Ron Paul

[MrScorpio]

Here's a guy who talks a good game. Of course, we should have never had gone to invade Iraq and we should leave like yesterday.

On this we all agree

But this a guy that thinks that maintaining the public welfare and protecting it from the money grubbing private interests is a bad thing and should be ended for once and for all.

Most of his supporters are hard working blue collar folks who will in no way benefit from increased privatization, advanced monetization of the economy and the systematic rape of the standard of living in this country that fuels our rapid race to the bottom.

Basically, a vote for Paul is a vote to stab their own selves in the back.

Paul represents the worse form of social Darwinism that pervades Republican conservatism.

[cboy4]

1. Why are you posting about Ron Paul on a Democratic

website?

You make it sound like there's widespread support here for the man.

[MrScorpio]

3. Because the fucker bothers me and this is the first place that I thought to post

Besides, Republicans read DU as well

Don't tell me that you're really that bothered by my post!

[cboy4]

5. Yea, I am bothered by it because I think it's a subtle

attack on Kucinich for all of that idiocy surrounding him supposedly wishing to run with Paul.

[LoZoccolo]

10. He did it to himself when he was "thinking of Ron Paul". n/t

[cboy4]

12. Well LoZoccolo, what exactly did he do to himself? Nothing

has changed.

I've heard people say they wouldn't support Kucinich if he picked Paul, but that's impossible since the Paul people have shot down the possibility of that hypothetical ticket.

The only consequence has been an army of DUers typing up warnings about Ron Paul's record -- as though there are a lot of people planning on voting for him.

There are not.

What else do you have for me?

[cboy4]

17. *********CRICKETS*********

Mmmmm Hmmmmm.

obsession

Pronunciation:
\äb-ˈse-shən, əb-\
Function:
noun
Date:
1680

1: a persistent disturbing preoccupation with an often unreasonable idea or feeling; broadly : compelling motivation <an obsession with profits (OR RON PAUL)>

[LoZoccolo]

18. His credibility as a decision-maker is further lessened.

He seems to be able to say all kinds of things to pander to people (Shirley MacLaine too), not exactly a quality you'd expect in the one who is supposed to be Mr. Honest Guy who all the other candidates are supposed to pale in comparison to. Maybe he should have checked to see if chemtrails actually exist before he put them into the Space Preservation Act of 2001, but it might have got him some tinfoil hat votes. Or when some 9/11 "truthers" approach him, and he knows that they are probably crazy, but he strings them along and talks about how he wants to investigate "what happened" as if it might be what the tinfoil hatters want to find out, rather than just negligence and incompetence. Just because he engages in political hackery of untapped markets doesn't put him above the fray.

His entrance into the race can only serve one purpose, and that's to make the candidates who can win look bad. Well, I'm saying he looks bad too in a lot of ways, so it's unfair to dismiss the viable candidates when you could do a lot of dismissing of Mr. Honest Guy.

[cboy4]

14. *********CRICKETS*********

Chirp Chirp.

I thought so.

[ingac70]

2. On fiscal policy....

He is a typical libertarian. But on social issues (abortion mainly), Paul is a typical fundie. He has also penned this about the "War on Christmas"...

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

Uneducated fundie types who happen to have not much use for the war are drawn to him.

Since when have working class Republicans voted their own financial interests?

[MrScorpio]

4. I saw that Fundie support the other night on CSPAN during one of his events

I saw that the support runs long, wide and deep

And on not voting for their own interests, check this out:

http://www.alternet.org/story/69927/

[Syrinx]

6. A lot of what he says, I agree with 100%

But I could not, in good conscience, support him.

I agree with him on things like the war, of course, and on drugs, and separation of powers, adherence to the Constitution (sad, that that's even an issue), etc.

I think Mr. Paul has gotten a bad rap on being racist. I don't think he is, and just because a racist like David Duke supports him, doesn't mean that Paul himself is a racist.

To me, it is his socially Darwinist views that make him utterly undeserving of my vote.

If I had to choose one of the Republican candidates to be president, I'd probably pick Ron Paul, because at least I agree with him on some issues.

Fortunately, though, the Democrats have some candidates too. :)

[MrScorpio]

7. A lot of people are enamored with the pretty packaging

The insides are dark and disturbing

[Syrinx]

11. what do you mean by "pretty packaging?"

I think he's pretty upfront about what he stands for, though a lot of liberals that primarily support him somehow seem oblivious to the bad stuff.

It doesn't seem that he's trying to hide his views, just that some of us on the "good side" seem to be willfully ignoring his bad points. I'm not sure why that is.

I would never vote for Ron Paul, unless my only other choice were Romney, Huckabee, Giuliani, etc., but I I would pick him over any one of those guys.

I do prefer the views offered by Kucinich, Edwards, Obama, Biden, Dodd, Richardson, Clinton, in roughly that order.

[Brother_1969]

8. This guy is a republican

Enough said

[MrScorpio]

9. Welcome to DU, Brother

Stick around

[ingac70]

13. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[lvx35]

15. Why never 1/10th of this shit on the other republican candidates?

Ron Paul. Ron Paul. Underdog. Against the patriot act and the war. Why not attack the front runners?

[cboy4]

16. Interesting, ha? Well mark this down as another

thinly veiled anti-Kucinich thread. :puke:

[LoZoccolo]

19. Because left-wing voters are threatening to vote for him based on one issue. n/t