‘Scary’ presidential candidate naively hopes to return country to roots

[DrNoZone]

Let the emails and flaming begin (I'm being sarcastic, btw):

http://www.thepost.ohiou.edu/Articles/Opinion/Columns/2007/10/16/21740/

[FrankRep]

be gentle

Jesse Hathaway
jh309105@ohio.edu

[Adamsa]

Man, that was just an attack on him...

[FrankRep]

http://www.thepost.ohiou.edu/Articles/Opinion/2007/10/18/21775/


Your Turn: ‘Post’ columnist misinformed about Ron Paul, libertarianism

Published Thursday, October 18, 2007.
Letter to the Editor

I am writing in response to the biased and uninformed piece by Jesse Hathaway, who wrote about Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul.

First, Ron Paul did not switch over to the Republican Party to increase his chances of winning. He has served as a Republican for 20 years.

Second, Libertarian philosophy states that the individual is the ultimate owner of his/her life and one should be free to do as they please as long as they do not infringe on anyone else’s right to do the same.

Ron Paul would cut many federal government agencies, including the IRS, CIA and Department of Education. Taxing should be left to the states, the CIA interferes in other countries’ politics, and education should be left to local governments.The Constitution is intended to be a framework for which our country is built upon and places a limit on the federal government. Government serves the people, not vice versa.

Ron Paul has the most consistent record of all the candidates on both sides. Ron Paul never votes for anything unconstitutional, so the reasoning for the way he votes on the issues that Mr. Hathaway listed can be explained that way.

This country was originally set up so that the state and federal governments could balance each other out. However, over time the federal government has become supreme and the states subordinate. Just because we are America doesn’t mean that our country can’t go sour. Freedom requires an ever-vigilant populace, and I believe that Mr. Hathaway needs to understand that.

Brad Voldrich is a junior political science major.


http://www.thepost.ohiou.edu/Articles/Opinion/2007/10/18/21775/

[dircha]

I suggest not responding to that article unless you are a student there.

The author is an insignificant nobody. Responding to him will only validate his own already outrageous sense of self importance, and reinforce in his mind the truth of his accusations.

However, if you are a student at the school, the paper, to be fair, will likely look to run a pro-Paul column in the next edition.

Consider writing a piece about how both Hillary and Obama now tell us we will be in Iraq until at least 2013, how they have adopted the rhetoric leading the march to war with Iran, and how they have declared that a preemptive nuclear attack against Iran is on the table in a Hillary or Obama presidency.

Write that Ron Paul is the only viable candidate who we can trust to get us out of Iraq and to stop the march to war in Iran.

Write that unlike Hillary and Obama who want the federal government to tell you what medical treatment to have and how to care of your body, Ron Paul believes that it's none of the government's business what you choose to put in your own body, and that includes marijuana.

Write that we have a clear choice in this upcoming election. We can either vote for a candidate like Hillary or Obama who will lead us further down the path of militarism, empire-building, and increased government control of our lives, or we can vote for top tier Republican candidate Ron Paul who will lead us down a path of peace, liberty, and prosperity where we stop meddling in the affairs of other sovereign nations around the world, and where the government doesn't tell us how we have to live our lives.

[Sematary]

This is all I need to know about this asshat:

However, what his cultists fail to realize is that the Constitution is not some sacred document handed down from upon high, impervious to interpretation or change.

[DrNoZone]

This is all I need to know about this asshat:

However, what his cultists fail to realize is that the Constitution is not some sacred document handed down from upon high, impervious to interpretation or change.

Well, he is right about that last part; it isn't impervious to change. But here are rules written into it that give the states a LAWFUL way to do that, it's called amendment.