Platform of Ron Paul

[Salty]

The Ron Paul Platform

What do you agree with and what do you disagree with?

There are over 60 issuse listed. I dont expect you to comment on each one - but take few and expound on the one that are very important to you

Salty

PS if you say "I agree with every item" then I will loose quite a bit of respect for you.

 

[matt wade]

PS if you say "I agree with every item" then I will loose quite a bit of respect for you.

Which items in particular would cause you to lose respect for us?

 

[Havensdad]

The Ron Paul Platform

What do you agree with and what do you disagree with?

There are over 60 issuse listed. I dont expect you to comment on each one - but take few and expound on the one that are very important to you

Salty

PS if you say "I agree with every item" then I will loose quite a bit of respect for you.

What on earth do you disagree with? Are you pro abortion? Pro big government? Do you believe the Federal Government should be controlling our day to day life? Seriously, what do you object to?

 

[Ruiz]

When I endorsed Ron Paul, I wrote the following (Published September 8, 2011):

Endorsing a candidate is never easy and while I have changed many of my views on politics in the last 10 years, I still believe that making a decision is my responsibility as an American citizen. First, let me explain the areas where my political views have changed (1-3) or issues that I hold as vitally important (4-5) in my selection.

1. The last 10 years I have a more narrow view on what it takes to qualify for a “just war.” As a result, I am at odds with both parties; more at home with those who love peace with a strong defense for protection.

2. I have become more Austrian in my economic theory. While the Bible does not explicitly espouse an economic theory, I do believe that God’s call for compassion ministries to be individual. We limit compassion by handing it over to government and we exemplify compassion when it comes directly from our pocket to the needy.

3. Debt is dumb and the paid off home mortgage is the new status symbol of success. Yes, I love Dame Ramsey, and I think his financial principles for families are just as good for government. Common sense financial principles are more than economics, they are moral.

4. We must stand up for the life of all humans, from conception to natural death.

5. Marriage is an issue defined by God, not by modernists and politicians. To reject any Biblical arguments for marriage is to reject the foundation of marriage.

As a result, there were people I immediately rejected as my next President. Some of the people did not fit my views of life and liberty. Other Evangelicals did speak well to the moral issues, but some of their views and theology were problematic, some were just scary. Yet, only one person came close to my views on these issues, Ron Paul.

The two issues other evangelicals object are Paul’s views on drugs and marriage. The drug issue is not a big issue for me because I believe the issue is over-blown. I recently met a well-educated man who was unable to get a job because, as an adult kid, he was arrested for possession of marijuana. This college educated man has been dismissed for the rest of his life because he used some marijuana early in his life. If he had committed a violent crime, I could understand but he was stupid and that stupidity has cost him dearly in his career. I believe the punishment did not fit the crime. Yet, drugs are a gateway for government to invade other areas of our life. I am more scared of a big government telling everyone what they can smoke than I am of the one who smokes.

Marriage is the next issue. The problem with Ron Paul is that he fails to see that marriage must be defined by religion because it came from religion. Yet, he does believe government should get completely out of the “business of marriage.” However, no matter the President, the onslaught against marriage will continue to take place state by state. A Constitutional Amendment is ultimately needed, something the President has no vote or veto. While I don’t like his views on marriage, I understand his views and he is consistent in his message of life and liberty and I do believe government’s intrusion into marriage has caused more harm than good.

I believe Ron Paul’s convictions will help us to live at peace with our government and others. Under Paul, we will not have to be afraid of the Federal Government telling us we can’t homeschool, that we have to adhere to the morals of government, and other invasive regulations in vogue in our national dialog. He will limit the EPA and the Federal Reserve, if not abolished them. No more warrantless wiretaps and torturing our enemies. Each person, friend or foe, will be guaranteed a right to a trial and our foreign policy would be closer to the Moravians (peace lovers) than either the Republicans or Democrats.

Overall, I trust Paul because he has remained the same for my entire life. Most Presidents change when they get into office (see W and Obama), but I doubt Paul will change. His message of Liberty and Freedom means that as a Christian, I have freedom and liberty to worship and serve God how I see fit, not how Government sees fit.

I endorse Ron Paul for President.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

When I endorsed Ron Paul, I wrote the following (Published September 8, 2011):

Endorsing a candidate is never easy and while I have changed many of my views on politics in the last 10 years, I still believe that making a decision is my responsibility as an American citizen. First, let me explain the areas where my political views have changed (1-3) or issues that I hold as vitally important (4-5) in my selection.

1. The last 10 years I have a more narrow view on what it takes to qualify for a “just war.” As a result, I am at odds with both parties; more at home with those who love peace with a strong defense for protection.

2. I have become more Austrian in my economic theory. While the Bible does not explicitly espouse an economic theory, I do believe that God’s call for compassion ministries to be individual. We limit compassion by handing it over to government and we exemplify compassion when it comes directly from our pocket to the needy.

3. Debt is dumb and the paid off home mortgage is the new status symbol of success. Yes, I love Dame Ramsey, and I think his financial principles for families are just as good for government. Common sense financial principles are more than economics, they are moral.

4. We must stand up for the life of all humans, from conception to natural death.

5. Marriage is an issue defined by God, not by modernists and politicians. To reject any Biblical arguments for marriage is to reject the foundation of marriage.

As a result, there were people I immediately rejected as my next President. Some of the people did not fit my views of life and liberty. Other Evangelicals did speak well to the moral issues, but some of their views and theology were problematic, some were just scary. Yet, only one person came close to my views on these issues, Ron Paul.

The two issues other evangelicals object are Paul’s views on drugs and marriage. The drug issue is not a big issue for me because I believe the issue is over-blown. I recently met a well-educated man who was unable to get a job because, as an adult kid, he was arrested for possession of marijuana. This college educated man has been dismissed for the rest of his life because he used some marijuana early in his life. If he had committed a violent crime, I could understand but he was stupid and that stupidity has cost him dearly in his career. I believe the punishment did not fit the crime. Yet, drugs are a gateway for government to invade other areas of our life. I am more scared of a big government telling everyone what they can smoke than I am of the one who smokes.

Marriage is the next issue. The problem with Ron Paul is that he fails to see that marriage must be defined by religion because it came from religion. Yet, he does believe government should get completely out of the “business of marriage.” However, no matter the President, the onslaught against marriage will continue to take place state by state. A Constitutional Amendment is ultimately needed, something the President has no vote or veto. While I don’t like his views on marriage, I understand his views and he is consistent in his message of life and liberty and I do believe government’s intrusion into marriage has caused more harm than good.

I believe Ron Paul’s convictions will help us to live at peace with our government and others. Under Paul, we will not have to be afraid of the Federal Government telling us we can’t homeschool, that we have to adhere to the morals of government, and other invasive regulations in vogue in our national dialog. He will limit the EPA and the Federal Reserve, if not abolished them. No more warrantless wiretaps and torturing our enemies. Each person, friend or foe, will be guaranteed a right to a trial and our foreign policy would be closer to the Moravians (peace lovers) than either the Republicans or Democrats.

Overall, I trust Paul because he has remained the same for my entire life. Most Presidents change when they get into office (see W and Obama), but I doubt Paul will change. His message of Liberty and Freedom means that as a Christian, I have freedom and liberty to worship and serve God how I see fit, not how Government sees fit.

I endorse Ron Paul for President.

While I agree with what your saying my friend, the man will not be widely accepted in the primary elections....he is too divisive to many Americans & his running will only make it easier to having Obama reelected (which would be tragic for this country)

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

What on earth do you disagree with? Are you pro abortion? Pro big government? Do you believe the Federal Government should be controlling our day to day life? Seriously, what do you object to?

As difficult as this is to say brother, most of the northern liberal folks are in favor of Big Government running their lives, they are in favor of pro choice & massive entitlements......they want to be "just like Europe"! And if you come to the NE you will find atheism as the "True Religion" of the land....& thats what your truly fighting against. Dr. Paul does not play well up here. SEND HELP!!!! :laugh:

 

[Ruiz]

While I agree with what your saying my friend, the man will not be widely accepted in the primary elections....he is too divisive to many Americans & his running will only make it easier to having Obama reelected (which would be tragic for this country)

Perhaps, but I think if we are really looking at people who can beat Obama, I handicap this issue as follows:

1. John Huntsman-Does not have the baggage all the other candidates but has all the experience and a proven record in both economics and foreign policy. If Huntsman wins, he will win the General Election.
2. Mitt Romney-Money and experience, but a record he runs from.
3. Ron Paul-He will grab the left and right but he may be a Barry Goldwater. Hopefully there will be someone with his ideas who can better communicate them.
4. Newt Gingrich-Smart, but he is not a true conservative and has a lot of baggage. He is the best debater among the group, but it takes more than a debate to win the Presidency.
5. Rick Perry-He is a Michelle Bauchman who actually has been a Chief Executive.
6. Rich Santorum-He knows what he believes. He sounds like a novice.
7. Michelle Bauchman-The 2nd most personality driven candidate who has little government experience. You will either love her or hate her. She comes across divisive, though her policies are not as divisive.
8. Herman Cain-Rarely answers solid foreign policy questions and has a past no one wants to embrace. He is the most unqualified among the bunch and has been learning "on the go", and it shows.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Yes but the objective is to get elected & thus depose Obama and his odious power block. Who is in the best position to do that?

 

[Ruiz]

Yes but the objective is to get elected & thus depose Obama and his odious power block. Who is in the best position to do that?

The person in the best position to with the Primaries is Romney. He will get the endorsement from Huckabee and probably will outlast all the other candidates. He has the best ground game and there are few things that will "surprise" people about him.

 

[kyredneck]

....he is too divisive to many Americans & his running will only make it easier to having Obama reelected (which would be tragic for this country)

????

The only danger (which is none, because he is a man of his word) is if he were to run as an independent in the general election siphoning off more votes from the right than the left thus throwing the election to the Dems.

But this is his third time running for GOP nominee, and each time he has plainly stated that he is not going to run third party. Ron Paul poses ZERO threat to the Republicans.

Were he to win the GOP nomination, he would have an excellent chance of defeating the Socialists in 2012

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

????

The only danger (which is none, because he is a man of his word) is if he were to run as an independent in the general election siphoning off more votes from the right than the left thus throwing the election to the Dems.

But this is his third time running for GOP nominee, and each time he has plainly stated that he is not going to run third party. Ron Paul poses ZERO threat to the Republicans.

Were he to win the GOP nomination, he would have an excellent chance of defeating the Socialists in 2012

OK....time will tell KY as to his broad appeal......personally I believe he has ZERO chance of anything....as history has already proven out.

 

[kyredneck]

.....personally I believe he has ZERO chance of anything.....

His odds of winning the general election are much better than his winning the primary election.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

His odds of winning the general election are much better than his winning the primary election.

OK...ultimately though....which candidate do you think & feel can beat the Socialist cur?

 

[kyredneck]

OK...ultimately though....which candidate do you think & feel can beat the Socialist cur?

I don't know.

I waffle nearly daily, sometimes I believe Obama's a goner irregardless of who runs against him, other times I believe he's going to be very difficult for anyone to defeat. It's probably going to be the latter, unless an outright economic depression hits. He has some savvy experienced people behind him.

One thing is for certain, his foreign policy record over his term is going to be a HUGE plus for him, and they're going to play on it in a huge way.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I don't know.

I waffle nearly daily, sometimes I believe Obama's a goner irregardless of who runs against him, other times I believe he's going to be very difficult for anyone to defeat. It's probably going to be the latter, unless an outright economic depression hits. He has some savvy experienced people behind him.

One thing is for certain, his foreign policy record over his term is going to be a HUGE plus for him, and they're going to play on it in a huge way.

I agree unfortunately.....the man or woman who defeats BO is the one that has a compelling argument about "Jobs (or lack there of)", Health Care (Unconstitutional & expensive), & Our rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. RP has answers to all these & indeed I like him however what I like isnt important to what does the silent majority think. To me anyway, the dumping of Obama takes precedent over any other agenda (thats with the Elections looming)

LOL, I just noticed both mens initials.....one suggests something that stinks & the other.....well, I only hope Paul's middle name isn't Isadore.

 

[billwald]

I disagree with Paul regarding "Inflation and the Federal Reserve." Most Libertarians (Austrians) are living in the 19th century and don't understand the nature and function of the electronic transfer fiat money system. Neither do they understand the vast numerical gulf between the (real) rich and the poor.

 

[Ruiz]

I disagree with Paul regarding "Inflation and the Federal Reserve." Most Libertarians (Austrians) are living in the 19th century and don't understand the nature and function of the electronic transfer fiat money system. Neither do they understand the vast numerical gulf between the (real) rich and the poor.

Bill,

Your statement calls into question some of the greatest theologians of all time. As well, money transfer systems would not be eliminated in such a system. Rather, it would become more reliable than the current system.

Rather, Austrian economists understand the gulf between the rich and poor and see that the problem is not Austrian economics, but the Federal Reserve system who exacerbates the system. We oppose a top-down approach where people in Washington plans for the many, not the people planning for themselves. In an Austrian economic system, there would not be inflation that hurts the poor. As well, the unemployment would not be at 9% and there would be greater freedom for upward mobility than is currently allowed.

The problem with Keynesian economics is that they believe economics merely makes us pawns in their game, ignoring our wants and desires for their "crony capitalism." Government rewards those that are in bed with them, hurting everyone else.

 

[Havensdad]

OK...ultimately though....which candidate do you think & feel can beat the Socialist cur?

There is no point in defeating Obama, if our candidate is Romney. Romney is almost as liberal as Obama...Obama at least is somewhat consistent. Cain is an idiot. Gingrich or Santorum would certainly be better than Obama, but both of them would get thrashed in a General election. So would Perry, who looks and talks like a clone of George Bush jr. Bachmann is hated by most independants, and would also get clobbered in a general election. Huntsman is so liberal on his views, that his running as a Republican is almost comical.

The only real conservative that has a chance of beating Obama is Paul. He has enormous support among independents, and among antiwar democrats. His polling, despite what you say, is actually quite good in the North East.

Most of all, Paul ignites passion in young folks, which has only been seen by the current president in the last election. Paul would trounce Obama, IF he gets past the primary. And he is the only conservative that would do so.

 

[InTheLight]

I disagree with most of his foreign policy positions. I agree with much of his domestic positions.

This idea that Ron Paul could beat Obama is laughable. If Ron Paul were 60 years old instead of 74 years old it would be a possibility, but the American people are not going to elect someone of that age. I can't even imagine who he would select as his Veep running mate to counteract the age problem but it would most surely be an unknown.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

There is no point in defeating Obama, if our candidate is Romney. Romney is almost as liberal as Obama...Obama at least is somewhat consistent. Cain is an idiot. Gingrich or Santorum would certainly be better than Obama, but both of them would get thrashed in a General election. So would Perry, who looks and talks like a clone of George Bush jr. Bachmann is hated by most independants, and would also get clobbered in a general election. Huntsman is so liberal on his views, that his running as a Republican is almost comical.

The only real conservative that has a chance of beating Obama is Paul. He has enormous support among independents, and among antiwar democrats. His polling, despite what you say, is actually quite good in the North East.

Most of all, Paul ignites passion in young folks, which has only been seen by the current president in the last election. Paul would trounce Obama, IF he gets past the primary. And he is the only conservative that would do so.

Time will tell son, time will tell. Excuse me if I dont bet the ranch on that one though.