HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » On Ron Paul, a point many...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 12:49 AM

On Ron Paul, a point many miss

Yes, he wants to dissolve a whole slew of Federal agencies, but not because he wants to dismante government, just the FEDERAL government. Theoretically if the state of Texas decided to have a Texas EPA that's fine, 10th Ammendment and all. This is a small distinction missed by both friends and enemies of Paul.

That said, he is a fan of ending the wars...it goes back to the traditional isolationism of the paleo cons. And his war on drugs shtick, again if the state of Texas goes after it, that's fine. Just not the Feds. This is a critical point.

This is way too much inside Paul basebal, but when you gotta explain paulese to potential targets you need to understand it too well. This is usually shocking to potential fans that have not joined the faith, since Paul always writes federal government in campaign bullet points. This shit can be done, and supported, at the state level is not usually that obvious. But he is a strict 10th Ammendment fan. And nothing that was ever not mentioned in the holy writ, errr.... Constitution, belongs to the Feds. Ergo, no social security and no EPA and no war on drugs and no federal highway administration.

In fact in Paul's ideal US some states would look like 1984, while others will look like Somalia. Now to say that is a worst nightmare... Yes, the bill of rights is there, but in his world view a state level patriot act is just peachy, the federal level, not in the holy writ.

By the way this is important for a whole series of fellow travelers who are less noisy but still that much fun. 10th Ammendment is code for states rights and original intent. Yes, they usually match nicely with racist pricks, but not always.

Any liberal who is fooled by his war on drugs, USPA and wars shtick is just looking at talking points. There is more to this than talking points. Oh and anybody who expects the press to ask hard questions of Paul, or any other republican, is just dreaming.

And yes, I was very impressed with his speech on special orders back in 2003, calling neocons to the carpet...and on the surface I might even agree with a few talking points...that's on the surface. He is a nut, a dangerous nut, that makes Michelle Bachman looks rational. Oh and his long term game plan is Rand and a movement that will take upwards of a generation to reach power, as in the Presidency, that's the long term goal. He is building a movement, not running for President. And this is a dangerous, proto fascist movement. So don't be fooled, please.

37 replies, 3955 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 37 replies Author Time Post
Reply On Ron Paul, a point many miss (Original post)
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 OP
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2012 #1
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #2
Deep13 Jan 2012 #3
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #4
Deep13 Jan 2012 #22
white_wolf Jan 2012 #5
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #6
pnwmom Jan 2012 #7
vaberella Jan 2012 #8
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #10
Rex Jan 2012 #9
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #11
Old and In the Way Jan 2012 #12
PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #13
ellisonz Jan 2012 #14
koolkake Jan 2012 #15
dougolat Jan 2012 #16
Thaddeus Kosciuszko Jan 2012 #17
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #31
Thaddeus Kosciuszko Jan 2012 #35
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #36
Thaddeus Kosciuszko Jan 2012 #37
Tx4obama Jan 2012 #18
justiceischeap Jan 2012 #19
thesquanderer Jan 2012 #25
PuffedMica Jan 2012 #20
TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #21
spanone Jan 2012 #23
FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #24
mzteris Jan 2012 #26
Ratty Jan 2012 #27
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #32
99Forever Jan 2012 #28
ProSense Jan 2012 #29
MicaelS Jan 2012 #30
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2012 #34
tawadi Jan 2012 #33

Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 12:55 AM

1. Thanks for the depth on this. The last point is...poigniant

 

Whenever I see a Paulbot on Facebook, they go right on Block. Then I end up being confused when friends begin shouting at no one in their threads, but I like having to figure things out every now and then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 12:58 AM

2. Oh you welcome

There is a bot at the local OSD. He started to sputter when I raised a few of these points. I might have planted a seed...might is the correct word with paulista. The man has charisma and cult of personality does play a role.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 01:30 AM

3. The 10th explicitly does not apply to the enumerated powers of Congress...

...one of which is the Commerce Clause. Likewise, under the Reconstruction Amendments, civil rights are explicitly a Federal matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Deep13 (Reply #3)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 01:50 AM

4. I am talking Ron Paul here

He actually does not think the reconstruction AmmendmentSo should be there.

We are talking constitution as holy writ.

This is another point people miss about Ron Paul.

(That means, in case this needs to be emphasizes, that I like the whole 20th century, let alon reconstruction. Hence I highly disagree with this nut, dangerous nut)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 11:30 AM

22. Yeah, I know it's devil's advocate.

I'm just saying that those who shout "10th Amendment" every time they see Federal action they don't like are on much weaker footing than they suppose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 02:05 AM

5. Ron Paul reminds me of a cult leader.

When you first hear him talk what he says may seem like a breath of fresh air after escaping a burning building, but once you dig past the surface you see what a dangerous and insane man you've fallen in with. At least the lucky ones see, some never do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to white_wolf (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 02:07 AM

6. Cult of personality is exactly right

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 02:10 AM

7. Good, informative post. And you're right -- he's a dangerous nut.

It's so discouraging to see how many young people seem to have been taken in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 02:38 AM

8. This isn't missed. This is just ignored by the fools that support the man.

If people did some due diligence and vet their candidates shit like him would not be in office...unless there are just racist, homophobic and sexist voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vaberella (Reply #8)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 02:53 AM

10. Most people actually don't know this

But a lot is finally bubbling out.

The speech I referred to was a marvelous speech. It was the first true exposure on the liberal blogosphere for Paul. It was masterful...and I mean that with complete admiration for how well he took down wolfowitz, and the rest of the crew. It was...this is a republican? That's the point people started to pay attention outside the usual corners. And many people staid at that point, or evolved into, can you believe it, he is a civil libertarian

Heck i'd use the speech as an example of stuck clock is right, in this case very right, twice a day.

Now tat his news letters are emerging the far right is truly emerging.

Oh and Ron please run as third party. He will split the GOP more than libs.

But having to interact with true believers every so often is all kinds of fun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 02:44 AM

9. Awesome OP Nadin, I like how you

think...but you knew that already!

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #9)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 02:58 AM

11. Thanks, in the recent past I was faced with 100% Paulist bullshit

But some of this is seeding doubts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 04:05 AM

12. The Disunited States of America

You'll need a passport with visas to visit your neighboring state. Seriously, each state basically rewriting the law to suit their current ideas will create chaos on both an economic and social level.

He's a dreamer and a moron. And just what has this guy done in Congress? Check out his legislative record. I think he has sponsored just one bill to transfer a federal building to state control. Impressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 04:11 AM

13. See also:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=98951

A world with Paul in charge would be a terrible place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 04:24 AM

14. K & R

I agree that it is a "dangerous, proto fascist movement."



Someone linked this to 4chan...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 04:41 AM

15. Media Campaign

The online media campaign that promotes Austrian Economics and Libertopia has duped economic illiterate children into promoting a fringe, archaic view of modern society. No doubt the Koch Bros are behind a big portion of it- Cato Institute, which receives millions in funding from the Kochs, has been repeatedly sourced by libertarians in online debates. Deregulate environment regulatory systems so the Koch Bros can poison the environment further and let them rake in a few more billion bucks.

They've already played puppet master in a series of public colleges, dangling the opportunity of massive funding in front of poorly funded schools. Of course, the Koch bros get to pick the school's economists, the same economists that deny climate change and promote draconian deregulation.

It is a sad sight, when you see something like the Mises Institute promoting Somalia as a stateless utopia. And it's even a sadder sight when you see Pauldrones spouting meaningless talking points like "LIBERTY!" or "NO GUBBERMINT!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 04:46 AM

16. Shows people want drastic action to end wars-of-aggression, the drug war, and rein-in the FED

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 05:48 AM

17. Why do you think that the 10th Amendment has not been repealed?

 

Do you believe that Amendments 1 thru 9 should be repealed as well?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thaddeus Kosciuszko (Reply #17)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 01:41 PM

31. Read on the role of the commerce clause



And to Paul if a state decides one through nine are not good, poof in that state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #31)

Sun Jan 8, 2012, 04:15 PM

35. Interesting...but upon reviewing the yae votes to repeal the 4th Amendment (NDAA),

 

which President Obama signed into law on New Year's Eve, Paul's name was nowhere to be found.

As far as the Commerce Clause goes, Wickard v. Filburn, is the Plessy v. Ferguson of our time. Overturning it should be the standard for nominating SC justices. However, as Gonzales v. Raich demonstrated, it will be a difficult struggle.

In any case, it seems to me that if the 10th Amendment is no longer observed, it should be repealed. Failure to do so, will facilitate the further disregarding of the Bill of Rights, as evidenced by NDAA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thaddeus Kosciuszko (Reply #35)

Sun Jan 8, 2012, 04:19 PM

36. Different kettles of fish

Essy way to get it, crosses state borders...federal...it does not...

Why we cannot get one single federal education program, for example.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #36)

Sun Jan 8, 2012, 04:25 PM

37. They were not "different kettles" to the Justices who agreed with the government's case.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 06:07 AM

18. Until the day that each state can confine all their air and water within their borders ...

then the EPA needs to be a Federal Agency

p.s Now would be a good time for me to have a little thingie to post depicting a flying pig

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 06:38 AM

19. I think a lot of his supporters stop listening to him after they hear

"No more wars"
"Legalize drugs"
"Legalize prostitution"
"Make abortion illegal"

They don't hear:
That he wouldn't have voted for the civil rights act because it was a "massive violation of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of a free society."
He wants to revert currencies backed by gold (I believe Jared Laughner was a supporter of that)
That he's for monopolies (which would hurt every single American)
That the free market should determine who gets health care (basically he's against the American Disabilities Act)
He was AGAINST allowing wi-fi providers to report sexual predators transmitting child porn, etc.

IMO, if you want a candidate who is for ending wars, legalizing drugs & prostitution, that candidate should also recognize that we have laws that must be abided. The Constitution that he loves so much allows for the Amendments that he wants to do away with because he claims they're unconstitutional. If people can't see that simple fact, then his supporters don't use logic in their thinking.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to justiceischeap (Reply #19)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 11:47 AM

25. Yes - by definition, amendments cannot be unconstitutional (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 06:45 AM

20. We can end the War On Drugs without the baggage that comes with Ron Paul


If we elect strong progressives that will stand up in Congress and refuse to fund anymore War On Drugs nonsense, the matter can be put to rest.

The benefits of electing progressives to Congress outweigh the downside of Ron Paul and his cult following.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PuffedMica (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 08:24 AM

21. Nor is it needed to maintain and even advance civil liberties nor is it needed

to get out of the police state nor to get out of the imperialist resource war game nor is it required to seriously consider how the money supply works and accountability to the public for those charged with institutional control.

However, there is a dangerous vacuum of representation on the national left.

Allowing such notions to be the province of the extreme, almost anarchist right is ideologically suicidal, long term we are playing to lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 11:34 AM

23. k&r...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 11:41 AM

24. Way to un-unify the U.S.A. Mr. Paul.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 11:59 AM

26. It always amazes me

when someone says they support him because of his position on "war & drugs" - yet don't know one damn thing about his racist, misogynistic, bat-shit-crazy POV's...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 12:48 PM

27. Thanks for the reminder

As much as I rage on about Libertarians, Paul, and especially his enablers and apologists on the left, I do try and be intellectually honest. I'm always cautious about the Federal vs. State issue but the whole ignoring-any-amendments-they-don't-like thing, particularly the 10th, is an issue I often forget about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ratty (Reply #27)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 01:48 PM

32. Just remember libertarians range from far right to far left

Why the third largest organized party in the US makes the democrats look organized.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 12:52 PM

28. Thank you for laying it out in detail.

I suppose that now some horse's ass will come jump all over you for giving the nutball "free pres" on the forum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 12:56 PM

29. Great points. Still,

In fact in Paul's ideal US some states would look like 1984, while others will look like Somalia. Now to say that is a worst nightmare... Yes, the bill of rights is there, but in his world view a state level patriot act is just peachy, the federal level, not in the holy writ.

It would be a combination of the two. Ron Paul is every bit a corporate tool, willing to dismantle safety net programs.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=127245


This point is spot on:

"He is building a movement, not running for President. And this is a dangerous, proto fascist movement. So don't be fooled, please."

Will people transfer his views and their affinity to Rand?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 01:00 PM

30. Once question I'd like to ask Paul is this:

"We tried a limited Central Government under the Articles of Confederation and it failed because every state wanted to act like it's own Feudal Empire. How is your limited view of the power of the Federal Government any different?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MicaelS (Reply #30)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 01:50 PM

34. Extremely good question

I am sure a stumper, but good one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 01:50 PM

33. Don't think it's been said in this thread yet-

Fuck Ron Paul.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread