Ron Paul Interview
GOP Presidential candidate Ron Paul thinks Bush and Clinton are radicals. Also Congressman Ron Paul support lawmakers investigating President Bush and VP Cheney for possible impeachment. Who do you think is the radical, Bush and Hillary who voted for the war, support open borders, no real reform on our trade debt, supported the pork deals that put America 9 trillion in cash flow debt, 40 to 50 trillion in future obligation and support federal failed education programs like No Child Left Behind or Ron Paul who is against the above?
Some candidates are babe magnets, some are kook magnets. Candidates don’t really get to pick what kind of magnet they’ll be. They are what they are.
Mr Konop,
-o- Dubious never voted for war, he just went ahead and violated the constitution to do it.
-o- There is no such thing as a “trade debt.” We have a massive federal government debt caused by the fiscally irresponsible Republican’ts (as they always do when they get into office) that requires selling off Treasury bills like popcorn, which in turn fuels our trade deficit, but you can’t have a debt on a flow item like trade.
-o- You can’t have a “cash flow debt,” either, for the same reason.
Deficit for flow, debt for stock.
David
Hillary was head cheerleader to invade Iraq!
Our trade deficit grew after WTO China and NAFTA bipartisan bills pushed by Clinton and Gore!
John,
EWWWWW! Hillary in a cheerleading outfit!
My eyes! My eyes!
By the way … The sky is falling. the sky is falling. the sky is falling.
Ron Paul has a solution, tho
MD
LOL
Interesting article on Ron Paul from the libertairian journal –Reason
http://www.reason.com/news/show/121633.html
Ron Paul–Is He Good for the Libertarians? Why some libertarians don’t want to join the Ron Paul revolution.
Excerpt:
“Still, many libertarians are either ambivalent or actively unhappy with Paul’s campaign and the public attention it has gotten. They feel either that Paul is not libertarian enough in all respects, or are unhappy with linking libertarianism to certain aspects of Paul’s rhetoric, focus, or past. You’ll hear: If, after this campaign, whenever anyone thinks of libertarian, they think, oh, you are like Ron Paul?—will that be good for libertarianism in the future? And would you feel personally comfortable with it?
One prominent version of Libertarian Ron Paul Anxiety comes via noted and respected anarcho-legal theorist Randy Barnett in The Wall Street Journal. Barnett has decades of hardcore libertarian movement credentials behind him and is one of Lysander Spooner’s biggest fans. (Spooner, the 19th century individualist anarchist, famously declared the state to be of inherently lower moral merit than a highway bandit.) But the mild obstetrician, family man, and experienced legislator Ron Paul is too radical for Barnett in one respect—the respect that is key to most of Paul’s traction to begin with: hisconsistent, no-compromise, get-out-now stance against the war in Iraq.
Barnett is eager to dissociate libertarianism writ large from Paul’s anti-Iraq War stance, claiming that many libertarians are concerned that Americans may get the misleading impression that all libertarians oppose the Iraq war—as Ron Paul does—and even that libertarianism itself dictates opposition to this war. It would be a shame, he suggests, if this misinterpretation inhibited a wider acceptance of the libertarian principles that would promote the general welfare of the American people.”