In Defense of Ron Paul

re: In Defense of Ron Paul

Robert Kaercher — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:29:03 GMT

I'm positively amazed at what can be inferred from a five-word blog post.

Paul Grad: Got your tickets to the Ron Paul inaugural yet?

re: In Defense of Ron Paul

Paul Grad — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 23:00:49 GMT

Like Ron Paul, Lord Bertrand Russell also believed in non-violent political agitation, of which voting is but one form.

Perhaps Mr. Bostwick's excellent blog might have been called "In Offense of Ron Paul" for this surely is the first time so much truth has been thrown at the public for many years, and they are shocked. His performance on the committee dealing with the sub-prime mess on 9/20 was magnificent. He just kept throwing those jabs of truth out there like Ali throwing lefts in his opponents face (or was it rights?). Bernanke looked stunnedand shaken.

I'm quite optimistic that President Paul will be inaugurated in Jan. 2009 for quite a few reasons: No president has been elected since Eisenhower with a non-British Isles name, or a name over 8 letters long. The shorter the better. Hilary's voice is so irritating to listen to after a few minutes, that sub-consciously she will alienate millions of voters. The youth of America is getting pretty rylled up about taxes and Social Security, as it dawns on them that they are being exploited. The Clinton-Bush war on cannabis, continuing a long Dem/Rep tradition, makes them realise who their real enemies are. But perhaps tops will be the economic chaos caused by the plunging dollar. 14 more months of this and they will be in the streets. The massive inflation that is just beginning, as signaled by gold and the rise of such socialist rag currencies like the Euro and Cannuck Buck, will cause widespread hostility to the establishment. The war will drag on and the public's hate of Dem/Reps will surge, in contrast to the 'McGovern of the Old Right', Dr. Paul, the only peace candidate. Also, the common sense of Dr. Paul's proposals appeals directly to many who are exploited by the current system (tax free tips, or even better, abolishing the income tax). He also appeals to a lot of other groups: the far-right Christian anti-abortionists, states rights groups whose arguments suddenly seem a lot more leftist as Oregon has its medical-marijuana and assisted-suicide laws threatened by the anti-constitutionalists of the supreme court, the neo-fascist militia types who think he is their buddy, the 9/11 conspiracy theorists who make a very convincing argument and want questions answered, the gold backed dollarists,

anti-environmentalists, and finally those who understand and applaud the basic tenents of Austrian economics.

But perhaps tops is that people see a family man who obviously loves his wife and kids (like Truman who got a lot out of this image), has the guts to say what he thinks instead of constantly mincing before the public and worrying about his looks (Edwards $300 haircuts), and who believes in dialogue, civility and non-violence in debating the issues. He is the best of America, even if you disagree with him.

re: In Defense of Ron Paul

Niccolò — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 02:07:52 GMT

My hero Rothbard is correct, the matter is morally neutral, whats more all morals are in fact now void.

The state has taken away our innocent by its own existence.

If I kill a man I am no less moral than I already had been.

The only thing voting makes a person is stupid, the only thing that political involvement makes a person is waster of time.

re: In Defense of Ron Paul

JonBostwick — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 06:39:50 GMT

When trying to deleting the trackback, I clicked delete twice, so deleted the next comment as well.

I can't recall the user who left it, but it was definitely not intentional. Sorry!

re: In Defense of Ron Paul

JonBostwick — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 01:47:11 GMT

Thanks for the kind comments.

Jim,

Thats a good point. I thought of a similar one after I had already posted.

There is certain amount of elitism in the idea that none of yesterday's disenfranchised, who are Ron Paul supporters today, will be tomorrow's anarchists.

re: In Defense of Ron Paul

Jim OConnor — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 22:24:30 GMT

For most people Ron is the only person that they've heard making a persuasive, logical and passionate argument that more government makes us worse off, and less government makes us better off. Eventually, having had their eyes open they may figure out that they don't need that last little bit either, but first they have to get used to the idea of looking someplace other than Washington DC for the solutions to their problems.

re: In Defense of Ron Paul

csullivan — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 22:13:10 GMT

Great post, Jon. I think I'd missed that Rothbard quote before, but I'd heard him voice similar sentiments. It's nice to have something to run back to to back this belief! Keep it up!