An independent with a real shot?

[hork]

Originally Posted by -mmm-

I agree with you spoc. Overall hes got a libertarian platform (which really pushes his anti-war agenda, almost reminds me of the isolationists of the first half of the 20th century). But hes also been accused of being a racist and a homophobe.

both accusations are justified by his own writings and voting record. furthermore his supporters are trying to paint him as the protector of civil liberties yet with the exception of voting against the PATRIOT Act he has repeatedly voted down legislation that has traditionally become viewed as protected by the Constitution (e.g., his stance on abortion rights).

and his position on social institutions hardly qualify him as a liberal.

so earlier when i said he talks a good game but violates his rhetoric with his actions and beliefs, perhaps i mistakingly laid the blame on him. when in fact it's his supporters who are misrepresenting his loyalties and philosophy.

[SayOw]

Originally Posted by hork

both accusations are justified by his own writings and voting record. furthermore his supporters are trying to paint him as the protector of civil liberties yet with the exception of voting against the PATRIOT Act he has repeatedly voted down legislation that has traditionally become viewed as protected by the Constitution (e.g., his stance on abortion rights).

and his position on social institutions hardly qualify him as a liberal.

so earlier when i said he talks a good game but violates his rhetoric with his actions and beliefs, perhaps i mistakingly laid the blame on him. when in fact it's his supporters who are misrepresenting his loyalties and philosophy.

His pro life stance is partly because of his background, being an obstetrician formulated his opinion on abortion rights. And I, for one, am really tired of abortion oftentimes being the 'only' issue a person considers for election. Not that abortion is an issue to overlook, but it is oftentimes over-emphasized for impact.

(I had a longer post but probably won't be back online for a while... but I defy anyone to prove that Paul is homophobic, racist and elaborate his 'conspiracy theory'. If the conspiracy theory is Paul's quotes regarding the Iraqi war, remember those quotes are taken right out of the 9/11 Commission Report...far from a conspiracy theory, just facts...but republicans have no time to read the 9/11 Commission report because they are too busy patting themselves on the back for 'being there' ... just ask Guilliani).

Later guys!

[hork]

Originally Posted by SayOw

but I defy anyone to prove that Paul is homophobic, racist and elaborate his 'conspiracy theory'.

as for racist, i'll let his own words make the case.

the following are selected quotes made by Mr. Paul in writing in his newsletter during the mid 1990's

“Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”

“If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be.”

“We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.”

“We don’t think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That’s true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such.

""our country is being destroyed by a group of actual and potential terrorists -- and they can be identified by the color of their skin."

"Indeed, it is shocking to consider the uniformity of opinion among blacks in this country. Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions"

and to think all poor trent did (sarcasm intended) was call for the reinstitution of segragation.

i could go on and on (and if you'd like I'll be happy to) but Mr. Paul does a much better job verifying the accusation of his being a racist than anything I could type ever would. so much for that freedom loving, right's protecting idea. well at least for those who don't fit the white anglo-saxon protestant mold we've come to know is synonomous with real american in texan politics.

[hork]

as for his libertaraininsm? that's almost as laughable as the online poll results.

let's examine how libertarain Mr. Paul really is shall we?

First off so we're all on the same page, let us define libertarain and the libertarian philosophy on politics shall we.

A libertarain is (according to the official website of the Libertarian party)

"A person who upholds the principles of individual liberty especially of thought and action."

And according to the same site,

"Libertarians believe in, and pursue, personal freedom while maintaining personal responsibility. The Libertarian Party itself serves a much larger pro-liberty community with the specific mission of electing Libertarians to public office.

Libertarians strongly oppose any government interfering in their personal, family and business decisions. Essentially, we believe all Americans should be free to live their lives and pursue their interests as they see fit as long as they do no harm to another."

Now let's look at how Mr. Paul feels about my, your, and our rights shall we?

Mr. Paul has called for a repeal of natural born citizenship (protected explicitly by the US Constitution)....so much for that protection of rights thing

Mr. Paul voted against reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and for the "Federal Election Integrity Act" (which amounts to nothing more than voter suppression). Again what's a constitution? And who needs the rights protected in it?

On religious freedom and tolerance, Mr. Paul has voted for displaying the Ten Commandments in court houses while voting against the inclusion of other relgious icons in said courthouses (hardly what one would consider unbiased)

He introduced and campaigned for legislation that would prohibit federal courts from hearing any Establishment cases. (so much for article 3)

On labor law, he voted to defund OSHA's ergonomics rules. Voted against increasing mine safety standards.

He opposes Social Security and Medicare: Repeats the Republicans' lies about the programs' solvency.

He voted for the bankruptcy bill. Voted to make it harder to file class-action lawsuits.

And is vehemently against affordable and accessable health care.

So it seems to me he's 1) not near the constitutionalist his supporters would like us to believe he is; 2) far more right than any libertarian i've ever known; 3) Like so many others in D.C. could care less about the average citizen just as long as his private interests (remember he's a MD) and campaign contributors (among the largest being the AMA) are taken care of all is well

Now that's not to say he's any worse than anyone else (i'll leave that to the individual voter) but he's far from the freedom loving, constitution protecting, advocate of equality and liberty his grass roots supporters claim. And once the real Ron Paul is exposed he'll (like so many before him) become nothing more than a footnote in an otherwise long list of irrelevant candidates.

[spoc22]

Originally Posted by SayOw

If the conspiracy theory is Paul's quotes regarding the Iraqi war, remember those quotes are taken right out of the 9/11 Commission Report...far from a conspiracy theory, just facts...but republicans have no time to read the 9/11 Commission report because they are too busy patting themselves on the back for 'being there' ... just ask Guilliani).

Later guys!

His conspiracy theory has to do with the leaders of Canada, Mexico and the US conspiring to form a "border free North America"
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst082806.htm