What is there not to like about Ron Paul?

Question

I have to admit, yesterday I really didn't know the guy. But after doing a little research, this guy is awesome. Just wanted to know what some of his critics have to say.

Witty one sentence liners hardly tells me anything, and if that is all you have to come up with that does little for your credibility. He is the only candidate to date IMO who is making any sense on any issue. And until yesterday I never thought I would support a republican.

About the Rosa Parks thing...lol..did you listen to his reason. He didn 't believe that the taxpayers should have to pay for that kind of thing. So he asked each member of the House to chip in and use that money for the award. I guess he was the only one willing to chip in.

Answer 1

Not sure.. I like him very much.. Ron Paul is one of the few presidential candidates providing any real clarity on our foreign policy and domestic issues.. Unlike other candidates whose stances seem to change from week to week, Paul's record is actually consistent. He is a strong advocate of a non-interventionist foreign policy where we trade and negotiate with countries,.. instead of fighting wars under false pretenses where we put our economy in financial risk and the lives of our troops in jeopardy.. To find out more about his positions on other issues, please see the list I posted below. In addition to Paul's strong anti-war/less government stance, he accepts no money from lobbyists, corporations and interest groups.. He is man of integrity.. which is rarity in Washington.. Paul offers real solutions, instead of just typical political rhetoric.. He truly has the best interest at heart for the average American, not just the elite..

A brief overview of his record:
He voted against the Iraq war.
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He is a strong advocate of free trade.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He opposes invading Iran.
He opposes amnesty for illegals.
He will drastically reduce the debt the United States is in, by reducing government spending.. taking the burden off taxpayers.
He voted NO to the amendment banning gay marriages.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.



EDIT: To clarify the misconceptions that have been posted:

CIA/FBI: There are over 100 different intelligence gathering agencies. He wants to end the bureaucracy and consolidate.. NOT ABOLISH THEM.. this actually strengthens our central intelligence by gathering intelligence and making it more effective


Isolationism: Paul is a non-interventionist.. He is a strong advocate of diplomacy and trade, not secluding ourselves from the world. In fact, after 9/11 Paul voted in favor of invading Afghanistan to find Osama Bin Laden.. He also supports the Letter's of Marquee and Reprisal to counter terrorism.. “The issue of Marquee and Reprisal was raised before Congress by Rep. Ron Paul of Texas after the September 11, 2001 attacks, and again on July 21, 2007. Paul, defining the attacks as an act of "air piracy," introduced the Marquee and Reprisal Act of 2001, which would have granted the president the authority to use Letters of Marquee and Reprisal against the specific terrorists, instead of warring against a foreign state."

""Once letters of marquee and reprisal are issued, every terrorist is essentially a marked man..." (from the links at the bottom of the Wikipedia entry)

As for our withdrawal from some select global organizations.. First of all you don't need NATO and the UN to network and communicate...

NATO, is "managed trade" not free trade. Managed trade limits the freedom of the markets.

And the UN? Wasn’t this the same organization that caused us to enter war with Iraq in the first place? Iraq defied the UN resolutions..

How can people not recognize how flawed this organization is?

“There has been criticism of the Security Council, e.g. for being unable to act in a clear and decisive way when confronted with a crisis.”

“The UN has been accused of ignoring the plight of people across the world, especially in parts of Asia, the Middle East and Africa”
(source Wiki)

"To date, Congress has attempted to curb the abuse of power of the United Nations by urging the United Nations to reform itself, threatening the nonpayment of assessments and dues allegedly owed by the United States and thereby cutting off the United Nations' major source of funds. America's problems with the United Nations will not, however, be solved by such reform measures. The threat posed by the United Nations to the sovereignty of the United States and independence is not that the United Nations is currently plagued by a bloated and irresponsible international bureaucracy. Rather, the threat arises from the United Nation's Charter which--from the beginning--was a threat to sovereignty protections in the U.S. Constitution. The American people have not, however, approved of the Charter of the United Nations which, by its nature, cannot be the supreme law of the land for it was never `made under the Authority of the U.S.,' as required by Article VI."

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=825

why would we continue our involvement in an organization that has only perpetuated our problems? .. and let it tax our citizens? Our founding fathers specifically warned us about foreign entanglements, and the UN is the biggest foreign entanglement that I can imagine. And let’s not forget that Reagan ended the cold war by calling Gorbachev up DIRECTLY..

To sum it up:
"A Paul administration would see Americans engaged overseas like never before, in business and cultural activities. But a Paul administration would never attempt to export democracy or other values at the barrel of a gun, as we have seen over and over again that this is a counterproductive approach that actually leads the United States to be resented and more isolated in the world."

http://www.unionleader.com/article.a...9-9e992810f700


IRS/ Monetary policy: This explains it better then I can:

“1) The destruction of the IRS would include a free market solution of competing currencies.
2) Competing currencies (read: gold and silver used as money without government intervention) would lead to the destruction of the Federal Reserve.
3) The destruction of the Federal Reserve would lead to a halt on the interest we pay to them for the pleasure of using their valueless paper.
4) The income tax, which is solely used to pay back said interest, would no longer have a purpose.
5) Tariffs were collected at point of entry (read: ports and airports), just as sales tax is collected at point of sale today.
6) Excise taxes are collected at point of sale.
7) The abolishment of the IRS would not limit the collection of said taxes, just the unnecessary and unpopular Income Tax.”

I'd like to add a point that someone brought up earlier.. Paul is for creating a competing currency backed by gold. "He opposes dependency on paper fiat money, but also says that there "were some shortcomings of the gold standard of the 19th century ... because it was a fixed price and caused confusion." He argues that hard money, such as backed by gold or silver, would prevent inflation, but adds, "I wouldn't exactly go back on the gold standard but I would legalize the constitution where gold and silver should and could be legal tender, which would restrain the Federal Government from spending and then turning that over to the Federal Reserve and letting the Federal Reserve print the money."He supports parallel currencies, such as gold-backed notes issued from private markets, competing on a level playing field with the Federal Reserve fiat dollar." –wiki

***He is NOT for the return to the gold standard.. he is for creating a competing currency backed by gold.. wouldn't you rather have currency backed with the rising value of gold, instead of currency backed by the depreciating negative value of debt?

Rosa Parks: Try looking at his reasoning, before making accusations.. He suggested Congress (including himself should pay for the medal) taxpayers are already charged enough.. why should they pay more, on an issue they have no say in? The public didn't vote on this, Congress did..

Abortion: Paul is pro-life on a personal level but does not believe the government can impose their personal beliefs on citizens.. he will leave that choice up to the states..


***And to Elway_the_Cat specifically, generalities? All of this information I found can be heard in his speeches, even debates.. In fact all of his articles are posted online.. And another thing regarding generalities.. that can be said about your candidate.. Paul provides answers beyond “fiscal responsibility” and detailed solutions to the problems facing our country… Not just stating that he’d only “consider raising the cap on social security” like Senator Clinton. I may disagree with your candidates policies, but I make the effort to do research, instead of latching onto misconceptions.. I’d appreciate it, if you could extend me the same courtesy.. thanks

Answer 2

I lost every hope about a transition back to before 2008, it's been so much legislative change is only 3 years, and a total nationalization of the US economy. But no matter what happen I'm proud to know a real patriot like Ron Paul, and I'm proud of the americans that support him no matter how different their opinions are on certain issues or agree or disagree. RON PAUL = ONLY HONEST PERSON IN GOVERMENT

Answer 3

There is literally nothing not to like about him. He is pro-unrestricted commerce. Pro-getting-the-governemtn-out-of-people's-lives. He wants to protect our freedoms above anything.

He, unlike the other conservatives, actually cares about helping the poor, he wants to pull out of Iraq cuz its pointless, and he is the only conservative willing to admit this. He is exactly what Americans have been looking for these past few years, its just that the stupid media has been playing him off and lying about him, so Americans do not take the time to research him.

Originally, i didnt like any of the candidates in this election, and I became apathetic, even though I am very politically-minded. But when I actually decided to research this guy beyond what the lying media told me, I realized how in touch this guy is with the desires of Americans. He is drawing both dems and republicans to his side because he is one of the only honest candidates in this election.

I fully support him now, and he has started a movement that will not die until its goals are reached and Americans are again free.

Answer 4

A few things, but hey is there any canidate that you are going to like that you agree with all the time? NO! Ron Paul is the guy ringing the bell out there too get people too pay attention to what is really going on, most people don't pay attention to politics on a regular basis ,much less understand what we do in the world as a country. They are busy and they haven't noticed the bandits who have taken our country over and brought us too the brink of ruin, you may thank that is a joke but I dare you too take a close examination of our budget, our obligations, and our general policies thruout the world. We can not sustain these in our current form of operations, not too mention we need desperately too reform the whole of our way of doing things so as too become more competitive on the world stage. So Ron Paul is telling you the truth about what is really going on, all of the others want to continue on the current path, which I believe will crash sooner or later. So in reality it is take your medicine now and reform the country or it is keep on doing the current plan and have a big mess too clean up later.

Answer 5

He is pro life
He wants to return to the gold standard
He does not play well with others

Edit He said:
On March 29, 2005: " I believe beyond a doubt that a fetus is a human life deserving of legal protection, and that the right to life is the foundation of any moral society."
Jan. 31, 2006: "The federalization of abortion law is based not on constitutional principles, but rather on a social and political construct created out of thin air by the Roe court."

Answer 6

he is a Republican. He is a Libertarian.

A libertarian is what I consider one of those ideologies that sounds good on paper but cannot work in the real world...unless you want chaos and mayhem as the rule of the land, and a free for all dog eat dog as the world you live in. As someone who feels that the rich should in fact be taxed more based on their higher inocomes, the poor less, and that the rich have an obligation to help balance out society with government helping serve that balancing function, I obviously disagree with someone who wants goverment to play as little of a role in things as possible and to simply let dog eat dog and the rich get their way..while the rest hope some crumbs trickle down. No thanks....and when the bridges crumble I do not want to pass a hat out to help fix it...and how about this novel idea, lets not let the bridge crumble in the first place.

Answer 7

During the first debate I personally felt that he was whining to the others that the US wants them to change to what the Liberals want. If the Republicans don't they will lose more than just the President's Office. I believe he is wrong and that most Americans would prefer to stay the course with the war. What is good however, is the opportunity for one candidate who has a completely different view on what is best for the country and his party. It is going to be interesting to see what the Republicans do.

Answer 8

I don't dislike him, he seems like a great guy. But I don't like his penchant for isolationism in this world atmosphere; it's naive. He wants to dismantle the CIA, FBI, and the IRS and he offers nothing but generalities about what's gong to replace them. If a President plans to do away with vital parts of our government and finanical structure he better darn well give me a detailed explanation of what he's going to replace it with. He really doesn't stand a ghost of a chance in this election. The Republican powers that be can't stand him and will never, for any reason, give this man the nomination. That's just a fact that Paul supporters seem to have trouble grasping. He would have done much better running on an Independent ticket.

Answer 9

I like nearly all of his views. With the exception of his somewhat isolationist foreign policiy views, his anti death penalty view, and his mention of getting rid of the FBI and CIA. Other than that, he's golden. A strict constitutionalist, uncorrupted by Washington, wanting out of international treaties that threaten our sovereignty and constitution, and is very conservative fiscally.

Answer 10

He's insane. The constitution is no way to run a global empire.

The insane part is that he thinks the American people would give up their empire and live within their means for the sake of something so foolish and naive as freedom.

Answer 11

He promotes change. People as a whole fear change.