Ron Paul on Forbes.com

[wgadget]

http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2007/10/01/election-candidates-politics-oped-cz_rp_1002paul.html

Go over there and look at their graph, too.





Candidate Central
Ron Paul
Ron Paul, 10.02.07, 6:00 AM ET

Editor's Note: We offered all the presidential candidates an opportunity to answer our questionnaire and provide us with a short essay on their campaign platform. Ron Paul was one of the candidates who responded to our request. Except for minor copy corrections, the following is his unedited essay in its entirety.

"Congress should dramatically reduce its overseas commitments, as well as spending in areas like corporate welfare, and devote one-half of the savings to debt reduction and the other half to transitioning to a market system of retirement security and health care. This action will allow the government to meet its obligation to those relying on Social Security and Medicare while allowing younger people to escape the mountains of debt we are leaving--$60 trillion of liabilities.

"As president, one of my priorities will be restoring the 10th amendment and federalism. Decisions about issues like civil unions or right-to-die legislation should be made by the states, not the federal government. I will stop federal judges from imposing new definitions on the States. I will also return control over education to parents and local communities. Decisions about whether or not to fund vouchers, have merit pay for teachers or extend the school year should be made by parents and local school boards, not by D.C.-based bureaucrats.

"I will also pursue true free trade with low tariffs and less burdensome regulation. However, I reject the "managed trade" approach of the World Trade Organization, North American Free Trade Agreement and Central American Free Trade Agreement."

Web site: http://www.ronpaul2008.com

[itsnobody]

Ah man they say he's liberal on foreign policy......

[kylejack]

Ah man they say he's liberal on foreign policy......

Unfortunately they have to make people understand it in the current political context, so they're right, sort of.

[ross11988]

wow talk about dumbass editor who put this together, never the less any publicity is better then none

[CodeMonkey]

Unfortunately they have to make people understand it in the current political context, so they're right, sort of.

He's aligned with the left on Iraq, but with the right on Darfur, Bosnia, etc, and he's all alone on Israel, Japan, Germany, Korea, etc. There's more to foreign policy than Iraq.

[born2drv]

He's aligned with the left on Iraq, but with the right on Darfur, Bosnia, etc, and he's all alone on Israel, Japan, Germany, Korea, etc. There's more to foreign policy than Iraq.

Perhaps not. Paul wishes to withdraw forces from everywhere, not something anyone in the right is calling for.

[quickmike]

Unfortunately they have to make people understand it in the current political context, so they're right, sort of.

then theyre totaly wrong on hillary if thats the case. they put her all the way to the left on foreign policy even though shes for the Iraq war.

Me thinks Forbes uses double standards and is full of shit:D

[CodeMonkey]

Perhaps not. Paul wishes to withdraw forces from everywhere, not something anyone in the right is calling for.

Exactly, but the left would never call for that either. Really it is a more conservative policy, but we all know the current batch of Republicans are not so conservative. The problem lies in the 1-dimensional slider scale and the general assumption that left = democrat and right = republican.

[hambone1982]

Exactly, but the left would never call for that either. Really it is a more conservative policy, but we all know the current batch of Republicans are not so conservative. The problem lies in the 1-dimensional slider scale and the general assumption that left = democrat and right = republican.

Absolutely correct. Amen brotha.

[bcmiller]

My comment would not send to the site, it gave some error.

This is what I was going to say.

I must take issue with the idea that Ron Paul's Foreign policy is "left". It must be that you incorrectly identify an interventionist pre-emptive war foreign policy as "right"... it is anything but conservative to interfere in the internal affairs of other nations. That is the Wilson doctrine to make the world safe from democracy, not a conservative viewpoint.

I understand that you wanted a helpful graphic to allow people to choose a POTUS as if they were choosing a cell phone plan. However, you should be careful to not incorrectly label the most conservative canidate as a leftist.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

I hate people that call libertarianism a "right wing philosophy" they tend to not know what it is that they're talking about. If it were only about right wing issues, then it would look something like the CP's beliefs

fiscal conservative/social permissiveness

"Ron Paul is a Moderate Libertarian"

http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Ron_Paul.htm

[rp4prez]

He's aligned with the left on Iraq, but with the right on Darfur, Bosnia, etc, and he's all alone on Israel, Japan, Germany, Korea, etc. There's more to foreign policy than Iraq.

If the left's position is to get out of Iraq then RP is so far left it's silly. He would come home right now, whereas the Dems would stay until 2013 at least or so they said in their last debate.

They should have put a graph for what the right used to be and RP would be 50/50 on that I'm sure. ;)

[JosephTheLibertarian]

this is because America's views on the political spectrum is filled with inaccuracies. America does the same thing on other issues, such as race.