Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Ron Paul Says Some Crazy Stuff In This Interview

8 comments

Some highlights include him explaining why he has flip flopped on the border fence, Amber Alert is unconstitutional, the North American Union is real, it is not kidnapping to take a minor across state lines without the parents knowing, and tip toeing around the neo-Nazi money while denying giving part of Alex Jones' donation back.

Run time is 10 minutes.



To download the interview yourself go here. It's on the right hand side in podcasts.

I know I'll get emails about the border fence thing, but Paul has flip flopped on that several times. His website says he wants physical barriers on the border, but earlier this month he told Stossel he didn't like the border fence.

Also, his denying having any knowledge of returning campaign donations before was laughable. Here is the story.

Comments

8 comments to "Ron Paul Says Some Crazy Stuff In This Interview"

Anonymous said...
1:37 AM

“Some highlights include him explaining why he has flip flopped on the border fence,”

Total lie.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/ron_paul_on_immigration.html

Totally consistent!

“Amber Alert is unconstitutional,”

He opposes setting up a federal program for this but is in favor of a volunteer system. you have a problem with that?

“the North American Union is real,”

Total lie - I just listened to the whole thing and it wasn’t mentioned once.

“it is not kidnapping to take a minor across state lines without the parents knowing,”

He doesn’t think it’s the role of the federal government to man checkpoints between states and have federal agents try to divine the intent of the passengers. Sounds kinda police state-ish to me. Papers please?

“and tip toeing around the neo-Nazi money while denying giving part of Alex Jones’ donation back.”

Another lie.

His policy is not to send money back to anyone and he makes a good case for it. He didn’t “deny” sending Alex Jones donation back - he said he didn’t know whether it happened but that he didn’t personally monitor every penny in and out of his campaign and that HIS policy is not to take someones money and send it back to someone else who previously donated to him but whose money was already spent.

I *HOPE* people listen to the audio you posted!

They will learn what a thoughtful and principled man Dr. Paul is. It’s threads like this that brought me to support him.

So good job - you will get some backslaps from some people who either didn’t listen or support big government.... and other people will listen and support the Doctor.

KineticReaction said...
3:12 AM

Ron Paul is a consistent conservative.

http://republicanrenaissance.blogspot.com/2007/06/ron-paul-and-fred-thompson-comparison.html

Ron Paul and Fred Thompson: A Comparison

Much has been made lately of the impending entry of Fred Thompson into the Republican race for the nomination. The journeyman actor has precious face-recognition, a commanding presence and camera-smart charisma all on his side. Admittedly, it’s hard not to be drawn in by him. His most recent gig has concretized him as the Law and Order candidate, which I think effectively sums up what a fair number of my fellows are looking for. But what of his credibility as a conservative—a true honest to goodness conservative? Is he the champion of limited government that he makes himself out to be?

The former Senator says that federalism is his lodestar:

Republicans have struggled in recent years, because they have strayed from basic principles. Federalism is one of those principles. It is something we all give lip service to and then proceed to ignore when it serves our purposes … Those who are in charge of applying the conservative litmus test should wonder why some of their brethren continue to try to federalize more things—especially at a time of embarrassing federal mismanagement and a growing federal bureaucracy.

He has covered this ground elsewhere too, and in a fashion that actually sounds a lot like Ron Paul talking:

Our government, under our Constitution, was established upon the principles of Federalism—that the federal government would have limited enumerated powers and the rest would be left to the states. It not only prevented tyranny, it just made good sense. States become laboratories for democracy and experiment with different kinds of laws … Federalism also allows for the diversity that exists among the country's people. Citizens of our various states have different views as to how traditional state responsibilities should be handled.

“Limited enumerated powers”. Those are three words that we don’t hear so often anymore. The fact that someone of Thompson’s evident stature is saying them is heartening indeed. The federalist system we once had, with a very small central government rigidly defined in its jurisdiction, has in fact been turned on its head. It needs to be righted. Rep. Paul has been saying this for a good long time and I’m glad that Mr. Thompson is helping bring attention to it as well. None of the other candidates have shown much interest in the subject.

So how do these two, Fred Thompson and Ron Paul, stack up to one another? Judging strictly by the rhetoric, they don’t appear all that dissimilar. But of course it’s action that counts, and that’s where we should look to see who wins on the federalism front; to find out which one of them is really the most conservative. Luckily both have worked in Congress and have thereby provided us with a handy roadmap. Our comparison is abetted by the Congressional voting records published at Project Vote Smart.

Let’s start with Mr. Thompson. Out of the 50 appropriations bills the former Senator voted on between 1995 and 2002, he voted for all but 2 of them. (Appropriations bills are the ones that take money from the Treasury and mark it for spending. This is, it's safe to say, where one has a good chance of spotting who is truly for small government, or federalism, and who is not.) These bills Mr. Thompson voted to pass spent billions upon billions of dollars on, among other things:

* Agricultural subsidies (to dairy farmers, tobacco growers, livestock producers, peanut farmers, and others)
* Federal crop insurance
* Guaranteed subsidized loans to farmers
* Subsidized loans for rural housing, electricity and telephone service
* The National Endowment for the Humanities
* The National Endowment for the Arts
* The Peace Corps
* The Job Corps
* The Federal Railroad Administration
* Discretionary education spending
* School violence treatment and prevention
* The Commodity Credit Corporation (for the purpose of influencing production, prices, supplies, and distribution of agricultural commodities)
* The National Commission on the Cost of Higher Education
* The Smithsonian Institute
* The United States Holocaust Memorial
* The National Science Foundation
* The Dept. of Housing and Urban Development and its various community development initiatives

He also voted for the No Child Left Behind Act and the McCain-Feingold Act. He voted for increasing benefits to workers who have been displaced due to increased imports, voted for many tens of billions of dollars in foreign aid, and he voted to double the President’s salary. (On a side note, Mr. Thompson’s penchant for having the federal government underwrite insurance appears to predate his term in the Senate, going back to his lobbying efforts for the Tennessee Savings and Loan. I would ask Mr. Thompson how extending government support of the S&L industry through the FDIC figured into his concern for the principle of federalism).

Now let's look at Congressman Paul’s record. Out of 166 appropriations bills voted on between 1997 and 2007, Ron Paul voted against all but 6. His rare “yea” votes were reserved for bills which:

* Prohibited subsidizing crop insurance for tobacco farmers
* Reduced funding for the Dept. of Labor and the Dept. of Education
* Prohibited the use of federal funds to restrict travel to Cuba by United States citizens
* Prohibited federal funding of adoption in D.C. for couples not related by blood or marriage
* Allocated funds for the military quality of life functions of the Department of Defense (housing allowances, health services, veteran’s health benefits and pensions)

Paul also voted for a Constitutional amendment that mandated a two-thirds vote in both Houses of Congress in order to increase taxes (requirement waived if war is declared), voted against McCain-Feingold, against No Child Left Behind, and against the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill.

The two candidates’ records are almost exactly the reverse of each other. The answer to the question, “Who is the more conservative?” is clear. Fred Thompson talks a good game (and I for one do appreciate him for that), but his record reveals a tendency to stray far and often from those “limited enumerated powers” that he references in his TownHall.com articles. Probably no less than 95% of every non-military piece of legislation he’s ever voted for has been non-federalist and un-conservative, as well as blatantly unconstitutional, having no basis whatsoever in those particulars set forth for Congress in Article 1, Section 8. In this respect he may be no different than the vast majority of others who have spent some time on the Hill, but it will no longer do for him to use the rhetoric of federalism and limited government while the money hose still bears the impression of his grip upon it.

They say the problem with actors is that they never stop acting. This country needs a leader who actually lives his message.

KineticReaction said...
3:14 AM

Fred Thompson meanwhile lobbied for pro-abortion groups. He is a former Washington lobbyist.

Ron Paul is authentic.

Casey said...
10:29 AM

I hope people listen to the audio also ... starting with you.

He mentioned the NAU in the first segment about immigration.

Yes I have a problem with Amber Alert being strictly voluntary. I have a bigger problem with Paul throwing around the constitution without ever actually reading it. He said Amber Alert was unconstitutional, which it isn't. Amber alert is a part of the EAS system (emergency alert), and the Constitution grants the federal government that power.

Your spinning the kidnapping issue exactly as Paul did, and I explained the irrelevance of his comments in the original post. No ONE ever proposed have state line checkpoints to check all cars. That would be "police statish" except it was never an issue. He specifically said he disagreed with me that that was a form of kidnapping, and you know damn well I'm right.

The notion that Paul had no idea his campaign gave contributions back to Alex Jones is as I said ... laughable. Everyone is well aware that he gave money back to Jones, and it is impossible for the candidate to not know his campaign staff is giving away his money without him knowing about it. If that is happening then we have two more problems with Paul. One is that he seems to be unable to acquire common knowledge that everyone else has. The second is that his campaign is accepting, and returning, donations at will without his knowledge. Both call into question his leadership.

Ron Paul is not a conservative nor has he ever been. He is a libertarian, and there is nothing wrong with that. Libertarians and conservatives share a similar domestic policy, and ally themselves together. Paul is also not a constitutionalist. Hence his constant false statements on the Constitution. He is a confederalist. He claims the Constitution states things that were only in the Articles of Confederation ... we are not a confederation anymore.

As for Thompson and the abortion thing ... I was the first blogger to expose that as true while others defended him. Thompson is still the most conservative candidate in the race, and he knows the difference between the Constitution and the Articles of Confederation.

Casey said...
10:35 AM

Paul is also inconsistent on the border fence. He told me he was talking about a concrete wall that he opposed, and then touted his support of the border fence bill. However, he told Stossel that he didn't support a FENCE, not a wall, and he didn't like the fence provision in the bill. He's also voted against several amendments that would have built a fence. Why would he tell Stossel he didn't like the fence, but tell me he does?

Anonymous said...
11:16 PM

first of all i totally agree with the anonymous post and the kineticreaction post.
now for my personal views.
ron paul started out saying the exact same things he is still saying. which in my opinion makes him a man i can respect. he believe's in getting the federal government out of our lives as much as possible.
he believes in giving the states more control of their chosen beliefs and needs.
he believes in doing away taxes on a federal level which will help poor people have a better life.
he does not believe in paying farmers for not producing crops.
he does not support a school system who's main purpose is to make our kids stupid and there for more easily controled by the government.
he does not support limiting our freedom to live our lives without builderburg permission.
he does not believe the bullshit that the new world order is trying to feed us. and yes these people are real just like the amerio is being minted at the denver mint.
the nwo drivers licenes are being used in the carolina's.
the national health care plan is moving forward when implimented this so called health care plan will give the government total control over weather you deserve medical care or not.
the national id care that so many of you think is a good idea will have a tracking device enbedded in it so that at any time the government can decide you have commited some made up crime and pick you up to be placed where ever they choose.
just like our animals can now have locater devices inplanted under their skin some day soon the builderburg group will force us to have these devices implanted under our skin complete with all our medical information our identification information and our financial information this way they can more easily decide who deserves to live or die.
wake up people and educate yourselves stop believing the politicians and think for yourselves maybe then we can beat these people at their own game......

Anonymous said...
7:41 PM

Salut! Alejandro Anderson . payday loans

Anonymous said...
6:45 PM

toronto bad credit loans This website is the most effective I appreciated it to a great extend
AAA Toronto Payday Loans 1172 Bay St #101, Toronto, ON M5S 2B4 (416) 477-2817

Advertisement

 

Copyright 2008 All Rights Reserved Revolution Two Church theme by Brian Gardner Converted into Blogger Template by Bloganol dot com