An #Occupier said something interesting about Ron Paul...

[emcguffie]

41. I am not saying this to suggest I support or like Ron Paul.

I just have an observation -- why I think so many young people or unhappy Republicans or Independents or sometime Dems might be attracted to him. Maybe this is really obvious to everyone, if so I apologize.

The attraction certainly isn't because of all of his positions, most of which we never see him discuss. What one sees when watching the political show, just generally, is that Ron Paul stands apart from his Republican brethren on a couple of very obvious libertarian-style points -- the Federal Reserve, an issue about which, in general terms, I myself agree with him, and the legalization of drugs, although he may have changed his position on that. And I could be wrong here. Haven't watched a single Republican debate. I'm not trying to say I am staying on top of him either.

I can't remember if I have ever heard him say anything about sexuality or choice.

What stands out in my mind is that he has taken a stand on a couple of libertarian points, and those points happen to be ones that can appeal to left-leaning liberals, taken apart from everything else. But, of course, there's the rub -- the stuff we don't hear about.

And so lots of unhappy citizens, particularly young people, see him attack the Federal Reserve and stand up for personal liberty and personal responsibility, and the right for the individual to make his/her own choices. And that is very different from the other Republicans, so he stands out, and some are attracted to that. My 18-year-old daughter, who is very left-leaning, gets very over-wrought about the whole nanny-state business. She really believes individuals should be allowed to choose for themselves, even if it is really bad for them. Drugs shouldn't be illegal because they are bad for you. Seat belts shouldn't be required, you should be allowed to risk your life if you want. (Of course, there are obvious arguments against that; please don't get me wrong.)

Obviously, they are not seeing a complete picture of Ron Paul. They may just be seeing or registering that he might be really good for change, and they see the Federal Reserve as at the heart of our biggest problems.

I remember the first time I came across any Libertarian info myself. It was on the street, and I was handed some materials, and those materials were stressing issues that I naturally would agree with. Now, I knew that I thought Libertarians were kind of wacko, but what they were showing me did not strike me as wacko. There wasn't anything about taxes, I don't think. It was all about personal liberties. Back then, if there had been material about the Federal Reserve, I would have thought that was nuts. Today, I no longer find that to be nuts. So in one way at least I have come around to share one position with Ron Paul.

I guess they do this on purpose: advertise the issues that are more acceptable, that might appeal to some of us on the left, and not say anything about those issues that so many of us would find repellant. Then maybe they can pick up some not-well-informed votes that way. It isn't always easy to know, or be aware of, what you don't know. We often learn the hard way about the fine print.

I don't have any suggestions to make as to how to rectify or address this. The media aren't any help that way, I mean, by exploring his less up-front positions, but they do help, in terms of the final result, by ignoring him and shutting him out. On the other hand, that also builds up his mystique. And in the meantime, more and more young people and customers dissatisfied with the rest of the pack continue to be attracted to him for his views on the Federal Reserve, primarily.

Ignorance is bliss?