Rah, rah, Ron Paul?

[BT]

Rah, rah, Ron Paul?

19 Dec 2007 04:12 pm

I am being urged, in comments and email, to ignore the fact that Ron Paul is a no-hoper because after all, he's an honest man who stands by his beliefs.

The same, of course, could be said of the lunatic who sincerely and with great conviction declares himself emperor of France and uses all the asylum's plastic sporks to map out his conquest of Russia.

Ron Paul has some beliefs that I like, such as his opposition to eminent domain abuse. But he also has a number of beliefs that are, not to put too fine a point on it, utterly insane. The gold standard is one; the belief that NAFTA is a trojan horse for the North American Union is another. Much of his persona, sincere or not, seems to boil down to "Foreigners are scary, and people who like foreigners are plotting to take away all your stuff."


http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/12/rah_rah_ron_paul.php

[Universe Prince]

Much of his persona, sincere or not, seems to boil down to "Foreigners are scary, and people who like foreigners are plotting to take away all your stuff."

No, but thank you for playing. However, one could probably boil down to something like that the closed-border, pro-war campaigns of folks like Giuliani. Saying let's stop having an agressive foreign policy and let's trade instead is not at all like saying foreigners are scary. It's more like saying, foreigners are neighbors with whom we should be trying to get along rather than bully around and piss off. And Ron Paul's objections to NAFTA have to do with the notion that NAFTA infringes on the national soveriegnty of the U.S. and Mexico and Canada. You know, national soverignty, that bugaboo that people keep telling me we're all in danger of loosing if we don't get control of immigration. People who advocate close borders and/or strict control of the borders tell me repeatedly and insistently that they are not xenophobic in any fashion. But now BT is using McArdle's words to suggest Paul must be xenophobic? Tsk, tsk.

Ms. McArdle clearly doesn't know what she is talking about.

But he also has a number of beliefs that are, not to put too fine a point on it, utterly insane. The gold standard is one

And there is a prime example. Granted it is not a popular notion or likely to happen. But that doesn't mean the idea is insane or even wrong. Economist Peter Boettke has this to say:

The empirical record on deficits and debts, and government attempts to monetize the debt certainly fits the story of Hayek and Buchanan.  And, the policy solutions they propose seem to logically follow.  If the natural proclivity of democratic governments is to concentrate benefits on the well-organized and well informed in the short-run, and disperse the costs on the unorganized and ill-informed in the long-run, then budgetary deficits and public debt do appear to be the most politically popular.  Government can only raise revenue in 1 of 3 ways: borrow, tax, inflate.  Taxation whle the most transparent, is also the most politically unpopular.  Better to borrow now, and then pay back debt with cheaper dolloars later via inflation.  So how do you stop this policy cycle?  Take away governments ability to inflate is what I would argue (and have) through abolishing the current Central Banking regime and instead instituting one of a variety of alternative monetary regimes.  I tend to favor a free banking regime -- but a classic gold standard would work better than our current arrangement to curb the inflationary tendencies. --http://austrianeconomists.typepad.com/weblog/2007/12/ms-mcardle-plea.html

And also this:

The 'self-taught' economics of Ron Paul (whatever other problems I might have with him and his presentation of these ideas) is grounded in sound scientific economics.  An understanding of the logic of human action, the coordinating capacity of the market economy, the problems with bureaucracy, the special pleading of interest groups, and the destructive capacity of inflation are fundamental to his economic policy message. --http://austrianeconomists.typepad.com/weblog/2007/12/you-cannot-be-s.html

So yes, rah, rah, Ron Paul.

[Richpo64]

>> Much of his persona, sincere or not, seems to boil down to "Foreigners are scary, and people who like foreigners are plotting to take away all your stuff."<<

Ron is our Kucinich, he's not to be taken seriously. His recent comments about Huckabee's Christmas ad are enough for anyone to realize what a loon he is. He should be removed from the debates, or taken on directly by the other candidates and expose him for the nut he is. I do give him credit though. He's a losertarian working within the Republican party. That's the only way to get the things things you (and I) agree with him on into a party that matters.

[Universe Prince]

Ron is our Kucinich, he's not to be taken seriously. His recent comments about Huckabee's Christmas ad are enough for anyone to realize what a loon he is.

On the other hand, support for Huckabee's Christmas ad might be enough for most people to realize what a loon you are.

For a better Christmas ad (and one lacking the "look at me, I'm a Christian" grandstanding of Huckabee's ad) try the Ron Paul Christmas ad: http://youtube.com/watch?v=XZPCWGtIupE

[Richpo64]

>>On the other hand, support for Huckabee's Christmas ad might be enough for most people to realize what a loon you are.<<

I doubt it. Besides, who said I supported it?

Ron Paul is a fringe cook, and everybody knows it. Just another Losertarian pretending to matter.

[Universe Prince]

Ron Paul is a fringe cook, and everybody knows it.

I had no idea he was a cook. I've certainly never heard him talk about cooking before. Though, I can't say I'd be surprised if he was a cook. He is after all a doctor and the smartest Republican candidate in the race. Why not a cook too?

;-]

[BT]

So Ron Paul is for open borders?

[Richpo64]

>>I had no idea he was a cook.<<

So now you're reduced to a typo Nazi?

Kind of says it all ...

[Universe Prince]

So now you're reduced to a typo Nazi?

Kind of says it all ...

Dude. It was a joke. Lighten up.

[Universe Prince]

So Ron Paul is for open borders?

No, and I didn't say he was. And no, I don't agree with him on that one issue.

[Richpo64]

>>Dude. It was a joke. Lighten up.<<

Dude?

 

[BT]

So if he isn't for open borders and he is in favor of the 700 mile fence and he thinks the whole immigration issue is really about welfare programs that illegal immigrants sap what part of McArdles statement do you find misleading?

[Universe Prince]

So if he isn't for open borders and he is in favor of the 700 mile fence and he thinks the whole immigration issue is really about welfare programs that illegal immigrants sap what part of McArdles statement do you find misleading?

I have not seen where Ron Paul says he is in favor of the 700 mile fence. I believe he has spoken of manning the border with U.S. troops.

What part of McArdle's statement do I find misleading? Oh, pretty much the whole damn thing. Again, Ron Paul is not about "foreigners are scary" but rather "foreigners are our neighbors". But part of my objection is also that you, BT, brought it up. As I recall, you're not one of the open border advocates, so I find it a little disingenuous that you're using this "foreigners are scary" argument as an objection to Ron Paul.

[BT]

We subsidize illegal immigration, so we get more
If you subsidize something, you get more of it. We subsidize illegal immigration, we reward it by easy citizenship, either birthright or amnesty. But we force our states and our local communities to pay for the health care and pay for the education. Why wouldn't they bring their families? And because of our economic conditions, we do need workers. But if we had a truly free market economy, the illegal immigrants would not be the scapegoat. We would probably need them and they would be acceptable.
Source: 2007 GOP debate at Saint Anselm College Jun 3, 2007

Voted YES on building a fence along the Mexican border.
Within 18 months, achieves operational control over U.S. land and maritime borders, including:

   1. systematic border surveillance through more effective use of personnel and technology; and
   2. physical infrastructure enhancements to prevent unlawful border entry

Defines "operational control" as the prevention of all unlawful U.S. entries, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, narcotics, and other contraband.

Rated 100% by FAIR, indicating a voting record restricting immigration.
Paul scores 100% by FAIR on immigration issues

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is a national, non-profit, public interest membership organization of concerned citizens united by their belief in the need for immigration reform. Founded in 1979, FAIR believes that the U.S. can and must have an immigration policy that is non-discriminatory and designed to serve the environmental, economic, and social needs of our country.

FAIR seeks to improve border security, to stop illegal immigration, and to promote immigration levels consistent with the national interest—more traditional rates of about 300,000 a year.

With more than 70,000 members nationwide, FAIR is a non-partisan group whose membership runs the gamut from liberal to conservative.

The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.

http://www.issues2000.org/TX/Ron_Paul_Immigration.htm#03n-FAIR

[BT]

More on Paul:

Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacist, and the Texas congressman doesn't plan to return it, an aide said Wednesday.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/12/19/paul-to-keep-donation-from-white-supremacist/

Morris ran numerous attacks, including publicizing issues of the Ron Paul Survival Report (published by Paul since 1985) that included derogatory comments concerning race and other politicians.[49][50] Alluding to a 1992 study finding that "of black men in Washington ... about 85 percent are arrested at some point in their lives",[51][52] the newsletter proposed assuming that "95% of the black males in Washington DC are semi-criminal or entirely criminal", and stated that "the criminals who terrorize our cities ... largely are" young black males, who commit crimes "all out of proportion to their numbers".[53][54]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul#1996_campaign_controversy