporations who also conveniently control mainstream media? Might that be why the establishment isn’t willing to present Ron Paul honestly, either treating him as “the 13th floor in a hotel,” as Jon Stewart quipped, or distorting his views through biased coverage?

Despite the media blackout and outright hit pieces, our “Daily Paul” study breaks revealed impassioned responses to Paul’s message from both within and beyond our nation. In the past months I’ve seen Dr. Paul likened to “a clean boat in a sea of garbage,” a rock star, a Jedi knight, a prophet, and Don Quixote. One significant difference with respect to the latter figure, at least, is that the giants Paul has been challenging (the military-industrial complex, crony corporatism, the Federal Reserve) are all too real, even though they are largely hidden from view.

Having set my homepage to the Daily Paul, I reactivated my Facebook account to post Paul-related articles, switched my affiliation from independent to Republican to vote in the primaries, and began shopping at the campaign’s on-line store. My son brought in rally signs to his high school teachers for their classrooms and started a Youth for Ron Paul chapter at Columbia within minutes of enrolling as an incoming freshman. Our concentrated focus on Paul-related news was initially disconcerting to my daughter, a Columbia College sophomore. Over Thanksgiving break she complained of feeling displaced by a new baby in the family and sought help from Yahoo! Answers: “My family is obsessed with politics! They’re driving me nuts. What can I do?” (Ironically, the best answer came from someone with the opposite problem who offered to trade parents.) Yet by semester’s end she was relating Ron Paul to her CC readings, especially Locke on the government’s role to protect the natural rights of liberty and property. When she started playing Ron Paul songs on YouTube and phoning-from-home, I knew she was a Ronvert! She even succeeded in convincing her grandmother to vote for the first time since the 1960s.

As the three of us followed the news together over winter break, we asked ourselves how President Obama could have signed the ACTA (global internet censorship treaty) and NDAA (indefinite military detention of American citizens without due process bill). Yet it came as no surprise when in mid-January Congressman Paul introduced an amendment to repeal the NDAA’s most undemocratic section. In the space of one semester, he had become our champion.

Our favorite Frank Capra classic, “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” had a happy ending, but it was only a film. Will Ron Paul garner enough support to disappoint the Republican establishment’s predetermined nominee despite systematic media misrepresentation? Will the good doctor be given a chance to cure our woes come November? In my opinion, given the pro-war, pro-bankster, anti-liberty direction adopted by both parties, our collective future as a free nation may depend on it. As Ron Paul said in “We’ve Been Neo-Conned”: “Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.”

The author is an associate professor in the Italian department and an instructor for Literature Humanities.

Comments

Plain text

  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Your username will not be displayed if checked
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Islander posted on

"Truth is treason in an Empire of Lies". - Ron Paul

How very true.

+1
0
-1
mary posted on

LOL, my family sounds like yours. Let's hope that Paulism is a contagious disease that sweeps America. We have only one thing to lose if he doesn't win: everything.

+1
+1
-1
leslymill posted on

Il loved for Obama even though I wanted Ron Paul. I will never forgive myself. He is such a liar.

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

Another fine story about people finding the "light" through Ron Paul. It's very interesting, but sad, that many people around the world realize the worth of Ron Paul to America and the world but that many people  in America have still not understood/embraced his freedom message ... civil/financial freedoms and freedom from detrimental big-government/war-mongering/corporatized-state/Keynesian-economics. As a foreigner, I first heard Ron Paul back in 2007 through sound bytes played during the "Financial Sense Newshour" hosted by Jim Puplava (a believer in Austrian economics). Ron Paul's stances had stood out, especially on the Fed. After realizing the history and power of the deleterious Fed, the stances that Ron Paul had for over 30 years, his consistent freedom philosophy, etc. it was obvious that Ron Paul was the "real deal" and that the others (Romney, McCain, Obama, etc.) were the status-quo candidates. Philosophically, they never traveled to the places that Ron Paul has conquered. It is unfortunate that back in 2008 people were ambushed with Obama's choice words ("change", etc.) rather than taking the advice of the good/proven Dr Ron Paul. We now realize where Obama's allegiance lies and it is not with the freedoms of the American citizen. Obama's war-mongering stances have been very notable. Where are the liberals/left that were protesting Bush's war mongering a few years earlier ? They have been eerily silent during Obama's conflict-making stances. This is a disgrace and as a commentator recently mentioned, Ron Paul is like a mirror showing the hypocrisy of those respective portions of the left/liberals.

Doug Wead, Ron Paul's senior campaign manager, mentioned that back in 2008 about 70% of Americans did not realize what the Fed was. In 2011 about 70% of Americans want an audit of the Fed. This is the Ron Paul effect and the "powers that be" are scared of an overflowing of the Ron Paul effect. Ron Paul attempts to educate, tells you how it is rather than the others who use propagandist tricks to give you a sugar-coated scenario intent on pleasing the unsuspecting mind.

Taking from Plato's "cave" simile ...
beware of the status-quo, use the light of philosophy to escape the cave of ignorance.

[Ron Paul - 2012]

+1
+1
-1
Aireck posted on

Outside the US you don't have to suffer the 24/7 media propaganda against him like we do here. You should listen to our AM radio for an hour! And these are the supposed Republicans. If you ever wondered what would happen if an honest politician ever showed his face, you are seeing the enemies of all the honest ones showing their true colors now. 

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

Right.They  all   fear Ron Paul  common  sense. The  simple  truth  he  is   saying. They   fear   loosing the fat money from  military-industrial  complex they  all  serve  to.I think that all    conservative  talk show  hosts practically   work/depend  on   media company own  by  Romney.

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

I see several faults in the American System or rather in any Democratic System.The reason we have to hope for people like Mr.Ron Paul to succeed is because our systems are inefficient.People take advantage of loopholes in the system.
While the credentials of the Presidential candidates themselves are dissected equal care needs to be given to their nomines.Just knowing VP is not enough.Maybe Presidential Candidates should be asked to declare their nominees for the various secretary level posts during the nomination process.This will prevent firms from putting their point man in important positions.
 
Companies routinely manipulate their accounts to pay lower taxes.What makes Obama think they will not do the same to avail of the freebies he calls bailoutsI imagine firms are falling over each other to declare bankruptcy and avail of the precious millions so they can invest more, and give greater bonuses.So,bailouts essentially give incentive to companies to fail rather than succeed.
Obama has taken the concept of bailouts in a totally new direction by promoting Green Energy.He even lets the government choose which Green companies to invest in.Green Companies though desirable are risky.Basically, investing millions of taxpayer money into Green Companies is akin to gambling.
To prevent any future President from gambling away the American taxpayers hard earned money all bailouts in future should be subjected to a referendum.
Obama and Bush have even flouted established systems.Bush went to war with Iraq without getting UN Sanction.At that time many Americans were boasting about "American Exceptionalism" .Now, Obama has gone in Libya without even seeking Congressional approval.This canbe called "American Presidential Exceptionalism" where the American President does not care about what his own people are saying.Clearly, Obama is behaving like a dictator.Rules must be made that allow impeachment of any President who behaves dictatorially 

+1
-1
-1
Anonymous posted on

The NDAA is exempted for US Citizens. So, it doesn't trample your freedom. So, we can't hold it against Obama or anyone else. Ron Paul might seem to be different on foreign policy, but he is a wacknut on almost all other issues. He doesn't believe in factual scientific principles like evolution, he doesn't want govt to fund education in this country, he subscribes to bronze age nonsense in his decisions of birth control/abortion and gay rights issues. I feel this country would be destroyed if someone like him were to be president. We already had 8 years of a screwjob rule in Bush, we don't need any wacko now.

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

Straight on. He has progressive stances on drugs and wars (if anyone hasn't noticed, the wars are ending) and is a grade-A douche on everything else. I can't believe so few people have noticed this. 

+1
+3
-1
Anonymous posted on

Maybe you should do a little more reading... I've spent the past 4 yrs off and on researching RP's possitions.  Sure they sound crazy @ first, but if you spend the time and dig, you'll find that he's pretty much spot on for the most part.   By the way the wars are not ending, as you will soon see us in yet another war...Stop watching the MSM and read.  Bye the way, if the only thing RP is right about is the FED, it's still the best reason to vote for him over anyone else.  If you don't understand the FED, your lost....

+1
0
-1
Anonymous posted on

 "grade-A douche on everything else."  Oh thanks for enlightening us with your brilliance. Please....

+1
+2
-1
Anonymous posted on

I hope it was as enlightening for you as this atrocious article was for me. 

+1
-1
-1
adplatt126 posted on

Actually, my father, a consummate Republican for 35 years now didn't support any of the wars, or torture or indefinite detention or any of those policies. And he also can't seem to figure out why something so trivial, minor, private and personal as marijuana use should be outlawed, least of all as dictated to the states by the federal government. I see nothing inherently progressive in these ideas, but I see plenty unconservative about them. All government overreach, all very expensive, all anathema to traditional conservative principles about the limits of the law and respect for bodily integrity and sovereignty.

+1
0
-1
Anonymous posted on

And I want to thank YOU for your "enlightening" additions to our discussion, O Brave White Knight! You should be awfully proud of yourself for wielding such skill in ad hominem and guilt by association reasoning. Pray, tell me, what is your timeline for when the U.S. war on terror and nation-building will be brought to a close? I'm struggling to come up with a justification and I can only trust you have insider information. Also I am curious when U.S. citizens will be returned the rights they lost under the Patriot Act and acknowledged by the Constitution? Or is law rule of law not needed? Are laws like suggestions and we should simply obey shifting commands from those in power? Being you and the state are the "experts" in such affairs, I should probably grant you unlimited power since you are wise and diligent in things both small and complex, having thought through each of your arguments and solutions with great care and knowledge of history. Ron Paul has "kooky" economic ideas anyway, which carry no weight among the truly credible and "elect" among us such as yourself, whom I ought to take very seriously not on the basis of reason or evidence but on your own authority and virtue. Ron Paul explained the recession/depression when none of your guys saw it coming, but it doesn't really matter because he's a kook and we shouldn't listen to him. He's also wrong on other things like marriage. Clearly it is the business of government to define marriage, unless you are a Christian who defines it as between complimentary sexes, or a polygamist who defines it as between three or more persons, or an incestuous person who defines it as between family members, or an animal-lover... Again, clearly Ron Paul is wrong and we need government to define marriage for us and have a monopoly for codifying and granting special privilege to these "vital" relationships.

+1
0
-1
Anonymous posted on

kookyronpaul d o t  c o m

+1
0
-1
Tim O posted on

What war is ending, you mean the one they are trying to start with Iran?  The wars aren't ending, there are thousands of former military private contractors who will remain in these countries.  You think we built a billion dollar embassy in Iraq because it won't have any troops stationed at it?  The war on drugs does not work, and has not worked, it is another endless war that treats people with addictions as criminals instead of medical patients.   Why is Ron Paul getting twice the donations from active duty military than all candidates combined including Obama?  You are grade A uniformed on Ron Paul.  Turn off your television.

+1
-1
-1
Anonymous posted on

US citizens are NOT exempt from NDAA - Do some research friend

+1
-1
-1
DoublePlusGood posted on

The Obama administration specifically asked for the NDAA to include language that would make sure it affects American citizens.  See what Senator Carl Levin said about it.

What do you mean, Ron Paul "seems" to be different on foreign policy?  He is 180 degrees completely different than the war mongers Bush and Obama, and all the other candidates running. 

As for scientific principles, you sound like you're throwing a blanket statement out making him sound like he rejects science as a whole.  He doesn't agree with the theory of evolution.  Who gives a rip?  There's a lot more important things going on in this world.

He doesn't want the federal government to run education.  He wants to leave it up to the states.

Bronze age?  Really?  Ron Paul doesn't want the federal government involved in your sexual orientation, birth control, or abortion at all.  Once again, he wants to give the power to the states.  That  means more power in YOUR hands and not the feds.

The only dangerous thing about Ron Paul is that he threatens the status quo.

+1
+3
-1
Anonymous posted on

Random Guy, you are incorrect on RP's positions. For example, you stated he doesn't want the govt to fund education. That is untrue. He doesn't want the Federal Government to fund education. He believes in states rights and thinks each state should make their own decisions on education.

I find that most people are opposed RPs ideas because they do not understand his ideas. They only catch a part of them, or they are incorrectly conveyed to them......like the above example. Maybe RP and his campaign can take some blame for not getting his points across in a manner that people can understand. Maybe it is the media not giving him a fair shake or doing a better job of accurately describing his positions.

Whatever the reason, I do think that if people understood his positions, he would get elected.

+1
+2
-1
Anonymous posted on

Dougie944,  Lots of truth here brother.  There are two type of "anti-Pauls."  Those who do NOT understand his viewpoints (I was one of those four years ago), and those who DO understand his viewpoint very well, and don't like them because it threatens their "Establishment Gravy Train."

Don't underestimate just how many people are employed by the Big banks-Military Industrial Complex-Big Government-Big Corporation-Big Lobbyist and Regulator Cartel who want and need WAR to keep their "Blood Money Public Debt and War for Profit Train" moving along in the same direction.  Banks like to loan money to companies to build War Materiel, i.e., planes, ships, tanks, missiles, guns, ammo, etc. which are used to destroy innocent countries. THEN, the banks get to loan money to companies to finance the reconstruction of those countries. Profit on the front end and profit on the back end. Gotta have a couple of good wars going on to spur on the economy, right? Gotta keep those war materiel assembly lines moving to keep the profits up!!!

So, moral of this story is... Its going to be an uphill fight so we must educate everyone we can on the real truth(s) of Ron Paul.

Here's my contribution to "entice" the anti-Pauls into taking a peek and hopefully getting educated on the real truth of Ron Paul:  kookyronpaul   d o t  c o m.  Check it out and pass it on.

+1
-1
-1
Anonymous posted on

You're either very uniformed, a liar, or both.  U.S. Citizens are not exempt from NDAA.

+1
+2
-1
sylvenwolf posted on

On the NDAA:
- Read it and the Obama administration's pushed changes to it. Then, edit or delete your post as it is simply wrong on this issue.

On RP's foreign policy:
- Non-interventionism is actually a 180 from the rest of the pack, Reps and Obama alike. The only contender he is similar to this on is Gary Johnson. And this is very important, as it is only through non-interventionism (free trade w/ all, entangling alliances and war w/ none) that our economy will heal.

On scientific principles:
- Dude, he was a Dr for several decades, his career built on scientific principles... or is being a Dr now classified as a liberal art?
- The man is super analytical in his discussion of just about anything. He utilizes the scientific method almost to a fault in consideration of most issues.

And just a quick couple of notes supporting the idea that the evolution thing is a non-issue:
- He is not a creationist either. He thinks that none of the origin of man theories have been proven enough to hold as correct yet, not that evolution is wrong. This is not kooky, but rather a scientific approach to considering the issue, since even evolution is not proven out at this pt, as much as we like to pretend elsewise. Approaching topics with questions and letting those lead you to results is a better, more scientific way to go than approaching topics with a viewpoint and trying to squidgee the facts in to fit that. ; - ) (Personally, I'm an evolution looks better than other options girl, but keep an open mind that the truth might differ from it... as Darwin, inquisitive man that he was, would prefer... ; - ))
- Whatever his personal beliefs on the topic are, he won't be trying to push Congress to legislate to those or signing an executive order to dictate education across America. (In fact, he's trying to get the Fed outta education... and where else does this pov matter, neway?)

On abortion rights:
- The man is pro-life, but not pro Federal law on the topic. While state by state is what he sees as the best option available now, he tends to favor community level rules, so would probably most prefer this being decided community by community.

On gay rights:
- You probably have this impression due to his noting that you cannot decide the marriage thing at the Federal level. However, when it comes to marriage, he feels the govt should stay out of it altogether except as a contract. Basically, the govt should handle it like any other legal contract and let individuals and their respective churches or other orgs to decide on apt pairings otherwise. Basically, he has no problem at all with gay marriage and thinks the govt should just get out of the way.

Final note: If you look back at Hoover and FDR, you will note that they are very similar to Bush and Obama. Hoover was essentially a less effective at pushing overweening govt control FDR and FDR was like a much more destructive Hoover. Essentially, Bush is the less effective Obama, and Obama the up to now more effective Bush. Let us hope his hand on our country's throat does not linger 2/3 as long as the grip of FDR... RP is much less like Bush than Obama has proven to be.

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

Does RP believe that government should stay out of marriage, or just same sex marriage ?!

+1
0
-1
sylvenwolf posted on

He thinks that, ideally, the government would only treat marriage as a contract, and otherwise have no say in it, because it should otherwise be a religious function.
Here's a quote from the Wikipedia article:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
"In a 2007 interview, Paul said that he supported the right of gay couples to marry, so long as they didn't "impose" their relationship on anyone else, on the grounds of supporting voluntary associations. He also said, "Matter of fact, I'd like to see all governments out of the marriage question. I don't think it's a state function, I think it's a religious function." Paul has stated that in a best case scenario, governments would enforce contracts and grant divorces but otherwise have no say in marriage. He has also said he doesn't want to interfere in the free association of two individuals in a social, sexual, and religious sense. When asked if he was supportive of gay marriage, Paul responded, "I am supportive of all voluntary associations and people can call it whatever they want."

+1
-4
-1
chellethesouthernbelle posted on

factual evolution...you're kidding right? and the NDAA exempts US citizens, your kidding again...let's have some FACTS for both of those statements!

+1
0
-1
Anonymous posted on

This country has been alr4ady destroyed and RP is your only chanbe to reverse the process. BTW read more about RP so you won't sound like ignorant...

+1
-2
-1
Anonymous posted on

  There is a provision within the NDAA specifically allowing the military to detain US citizens without due process.As far as your other 'points'; with a little research you would find out that Ron Paul is against public education and state run healthcare because they are unconstitutional and fiscally untenable. Though I personally do no agree 100% with his stance on abortion, it stems from legal issues rather than anything else. Specifically, that a doctor can be sued should a pregnancy go wrong or that a mother would be a murderer were she to 'abort' her baby moments after it was born, seems to suggest that a fetus is indeed a legal person. I will leave it to your best moral and philosophical judgement to determine your own stance on the matter.
  Finally you may be right that he is against gay marriage personally, I can't speak for him. However he does not believe that the government should decide how to legislate morality. As far as he is concerned, marriage is a voluntary union between persons, be they heterosexual, homosexual, or what have you, and has no reason to be legislated over by the government. In this sense as far as Ron Paul is concerned gay marriage is sort of a moot point. Think about it, if there is no law defining what a marriage is or is not, then there is no reason to have to amend that law to include gay people. How's that for a progressive view point? It is interesting to note that there are laws on marriage mostly for tax purposes. Paul wants to get rid of the IRS.
  One last final point I would make is that yes Bush was indeed a piece of work, but Obama is really just the sequel (I fell for it too). Some research and critical thinking should reveal that to you.
So sure you could vote for Obama or Romney or Newt, etc., and continue to subsidies education and inflate its cost, socialize
medicine (which, you may or may not know, plays more to the advantage of
giant pharmaceutical and insurance companies than you), and need to pass laws so that gay people can get married, OR you could do a little research on what the Federal Reserve is, read that thing you were taught people died for to protect (the Constitution), and maybe even ask yourself what is wrong with a president who when he decides congress isn't acting fast enough simply writes the law himself.
  But hey it's just your future we're talking about; no big deal.

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

 DISAGREE.NDDA : The Act authorizes $662 billion in funding most of it for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad."The controversial 1021 ,1022 provisions gives  authority to  the  president  indefinitely  detain  any  suspect  of  terrorism  included  American citizens. McCain and  Levin read the  laws  that   president  already  might  exercises   this right  and  Act only make  it  clear.Senator  Feinstein and  others say  that  indefinite   detention   of  American  citizens  is  newly  introduce  by this bill.Urge you  to  read/listen to  what  Dr. Paul  is really  saying on  issues and  this:http://www.dailypaul.com/21220... 

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

Jo Ann - I applaud your family's passion. 

First of all let me state that I am not American. I think Ron Paul's message resonates with anyone who wants peace and personal liberty. 

Ron Paul is a treasure and I don't say that often about a politician. In the midst of the media blackouts, the booing at debates by a brainwashed audience  (even when he mentions the Golden Rule), constant put downs by the media and multiple 'experts', the man remains consistent and just focuses on the message. And he has been doing the same thing for the past 30 odd years. For his sheer intellectual honestly, one cannot help but admire him. He also comes across as humble and compassionate. 

I personally believe that if Ron Paul is not elected (or at the very least given unlimited powers to reign in the Fed), it is going to be very very hard for the American economy to recover. The Fed is ruining the middle class and the actions of the Fed are felt in various degrees across the globe. Peter Schiff is another individual who is worth reading and researching about in the context of the Fed.

All this talk about his 'weak' foreign policy is complete nonsense. It's actually quite sad when a person who talks peace is called 'strange' and 'dangerous'. It baffles me really ! I recommend every American ( or anyone interested in learning) read Dr Paul's books, do some research and I can assure you that it will open your eyes.  If Americans don't wake up not only will they see the economy go down but the slow erosion of their liberties.  

A Ron Paul Fan

+1
-1
-1
Anonymous posted on

Nice post. Ron Paul has my full support. We should be proud of him. I am sure, that he will be one of the best presidents ever.

+1
-3
-1
ROBERT posted on

I respect Ron Paul. He is the only Presidential candidate that did not make a pledge to the neo-cons that control the Republican Party, (Kristol, Feith, Perle, Wolfowitz, and Abrams) for a war with Iran. This same group came up with the lies that got us into Iraq. Remember "biological and chemical WMD's", "yellowcake uranium", "missile tubes" and "Iraq's links to Al-Quada". The disinformation program against Iran has begun just like in the lead up to the Iraq war. I hope all Paul supporters will take to the streets if the US contemplates another pre-emptive war against a sovereign nation regarding alleged WMD's. Been there, done that and it sure worked out well. Israel is trying to bully us into another war, just like they did with Iraq. They go it alone on this one. No more American lives lost for Israel.

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

From one Ron Paul fan at Columbia to another, thank you for this fantastic piece!

+1
0
-1
RPSupporterUK posted on

The man just reeks of honesty and is totally steadfast, all the others are just so false and unbelievably fickle. Ron Paul for Peace, Liberty and Prosperity.

+1
+4
-1
Anonymous posted on

Thank you. We need more citizens like you all In this country

+1
0
-1
Nick Riley posted on

As soon as people study the inflation tax and look honestly at the national debt.  They become huge Ron Paul supporters.

It was a great feeling to vote for him in my Nevada primary.

Balanced Budgets, Peace, and Sound Constitutional money.   Ron Paul 2012

+1
-2
-1
Anonymous posted on

awwwwww the paulies have come out to play. 

+1
0
-1
Lisa Farkass posted on

And you my friend Anon are out on the Ron Paul articles I see, again.  You must like him an awful lot or just love baiting his supporters.  We don't care, ALL ARE WELCOME AT THE TABLE OF LIBERTY!!!  Stick around, maybe you will learn something ;)

+1
+4
-1
Anonymous posted on

"As an expert in monetary policy, moreover, he exposed the role of the
Federal Reserve not only in war financing, but also in currency
devaluation, vast debt accumulation, artificial boom-bust cycles, and
even our loss of civil liberties, as he details in his book 'End the
Fed.'"

I honestly thought this was sarcasm when I read it. 

+1
0
-1
Todd Owens posted on

But now you know it to be the unvarnished truth?  Keynesianism is nothing more than an excuse for central economic planning. Stagflation disproved it, so now we have neo-Keynesians like the delusional Krugman. puh-leez.  When one aggregates across millions of individual actors, the data left are only meaningful as as aggregate. It is not a policy making engine.

There should be no such thing as monetary policy.

+1
-4
-1
Anonymous posted on

 I would think your comment is itself a good piece of sarcasm, Mr Economist. The alternative would reveal a sad truth about your education.

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

wish more of my cc peers were as intelligent as this professor and her family. GREAT PIECE ALL AROUND. BEST ARTICLE I'VE READ ALL YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

Ron Paul also endorsed racist newsletters. Guess he didn't care or didn't think he'd be running for the Republican candidacy in the future.

+1
-1
-1
Anonymous posted on

This has been debunked and the letter's real writer has already been exposed. If this is all the dirt you can find on a man who has been in the government for the past 30 years then that is pretty pathetic. You should also take a look at some of race related policies he has talked about. It might surprise you. Dig deeper.

+1
+2
-1
Lisa Farkass posted on

Read pages 64-66 of 'The Revolution, A Manifesto' by Ron Paul and then tell me you think he is a racist.  Please, that is all I ask and then get back to me.  Thanks.

+1
+4
-1
Anonymous posted on

6 or 7 politically incorrect statements that he didn't even make, in a newsletter that published thousands of articles, of which he was the nonbinding editor, represent his views on race. Listen to him at the debates talk about the prison industrial complex, he wants to rid jails of young black men who've committed non violent, drug "crimes".

+1
-2
-1
Anonymous posted on

The newsletters were released several decades ago. Enough with the wedge issues.

+1
-1
-1
Sonbeams posted on

The word you are looking for is "disavowed" not "endorsed" which is the opposite.  

Dr. Paul was a minority shareholder in the publishing company run during the period in question by his two good friends Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard (died 1995).  He did not oversee, manage, review, edit or in any other way supervise the work.  He was working full time running a busy ob/gyn physician surgeon practice and writing occasional investment oriented articles for the newsletter company.  These articles dealt with the monetary issues in which he is an expert.  Those who followed his advice in these articles are well positioned today to survive the coming collapse.

There were many ghostwriters employed by the publishing company for the political newsletter.  The  mission was to critique government affirmative action programmes for minorities and the folly of group rights which are the foundation and very definition of racism.  The problem is that the articles were written in an academic ironic fashion common for that time and which out of historical and literary context can be demagogued for political purposes by dull witted people.  

Dr. Paul is a committed Christian who endeavours to live his faith.  He is a decent, principled, honest man who continued to work as an ob/gyn physician during his time in Congress after the fashion of the early founders of the country.  He gave free medical treatment to Medicaid and Medicare patients some of whom were from minority communities.  He never accepted payment from Medicare or Medicaid.  Philosophically he embraces the liberty and individual natural rights principles of John Locke and as such is a quintessential anti-racist.

He has never been a career politician and only entered politics to serve his constituents and lay down a public record for future historians so that they might see that the light of sanity and clear thinking was not entirely absent from America public life.  If the Congress had hearkened to his admonitions and passed the many pieces of legislation he authored and co-sponsored then the country would be in a healthier state today.

He served on the Gold Commission in 1983 and the recommendations in his minority report at that time had they been followed would have averted the present financial crisis and the many wars entered into since then.  It has been published as "The Case For Gold" and can be downloaded free of charge at www.mises.org

+1
+3
-1
Tim O posted on

False.  It is proven he did not write them, and secondly the news all of the sudden stopped bringing this up because they were getting too many calls from minorities in support of Ron Paul, notice how the so called Racist News Letter story just died?  That is why, so the race card got pulled because they had no other dirt on Ron Paul and it ended when minorities came out in droves in support of Ron Paul. 

+1
-2
-1
Anonymous posted on

I think Ron Paul is right. I fully agree with Professor Cavallo. However, what he says is not what the public wants to hear, and that's why he has no chance to become president.

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

You do realise that you're part of the public, right?

+1
-1
-1
Anonymous posted on

Maybe the right phrase should be "the majority of the public."

+1
-4
-1
Lisa Farkass posted on

I understand the daughter's dismay that her family was too involved in politics as my own family has tried to put the brakes on my love for Ron Paul.  I am a 50 yr old college educated Homemaker, the mother of two teen girls and wife of a Veteran.  I discovered Ron Paul when I was trying to investigate on my own why our crazy country is still fighting this insane War on Drugs!!!  I started by reading 'Liberty Defined' and 'The Revolution, A Manifesto', both by RP.  He writes so clearly and concisely even I could understand the economic principles and Econ was NOT my best subject :)  Anyhow, I am a huge fan and devotee and just wish I could make people understand how much better ALL our lives could be!!  I love the fact that not only people from around the world love him and the ideas he represents.  Now if we could just get America on board, I really don't think our country can take another four years of Obama or anyone but Ron Paul.  Seriously.  My family thinks I spend too much time obsessing and following all news related to Ron Paul but the only way I can find out about him is on the Internet or thru books, the MSM is so biased against him and it is really sad.  I will keep spreading the word as best I can and give whatever support we are able too.  I don't think people understand how bad the economic situation really is,  SIXTEEN TRILLION dollars national debt.  If we continue on this path, am not sure how long the dollar will hold up, the debt is unsustainable!!!!!  Ron Paul 2012 and beyond!!

+1
-4
-1
Lisa Farkass posted on

I meant to mention that I did vote for BO last time around, not this time......

+1
-2
-1
RoadtoSurfdom posted on

Oh my. I don't have the words. This is such a wonderful story.

+1
-2
-1
Anonymous posted on

All I can say to the people who laugh and criticize Ron Paul - when you, your sons and daughters, and/or grandchildren are marching off to another soon to be undeclared war (for the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about and the oil companies) or you get that knock on the door regarding another son or daughter of the United States Armed Forces now lying dead - you will be saying to yourselves "why didn't we listen and support Ron Paul"  Savor that laugh now because you will be crying later.....
A 42 year old mom of a 5 year old son.

+1
-2
-1
Anonymous posted on

A 49 year old mom who agrees with you 100%.

+1
+2
-1
Anonymous posted on

Great story by the way.

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

Ah, the reason Ron Paul people are so fantastically awsome. You get one or two posts from people who have no clue what they are talking about. They simply paraphrase MSNBC and can't even get that right. Then you have 45 responses from RP supporters setting them straight. By far the most researched supporters of any candidate. I enjoy the comment sections more than the articles although I really enjoyed this one. I still think my favorite was the one from yahoo that said if you want to know Ron Paul's positions, just read the comment section below this article. =D

+1
0
-1
Anonymous posted on

I think the vital difference is between "people who take Ron Paul seriously" and "people take Ron Paul seriously?"

+1
+2
-1
Anonymous posted on

Thinking people know the truth.

People need to think for themselves - I have heard countless similar stories - when people FINALLY take a listen to what Ron Paul is saying - they invariably support his positions. Truth is truth.

Thank you for a wonderfully inspiring article.

+1
-1
-1
Anonymous posted on

No, they clamp onto his reasonable views and ignore the ones where he's kind of a socially intolerant bigot. 

+1
0
-1
Anonymous posted on

Name one instance - one single example - where he has ever been or said something socially intolerant or bigoted. Please enlighten us.

+1
+2
-1
Anonymous posted on

Here’s a list:
The Ron Paul Political Report newsletter stated the public should bear arms to protect themselves against carjackings by “urban youth who play whites like pianos.” Note that the terms “black” or “African American” aren’t used in this newsletter sample. However, the racially coded term “urban” and reference to “whites” makes it easy for the reader to ascertain what skin color the youth in question have. The newsletter, written in the first-person, continued on this topic with the following assertion: “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self-defense. For the animals are coming.” Now these animal wouldn’t be blacks, would they?
In another newsletter, Paul described most black men in Washington, D.C., as “semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”
Talking Points Memo reported that in December 1990, Paul suggested that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. sexually molested girls and boys, remarking: “And we are supposed to honor this ‘Christian minister’ and lying socialist with a holiday that puts him on par with George Washington?” 
In a 1993 Ron Paul Survival Report newsletter, alarm was raised about “The Disappearing White Majority.” The newsletter referenced the growing birth rate of people of color and expressed a pro-segregation stance with this comment: “It is human nature that like attracts likes. But whites are not allowed to express this same human impulse. Except in a de facto sense, there can be no white schools, white clubs, or white neighborhoods. The political system demands white integration, while allowing black segregation.”
In May 2011, Paul told MSNBC that he would have voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which ended Jim Crow. He questioned the act because it took authority away from property owners. Evidently, Paul values the rights of racist property owners over those of African Americans whose housing, employment, schooling and leisure activities were all dictated by Jim Crow.
 

+1
-1
-1
Anonymous posted on

Now that is what I call a hit job on a lost cause. This guy knows nothing, not even about the infamous newsletters - which Ron Paul never wrote, had not read, has since disavowed, and whose contents have nothing to do with what he believes. We're talking about a whole series of economic newsletter, where in some 4 cases an article written by hell knows who with a few sentences that may seem racist to the willing.

This guy wants to speak about ron paul without understanding what he is all about. Actually, this guy is performing a hit job - we had a lot of that.

Don't you mention MLK - he is one of Ron Paul's heroes, you twat.

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

Those newsletters, written in the first person, ARE racist. Whoever did the actual writing in Paul's name, the fact remains that they are the reason he'll never get elected. Talking Points Memo, btw, is a highly reputable source and their material regarding Dr. King had nothing to do with the Newletters. Calling smart people who disagree with you "twat"s? Priceless.

+1
-1
-1
Anonymous posted on

I'm a recent Columbia alum, and I felt like a lone wolf on campus. This article was such a great treat!

+1
+1
-1
Anonymous posted on

I'm just overcome with emotion about the outpouring of support for Ronnie P on this campus. I thought I was so alone not joining the cult of Obama, but it looks like I was wrong!

+1
+3
-1
Anonymous posted on

I am from South Africa and I must say that, in the recent 15 year period of our short world history we have never heard of any other American leader of any stature like like Ron Paul? He is good for America but more importantly good for the whole world, given the critical role US plays in the world. Listen to what he says and support him for our sakes.

+1
-3
-1
Mark Sabbai posted on

"In Ron Paul We Trust"

Let's legalize the Constitution!  End the Fed & the I.R.S. !!!

+1
0
-1