Ron Paul vs. Dennis Kucinich

[Fort Lauderdale]

Ron Paul vs. Dennis Kucinich

Could you explain to me, in depth, the difference between Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich? On what issues do they agree and on what issues do they disagree? Would Ron Paul ever ask Dennis Kucinich to be his vice president?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYWWBwf2wHE

[Fort Lauderdale]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJcnoDfFWhM&NR=1

[Fort Lauderdale]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSBdRVH3AUI&NR=1

[Fort Lauderdale]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjaMLuOpj38

[Fort Lauderdale]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx9a4hNeIRo

[Fort Lauderdale]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgzfu_b6v44

[specsaregood]

Yeah, no he is a democrat and thus is incapable of being Dr. Pauls vice president.

Also, he is anti-2nd amendment and thinks it is constitutional for the federal government to force you to buy products from companies. In short, he fails.

[HeaT777]

ron paul supports the free market

kuccinich doesnt

[Justinjj1]

Kucinich is a very honorable man, and I have a lot of respect for him even though I disagree with him on some issues. I would have no problem with him being Ron's running mate.

[Lafayette]

I had much more respect for Kucinich before got up on stage and gave this speech.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvzcLgx14G0

[kah13176]

Kucinich is a very honorable man, and I have a lot of respect for him even though I disagree with him on some issues. I would have no problem with him being Ron's running mate.

Kucinich is one of the few people we can oppose and respect at the same time.

[freeforall]

I don't think I could handle that much integrity in the white house! ;)

[trey4sports]

he wants to give me everything i want for free! pre-nadal care, post nadal care, abortions, universal healthcare, universal pre-K, universal secondary education!

[objectivefreedom]

I think Kucinich is respected by Ron Paul because he is forthright with his political views, and is capable of having an honest, intelligent debate... in other words, he is a *worthy adversary* to Ron Paul. Other than civil liberties, the unconstitutional wars, and maybe some other issues, I think Kucinich is pretty much on the complete opposite side of the libertarianism spectrum... I can't claim to know too much about him, but I would presume that he's a statist, collectivist, and Keynsian.

For example, in video embedded by Lafayette, Kucinich made the one reference to building bridges. In Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson", Hazzlit explains that Public Works only lead to more taxes. Here's an exerpt:


"...for every public job created by the bridge project a private job has been destroyed somewhere else. We can see the men employed on the bridge. We can watch them at work. The employment argument of the government spenders becomes vivid, and probably for most people convincing. But there are other things that we do not see, because, alas, they have never been permitted to come into existence. They are the jobs destroyed by the $10 million taken from the taxpayers."

-an expert from Economics in One Lesson

Anyway, that's just my two cents.

[Danke]

I had much more respect for Kucinich before got up on stage and gave this speech.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvzcLgx14G0

He kind of reminds me of the way Al Pacino speaks.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ww6bJflIYgk&feature=related

[FreedomIsPopularRPF]

I strongly agree with Kucinich on the war and empire but disagree with his embrace of government largess at home.

[Foolness]

This is a hypothetical that will never happen but damn it, I just re-watched this and I have to say Kucinich would be a poor VP: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EsyFmPR6DE

The best VP I think is always someone who is more outspoken than the president but at the same tme in agreement with enough issues and yet very outspoken in disagreement. None of that is Dennis.

I see it as sort of a progress filtration. The ideal combo should always be where the president is like a net blocking the corruption and size of government and saying no to everything while the VP should be pursuing for the social ideas that are actually good and can be federalized but at the same time knowing exactly what the heart of the corruptors are and where they are mistaken.

[emazur]

Kucinich voted against the full audit of the Federal Reserve, Paul's star piece of legislation in 2010:
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/house-hall-of-shame-list-of-those-who-voted-against-audit-the-fed/blog-365869/

And Kucinich talks the talk about anti-corporatism, but in the end he voted for the pro-corporate healthcare insurance industry bill, while Paul stood his ground against the corporations


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2UQRNSBFdU

[InTradePro]

I had much more respect for Kucinich before got up on stage and gave this speech.


Are you caught in the left/right idea or maybe throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Despite the faults, few politicians match up to Kucinich.

[kuckfeynes]

His heart is in the right place. I admire his humility and sincerity.

But he refuses to accept some basic economic truths.

He will always assume there is some better answer than free markets that can be found.

Therefore he will always be manipulable.

[Foolness]

He will always assume there is some better answer than free markets that can be found.

Therefore he will always be manipulable.

I don't think that's why he is manipulable. It's more like there aren't many consistent politicians anymore.

The same can be said for voting expectations. People don't praise consistent politicians anymore.

Even both the Tea Party and Ron Paul supporters can't say they value consistent politicians. At least not as high as it should be.

Many supporters just view consistency as part of another trait of a candidate. Worse, it has been hijacked by the media as being seen as simply stubborn or becoming a lame duck candidate.

The idea that there could be a better answer than a free market should never be seen as a fault in my opinion.

Once you start going down that route, it's like a leftist viewing anarchy or communism as heaven and must be reached above all scenarios and that once reached, that scenario will fix itself.

This belief is so dangerous because you (or people you influence) will start heading into a fundamentalist-like interpretation where free market can do wrong when in fact free market is the opposite.

Free market says that other answers often don't take into account the development that can happen in a free society which is why they often head to the wrong answers.

Basic economic truths is still basic economic truths. It's still soft science. It doesn't give the best answers. It helps prevent the bad answers to be repeated over and over again like rebranded justified insanity.

There will come a time when a solution is better than a free market. Innovations in food supplies for example, part of that requires some form of social distribution. The problem is when the lack of free market makes for the lack of a good media that will inform the masses what they really should do and the insistence of government interventionism to use such products by the free market as a tool to wield some hybrid of making it seem like the government is good rather than a corrupt over-spending robber baron guild marred by bureaucracy and politicians wanting themselves to get re-elected.

[Simple]

His heart is in the right place. I admire his humility and sincerity.

But he refuses to accept some basic economic truths.

He will always assume there is some better answer than free markets that can be found.

Therefore he will always be manipulable.

Yes he suffers from liberal hubris: thinking that central planning works best if only we got the plan right.