No Need to Guess On the Issues

[Brandybuck]

Ron Paul has attracted a lot of people. This is good! They hear his message on the war, and suddenly become Ron Paul supporters. Or they hear his message on the Federal Reserve and the IRS. Or industrial hemp. Or something else that struck a chord. Welcome all, this is a big tent with room for lots of folks.

But I am seeing a disturbing trend. I am seeing a lot of people bringing their own issues to the table, and assuming that Ron Paul stands for them as well. It is tempting to think so, but that is not necessarily the case. Examples include those that think he believes 9/11 was a Mossad plot (not true), that he is in favor of "fair" trade (not true), that he is a pacifist (not true), wants to abolish the MPAA and RIAA (i have no idea), etc, etc. I've fallen into this error as well.

There's no need to guess on any of this. Besides being the most consistant congressmen in half a century, he's also the most prolific writer. While I haven't yet found his position on the MPAA/RIAA, I have found his positions on nearly every other topic. He makes frequent speeches to congress, writes an considerable number of essays, and is the author of numerous books. There shouldn't be any disagreement as to his stand on the issues of our day.

Please folks, before you assume he stands for something, double check yourself to make sure. It is okay if it turns out that you and he are not 100% in sync. Most likely there WILL be something you disagree with him about. That's okay.

Two excellent places to start:

http://www.ronpaullibrary.com/
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html

[Bryan]

Thanks Brandybuck- you are correct that one should read (and search) the archives first- the new Ron Paul Library is great. I like this forum because it gives an opportunity to discuss, provide support for and better understand Dr. Paul's positions. Of course, we don't all have to agree and there are sometimes trade-offs to a position so that is open game as well.

Maybe we should rename this sub-forum to "Dr. Paul on the Issues" which would better align with the intent. It would to let this develop as such with minimal need for moderation to keep things on-topic.

[AZ Libertarian]

His official site has merit. His weekly 'Texas Straight Talk', his speeches and statements, and his press releases are listed.

http://www.house.gov/paul/legis.shtml

[TrybalRage]

Well, after the firing of talk show host Don Imus, he made a statement about how the federal government does not have the right to regulate speech "in any way".

Perhaps that's where the confusion came from.

[ReneInMiami]

Where can I find Ron Paul's stance on protecting the environment? Does he believe that the free market will protect it? Is he a global warming skeptic?

[tonyr1988]

...the most consistant congressmen in half a century...

Did you have someone in mind that was more consistent than RP 50 years ago? Just curious.

[Nathan Pannbacker]

Where can I find Ron Paul's stance on protecting the environment? Does he believe that the free market will protect it? Is he a global warming skeptic?

Check out the Green Scissors project.
http://www.greenscissors.org

Ron Paul is involved with them. That, I believe, represents one of the cores of his environmental policy. He wants to cut ecologically dubious government spending and programs. There might be more, but I don't know of other things.

[eted]

Examples include those that think he . . . wants to abolish the MPAA and RIAA (i have no idea) . . . [/url]

I was listening to him speak about the network neutrality issue. It seems that, in spite of massive Internet campaign, he is self-admittedly illiterate when it comes to these issues. I would assume that this goes for his knowledge of MPAA and RIAA as well.

Most importantly, though, this shows that he does not hesitate to admit when something is out of his current knowledge base. I think this is a good trait and I am sure his advisors will fill him in.

[tonyr1988]

About the MPAA / RIAA, I don't see how the President would be able to do anything about it. They aren't government agencies. They use controversial tactics against people in court, but that would be settled by the courts themselves, right?

[Brutus]

In a constitutional government the President's opinion about every little matter doesn't matter because he is not allowed to intervene. See his comment about thinking being President of Switzerland on the Google interview.

Since 95% of the legislation passing Congress is not Constitutionally authorized (hence his record as Dr. No) his opinion after vetoing the bills will simply be "let the States and the free market work it out."

So, if you disagree with him on MPAA/RIAA/MADD/PETA whatever it really doesn't matter.

[user]

The MPAA and RIAA would be less powerful under a Ron Paul presidency, because most of their power right now is thanks to lobbying Congress for special treatment. They frequently get extensions of copyright terms and they have government agencies like the FBI doing anti-piracy work. This is a huge subsidy for them. My guess is that Ron Paul would veto any bills that give them special treatment and would probably direct government agencies to shift their priorities.

IMO, the MPAA and RIAA should have to sue in civil court if they think someone is guilty of piracy, instead of having taxpayer-funded preemptive enforcement. Let them do their own dirty work. I don't know if Ron Paul agrees with this or not, though.

[Soccrmastr]

I was listening to him speak about the network neutrality issue. It seems that, in spite of massive Internet campaign, he is self-admittedly illiterate when it comes to these issues. I would assume that this goes for his knowledge of MPAA and RIAA as well.

Most importantly, though, this shows that he does not hesitate to admit when something is out of his current knowledge base. I think this is a good trait and I am sure his advisors will fill him in.

He talked about net neutrality. He said that government shouldn't regulate internet at all, which basically means he will do nothing to solve the "problem" that is supposedly currently occuring. Anything government does to try to fix these issues would be giving themselves more power and the market less power.

[raiha]

Ron Paul makes sense when he speaks in these areas. I have read what he writes in his library. I agree with his stance on over taxing in these areas and top- heavy interference and bureaucracy.
However, would not privatization of these areas lead to profit mongering as opposed to people mongering? My dots are not being joined up very well. Can someone help. I'm not used to how your systems work over there.

Well actually, I'm just gearing up to a family ordeal (i mean Christmas dinner) where they are already making wild accusations about his politics.

[Jeremiah]

Ron Paul makes sense when he speaks in these areas. I have read what he writes in his library. I agree with his stance on over taxing in these areas and top- heavy interference and bureaucracy.
However, would not privatization of these areas lead to profit mongering as opposed to people mongering? My dots are not being joined up very well. Can someone help. I'm not used to how your systems work over there.

Well actually, I'm just gearing up to a family ordeal (i mean Christmas dinner) where they are already making wild accusations about his politics.

It is my understanding that he is in favour of consumer sovereignty and personal responsibility. This means initially giving massive tax credits and permitting tax free medical savings accounts for people to look after their own health, like individual rather than corporate medical insurance and drug purchases. He would also include alternative therapies and natural health products which are under attack at the moment. He has also mentioned making it legal to buy generic drugs from Canada where they are much cheaper. This puts the power where it belongs, with the individual, and makes everyone more conscious of the cost of their own health care. Where there are dependency issues he would be careful to manage the transition for those people. Don't forget he is a medical professional with an intimate understanding of the situation on the ground.

[Fritz_Katz]

Where can I find Ron Paul's stance on protecting the environment? Does he believe that the free market will protect it? Is he a global warming skeptic?
Ron Paul says global warming is a 'supposed problem'. (http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=409) Paul doesn't seem to agree with either the WTO or the Kyoto Accords.

Ron Paul says: "Environmentalists go back and forth, from warning about a coming ice age to arguing the grave dangers of global warming". (http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=534) In other words, they can't make up their minds. That sounds pretty skeptical to me.

[raiha]

I disagree with him firmly here. Libertarianism is about taking personal responsibility but how can you consume at such a voracious rate as a species (most of it in the first world is not out of necessity but greed) and not have ecologicical consequences? Not only that, we live in a culture where most people don't have a clue about personal responsibility. I wonder if RP recycles his bottles and cans?Anyone know?

[tanstaafl]

I disagree with him firmly here [that humans might not have caused global warming]. Libertarianism is about taking personal responsibility but how can you consume at such a voracious rate as a species (most of it in the first world is not out of necessity but greed) and not have ecologicical consequences? Not only that, we live in a culture where most people don't have a clue about personal responsibility. I wonder if RP recycles his bottles and cans?Anyone know?

http://www.google.com/search?q=mars+warming&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

I started off thinking much as you do. If you look at the issue CRITICALLY, however, instead of starting with the FACTS of human population growth/resource use/pollution and SEEKING consequences, you end up with some major problems (which Al Gore doesn't even *mention* as an impediment to his thesis).

WHY ARE THE OTHER PLANETS, SUCH AS MARS *ALSO* WARMING? Is that human "spooky" action at a distance, or might changes in solar output be a more likely explanation for ALL the globes warming at the same time?

It's more than something to think about - before you spend untold trillions .. and VASTLY increase the power of "one world" government.... If politicians and bureaucrats agree they need to act, you can be just about sure it is an error.

[Sippy]

Hey all, I do have one question I hope someone can answer for me. Before I get into that, I just want to say that I like Dr. Paul's stances on many of the issues. Now, illegal immigration is a very important issue to me, and I like Dr. Paul's six point plan, but he doesn't mention anything about going after employers who employ illegal aliens. Bullet number two in his plan talks about enforcing visa rules (Which I assume may include employer enforcement as well) but nowhere does it specifically state he will go after employers who hire illegals.
Any help is appreciated.

[Sippy]

Where can I find Ron Paul's stance on protecting the environment? Does he believe that the free market will protect it? Is he a global warming skeptic?


I hope he is a man made global warming skeptic because it is junk science to think that global warming is man made. How arrogant we can be as a race!

However, I believe that RP's ideas on the free market will allow alternative fuels to exert a larger presence and hopefully get rid of the oil monsters controlling our world.
We all know the BOOSH family fortune is in OIL so our traitor in chief has no intention of doing anything about the soaring oil costs.

[Crickett]

Where can I find Ron Paul's stance on protecting the environment? Does he believe that the free market will protect it? Is he a global warming skeptic?
Another poster gave you good advice. I know Ron does not want it to be a federal issue, but one from the state. NO one is allowed to hurt anyone else, through pollution, to him, period. Federally, they mandate certain (changing) amounts of pollution is OK. Ron maintains that the free market has tougher regulations.