Thursday, October 18, 2007

More Ron Paul

Since I 'came out' the other day, I've had several questions both via email and in person and I thought that instead of answering them again and again, I'd rather answer them here. One, it gives me something to blog about, and two, it makes it so I don't have to repeat myself forty times.

Why do I support Ron Paul when he voted against the Iraq war?
Well, I figure that in today's political climate against the war, no one is going to come out in SUPPORT of the war. It's political suicide with the way that the major media has brainwashed the majority of the population. Yes there are candidates whose beliefs run more closely to mine in regards to the war, but that's only one aspect of the political spectrum and with so many other things out there to discuss. Additionally, Dr. Paul's vote against the war was more a statement upon the expansion of the Imperial Presidency and the power that the legislative branch is giving up to the executive branch rather than a vote against the war per se. Additionally, Dr. Paul is against the use of the military as president clinton did, as a police force in Serbia et al, as am I.
However, this IS the one stance that eventually may cause me to rethink my support at some time in the future. His moderation of his opinions from 2002 have been his saving grace in my eyes.

Do you really expect him to win?
Not at all. But wouldn't it be a kick in the teeth to both the Republican and Democratic parties if he did? Someone who is against the entire government support structure that the two major leeches off the government teat getting elected would cause a major outcry in DC from those who have made their careers on retaining one portion of the electorate or another based upon governmental reliance. What I do expect is that the major candidates will be forced to talk about and address the positions of Dr. Paul. If he brings enough influence to the table during the primaries, he will be able to influence the platform of the Republican party and perhaps swing it back to the limited-government party that it was under Ronaldus Magnus. Much unlike the current fat, bloated, disgusting mess of a party that it has become over the past 10 years. I don't blame President Bush for this, although he's allowed it to happen. It's the so-called Republican leaders in congress who have never met a federal program they didn't like. And unfortunately, President Bush had forgotten that he could veto things during these spending sprees or was afraid of what the NY Slimes would write about him if he did.

Do you really agree with the other groups that support Dr. Paul?
Anyone who asks this question obviously doesn't either know me or hasn't read much of this blog. Of course not. Truthers are morons. Anyone who believes that the government committed the atrocities of 9-11 needs a big-assed sign that they must carry to warn others that that they are in the presence of someone with an IQ lower than room temperature. And racist groups are generally ignorant white/black/hispanic/whatever trash. That would be TRUE racist groups, like the NAACP, KKK, Black Panthers, La Raza, etc. Not groups that are labeled racists by liberals because they espouse ideas of equality as opposed to favoritism based upon race.

How much have you donated to Dr. Paul's election effort so far?
None of your damn business. Want to know? Look up my name in the FEC records.

What do you agree with Dr. Paul on?
Gun control, federalism, the UN, immigration, border security,

No comments: