Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: An #Occupier said something interesting about Ron Paul... [View all]Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)17. Ron Paul's supporters are usually parasitic opportunists.
The remind me of Scientologists. This article has a list of things that should make clear what is questionable about Ron Paul:
"Why progressives should not support Ron Paul"
http://peoplesworld.org/why-progressives-should-not-support-ron-paul/
<snip>
Paul's supporters have tried to promote the notion that his positions are pro-LGBT in his own, libertarian way. However, his libertarian dogma, which his supporters claim treats lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender citizens in a "live and let live" fashion, does not advance LGBT rights in any way. While he opposed the draconian federal amendment banning marriage equality, he stated that he would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act and he is not against individual states practicing discrimination against their gay and lesbian residents.
Paul opposed the ruling in Lawrence v. Texas which banned prohibitions on sodomy, whose real targets are any gay or lesbian activity, claiming that the Constitution provides no protections for those wishing to engage in "sodomy." This seems surprising from a man who wishes to legalize heroin - hardly a practice protected by the Constitution..
Moreover, Paul opposed the Employment Non Discrimination Act (ENDA) which would have prohibited employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. Additionally, he opposed expanding hate crimes protections to include sexual orientation and gender identity.
It's not just gays and lesbians that Paul seems unwilling to protect against discrimination, Paul says he would have voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which ended racially motivated voter suppression and segregation in schools and businesses. He argues that it "reduced civil liberty" and violates private property rights. In 2006 he voted against renewing the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which helps to remove barriers to minority voting, again citing property rights, and claiming that it was too costly.
If that hasn't turned off progressives, perhaps a look at his economic policies will. Paul supported a 10 percent flat income tax during his 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference speech. The big beneficiaries of that would be the richest people in our country, who would have their taxes drastically reduced. Not only would this completely defund the majority of all social and educational programs provided by the government, it would also likely increase the income disparity that has been exacerbated since the onset of "supply-side" economics. In another seemingly populist assist to the super-rich, he often proposes abolishing the Internal Revenue Service.
<snip>
He's rancid and no good!
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
100 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Instead of posting me the rules for DU, could you please post CONCRETE PROOF of Paul's racism,
this bird has flown
Dec 2011
#32
I can't believe you are asking someone here for proof of Pauls racism and bigotry
abelenkpe
Dec 2011
#72
people's positions make them ugly to me....looking at Romney or Paul I still see ugly fascists
blm
Dec 2011
#75
I don't think refusing to focus on a person's looks, whether that person is male or female, is
tblue37
Dec 2011
#91
Paul's policies WOULD DEFINITELY give corporations GREATER control over our lives and THAT is
blm
Dec 2011
#14
PS:You also missed the point that Paul's votes HELPED corporations gain that control
blm
Dec 2011
#16
Ron Paul is against a minimum wage, against unions, against regulating businesses
abelenkpe
Dec 2011
#73
And that's already enough right there...how are people overlooking this?
Fire Walk With Me
Dec 2011
#4
Compared to the non-Mitt candidates running, Ron sounds more reasonable than the rest.
Old and In the Way
Dec 2011
#9
Not sure about the slavery part (as Paul harkens back to a late-19th
coalition_unwilling
Dec 2011
#62
He does sound reasonable - when you hear a sound bite here and there. But people
gateley
Dec 2011
#24
Good points and observations, except I fear you have overlooked the most
coalition_unwilling
Dec 2011
#64
No, not that I'm aware of. His supporters are simply showing up thereabout.
Fire Walk With Me
Dec 2011
#57
Nobody in Occupy thinks Ron Paul has the solution. Please do not spread this meme.
Zorra
Dec 2011
#60
I think you 'get' libertarianism very well. I hope you make an OP of that post.
freshwest
Dec 2011
#97