Help with Kucinich vs Paul rebuttal

[Scarecrow]

Hello

A friend of my wife who is a Kucinich supporter sent us this post she found and I would like some help responding back paragraph by paragraph on why this is information is not correct but do it in such a way as to NOT to flame or bash her especially since she didnt write it she just forwared it to us ( note: That I do like Dennis for the most part so this is not a bash him post )



August 26, 2007
Kucinich vs Paul
Filed under: Dennis Kucinich — g4rg4ntu4 @ 8:38 pm
Why Kucinich And Not Ron Paul

Ron Paul doesn’t support impeachment. Dennis Kucinich sponsored legislation for impeachment.

Ron Paul doesn’t support 911 Truth and even worse implies that the government’s version of 911 is true. Dennis Kucinich supports investigating 911.

Dennis Kucinich supports not-for-profit healthcare. Paul supports free market healthcare based on the ability to pay.

Ron Paul wants to eliminate all federal taxation. Dennis Kucinich wants to shift the tax burden to wealthy persons and corporations.

Ron Paul supports the neoliberal free market agenda of free trade, deregulation of business, and privatization of public assets. Dennis Kucinich supports fair trade.

Ron Paul falsely claims that lower taxes benefit all of us but this is false because different types of taxes affect different portions of the population. If you lower a regressive tax like the payroll tax then it benefits the poor and middle classes but not the wealthy. If you lower a progressive tax like a tax on corporate profits, capital gains tax, or federal estate tax then this benefits wealthy individuals and corporations but not the poor and middle classes. Paul also falsely states that lower taxes create jobs which is that trickle down economics crap that Ronald Reagan promoted which proved to be false. Paul also states that lower taxes allow us to make more decisions for ourselves about our lives which is only true if he’s talking about regressive taxes that affect the poor and middle classes. Paul also falsely implies that all we have to do is cut spending and we”ll avoid economic disaster.

Ron Paul also wants to deport every single undocumented immigrant. Paul shamelessly exploits 911 for his anti-immigrant agenda when he says a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas when he knows full well there were no 911 terrorists and that the attack was really a controlled demolition. Kucinich wants to grant permanent legal residence to immigrants living in the US for 5 or more years and conditional legal status and work authorization to all law abiding immigrants living in the US for less than 5 years.

Ron Paul opposes the International Criminal Court where he justifies it by saying the ICC wants to try our soldiers as war criminals and that they are a threat to our independence as a nation. Well I say if our soldiers commit war crimes then they should be prosecuted as war criminals. The ICC is no threat to our independence as a nation. The only reason for anyone to oppose the ICC is to prevent international criminals from being brought to justice. Paul falsely claims that the jihadists are our direct enemies. Paul also falsely claims that our reason for going to war was a UN resolution. The UN had nothing to do with why our country went to war. Oil is the reason why our country went to war but Paul doesn’t mention this and instead blames the UN to support his anti-UN agenda.

Paul is also an anti-abortion fanatic. Paul wants to redefine life as beginning at conception. I guess he wants to throw any woman who has an abortion in jail. Paul also wants to overturn Roe vs Wade. Paul claims federal court tyranny has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn. His statement is an oxymoron. You can’t die if you’ve never been born. Paul is trying to impose his religious beliefs on those who don’t share them. Kucinich used to be against a woman’s right to have an abortion but his views on the issue changed several years ago and now he’s a strong defender of a woman’s right to choose.

Kucinich discusses 88 different issues on his website. Paul only discusses 10 topics on his website.



Any input I can get from the Forum regulars woulf be greatly apreciated

Thanks

[bbachtung]

You're not gonna win that person over; although it is worth noting that RP does not want to eliminate the corporate income tax.

The International Criminal Court would have the power to drag Americans to Belgium to be tried by judges from Iran, Syria, Nigeria, China, France, etc. How does that not negatively impact our sovereignty?

RP actually supports a better 9/11 investigation because he thinks that the bureaucratic institutions in the federal government missed a lot of hints of what was coming and wants to shake up the overly cautious intelligence agencies. He's not a truther, he never will be, and if that's the person's litmus test for a presidential candidate, then good luck to him.

[dsentell]

Kucinich supports reparations for slavery -- Ron Paul does not

[jamesmadison]

Ron Paul on impeachment.


Mr. Speaker, I rise, reluctantly, in favor of the motion to table House Resolution 799, Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors, and in favor of referring that resolution to the House Judiciary Committee for full consideration. I voted to table this resolution not because I do not share the gentleman from Ohio's desire to hold those responsible for the Iraqi debacle accountable; but rather, because I strongly believe that we must follow established protocol in matters of such importance. During my entire time in Congress, I have been outspoken in my opposition to war with Iraq and Iran. I have warned my colleagues and the administration against marching toward war in numerous speeches over the years, and I have voted against every appropriation to continue the war on Iraq.

I have always been strongly in favor of vigorous congressional oversight of the executive branch, and I have lamented our abrogation of these Constitutional obligations in recent times. I do believe, however, that this legislation should proceed through the House of Representatives following regular order, which would require investigation and hearings in the House Judiciary Committee before the resolution proceeds to the floor for a vote. This time-tested manner of moving impeachment legislation may slow the process, but in the long run it preserves liberty by ensuring that the House thoroughly deliberates on such weighty matters. In past impeachments of high officials, including those of Presidents Nixon and Clinton, the legislation had always gone through the proper committee with full investigation and accompanying committee report.

I noted with some dismay that many of my colleagues who have long supported the war changed their vote to oppose tabling the motion for purely political reasons. That move was a disrespectful to the Constitutional function of this body and I could not support such actions with my vote.

I was pleased that the House did vote in favor of sending this legislation to the Judiciary Committee, which essentially directs the committee to examine the issue more closely than it has done to this point.

[Cjays]

I live in Kucinich's disctrict. Trust me, Kucinich supporters are like blocks of cement coated in molasses stuck in quicksand filled with velcro. They ain't gonna budge. ;)

[dsentell]

I live in Kucinich's disctrict. Trust me, Kucinich supporters are like blocks of cement coated in molasses stuck in quicksand filled with velcro. They ain't gonna budge. ;)

Hmmmm.

Kinda sounds like RP supporters! :D :D :D :D

[VoteRonPaul2008]

Kucinich went BROKE running Cleaveland.. his economic policies are seriuoulsy flawed... He's offering handouts when we are in debt.. why should we vote for someone who has no clue? and let what he was in charge of go bankrupt once before?

[PigeonHole]

Hello

A friend of my wife who is a Kucinich supporter sent us this post she found and I would like some help responding back paragraph by paragraph on why this is information is not correct but do it in such a way as to NOT to flame or bash her especially since she didnt write it she just forwared it to us ( note: That I do like Dennis for the most part so this is not a bash him post )



Any input I can get from the Forum regulars woulf be greatly apreciated

Thanks

As somebody already has stated he watned to impeach chaney for high crimes & misdemeanors, he was also a supporter of Bill Clinton's Impeachment.

Ron Paul supports a better investigation of 9.11 than the one the 9/11 committe released. (need a source for this statement)


Ron Paul supports letting the free market determine prices. There isn't a better way to lower prices than competition.

Ron Paul wants to eliminate federal taxes giving the money back to the people to re-invest in the market. Ron Paul also wants to back the dollar with real assessts to stregnthen it.

Ron Paul is anti amnesty and supports enforcing the laws that are already in place to get rid of illegal immigrants & to stop them from wanting to come over here. He believes if you want to be a citizen go through the process of becoming one, no illegal immigrants have done that.

Ron Paul is not an Anti Abortion fanatic. He is pro-life, but he doesn't want to legislate abortion from the federal govt and wants to leave that decisiion up to the states. It is the same position he has on Gay Marraige

[Goldwater Conservative]

Ron Paul doesn’t support impeachment. Dennis Kucinich sponsored legislation for impeachment.

From what I understand, Paul wants independent investigations before supporting impeachment. I know we all hate Cheney, but we can't just base it on our personal dislike or whatever we think we already know.

Ron Paul doesn’t support 911 Truth and even worse implies that the government’s version of 911 is true. Dennis Kucinich supports investigating 911.

As far as I know, Paul is not opposed to investigating 9/11. He simply happens to believe that 9/11 was not an inside job. I have seen no "slam dunk" evidence to the contrary.

Dennis Kucinich supports not-for-profit healthcare. Paul supports free market healthcare based on the ability to pay.

That's true. But a "free market" isn't what we have now. Between an inflationary monetary policy, excessive regulation, a systematic anti-savings bias, and a foreign policy that drains a trillion dollars from our economy each year, it's no wonder people aren't able to insure themselves. Paul seeks to do away with bad government policy, not add a layer of well-intended-but-still-possibly-bad policy on top of it.

Ron Paul wants to eliminate all federal taxation. Dennis Kucinich wants to shift the tax burden to wealthy persons and corporations.

Nice sentiment, but that has unintended consequences. Corporations and many rich individuals can afford to pass the tax burden on to workers and consumers. For example, a tax on corporate revenue is basically a sales tax. Eliminating the income tax would make the warfare state impossible, while eliminating the Social Security tax (in the long run, nobody who has payed into the system will lose their benefits) would be progressive because it's currently a flat 12.4% on labor income below a certain level. Also, most "progressive taxation" is extremely expensive to implement (the complexity of our current code imposes costs on the national economy of over $250 billion each year) and requires the government to meddle in our private lives in the name of enforcing it, which affects our civil liberties.

Ron Paul supports the neoliberal free market agenda of free trade, deregulation of business, and privatization of public assets. Dennis Kucinich supports fair trade.

Paul supports free trade, but not the "managed trade" of deals like NAFTA and CAFTA. True free trade is a win-win. For example, without corporate subsidies to (usually well-off) farmers in America, farmers in developing countries would finally be able to sell their products here competitively and improve their unfortunate station in life, in turn developing their respective homelands. Give a man a fish, he has food for a day, but teach a man to fish and he has food for a lifetime. Free trade teaches men to fish by allowing them to maximize their well-being and the opportunity to invest, but artificial barriers are a lose-lose, no matter how much foreign aid you send (and which goes to dictators).

Ron Paul falsely claims that lower taxes benefit all of us but this is false because different types of taxes affect different portions of the population. If you lower a regressive tax like the payroll tax then it benefits the poor and middle classes but not the wealthy. If you lower a progressive tax like a tax on corporate profits, capital gains tax, or federal estate tax then this benefits wealthy individuals and corporations but not the poor and middle classes.

Even poor people who don't pay income tax pay Social Security & Medicare taxes, which together amount to 15.3%. And taxes on corporate profits, like I said above, are not that progressive, since corporations don't actually pay tax, people do. Those people include workers, consumers, and shareholders (especially with mutual funds, a rapidly increasing number of Americans are joining this investor class). Capital gains taxes (not even considering that they actually discourage what be the normally efficient buying/selling as people hold out for lower rates, and they're not even indexed to inflation) and estate taxes raise so little revenue relatively, and they're good for nothing more than "sticking it to the man" and scoring political points. I thought we had bigger and better things to do than just be petty.

Paul also falsely states that lower taxes create jobs which is that trickle down economics crap that Ronald Reagan promoted which proved to be false.

They do. It's common sense and proven fact. However, it's not the end-all be-all to fiscal policy, which is what most supply-siders tend to overlook.

Paul also states that lower taxes allow us to make more decisions for ourselves about our lives which is only true if he’s talking about regressive taxes that affect the poor and middle classes.

Ever hear of the inflation tax? Bad monetary policy has led to rampant inflation, which means prices go up faster than people can keep up. That screws the poor and working class. Just go to a grocery store and interview some people.

Paul also falsely implies that all we have to do is cut spending and we”ll avoid economic disaster.

No, but he thinks that's definitely part of the problem.

Ron Paul also wants to deport every single undocumented immigrant. Paul shamelessly exploits 911 for his anti-immigrant agenda when he says a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas when he knows full well there were no 911 terrorists and that the attack was really a controlled demolition. Kucinich wants to grant permanent legal residence to immigrants living in the US for 5 or more years and conditional legal status and work authorization to all law abiding immigrants living in the US for less than 5 years.

I have never heard of Paul wanting to deport everyone. Even if it's true, I don't see what's wrong with enforcing our laws. He's not "anti-immigrant", he's for secure borders so that not just anybody can stroll into our country. Nobody has a "right" to just walk across without first proving they're law-abiding and don't intend to mooch off the system, among any other reasonable standards we decide upon. And drop the "I know what happened on 9/11" act.

Ron Paul opposes the International Criminal Court where he justifies it by saying the ICC wants to try our soldiers as war criminals and that they are a threat to our independence as a nation. Well I say if our soldiers commit war crimes then they should be prosecuted as war criminals. The ICC is no threat to our independence as a nation. The only reason for anyone to oppose the ICC is to prevent international criminals from being brought to justice. Paul falsely claims that the jihadists are our direct enemies. Paul also falsely claims that our reason for going to war was a UN resolution. The UN had nothing to do with why our country went to war. Oil is the reason why our country went to war but Paul doesn’t mention this and instead blames the UN to support his anti-UN agenda.

What? Now you're spinning off into conspiracy theories and making incorrect assumptions. Paul opposes the ICC and UN precisely because he opposes all "entangling alliances". No trade organizations, no military alliances, no "one world government" institutions. If our soldiers commit war crimes, Paul would probably want to deal with it ourselves (he opposes torture, unlike many in both parties) or work it out with whatever country we happen to be at war with. But since Paul is also against a foreign policy of interventionism and nation-building, this is unlikely to ever be a problem.

And jihadists are our enemies, but Paul understands why they're even around or attacking us in the first place. And enforcing UN resolutions is exactly the reason given by our government for going into Iraq. As for oil, well, there's been no independent study on that, whatever your personal feelings or (probably biased) reading. I'm sure Paul would support one.

Paul is also an anti-abortion fanatic. Paul wants to redefine life as beginning at conception. I guess he wants to throw any woman who has an abortion in jail. Paul also wants to overturn Roe vs Wade. Paul claims federal court tyranny has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn. His statement is an oxymoron. You can’t die if you’ve never been born. Paul is trying to impose his religious beliefs on those who don’t share them. Kucinich used to be against a woman’s right to have an abortion but his views on the issue changed several years ago and now he’s a strong defender of a woman’s right to choose.

Paul has never said anything about jail-time for women even if abortion were illegal. He disagrees with Roe because it was a bad decision and because it took away the power of states to determine their own standards. It's not the authority of the federal government to get involved. And I'll take a Doctor's word before your own that life begins at conception. It's not about religious beliefs, but about finding the balance between the child's right to life and the mother's right to choose. Nobody would agree that you can "abort" a recently delivered baby, but what about one about to be born? Or 8.5 months along? 7 months? 4 months? You get the idea. It's not as clear-cut as some on either side would like to believe.

Kucinich discusses 88 different issues on his website. Paul only discusses 10 topics on his website.

What kind of complaint is that? Maybe because he's better at organizing, or wants to have more focus for his campaign? We're not electing a dictator, but a president who will have to work with a Constitution, legislature, judiciary, and state governments.



I now regret taking my time to rebut this. Had I read it first, I would have known that this person does NOT plan on changing his mind and is much more radical than he might initially appear if you just read the first few paragraphs.

[jmdrake]

On 9/11 Ron Paul supports a new investigation as does Dennis Kucinich. I have yet to hear Dennis Kucinich issue the words "9/11 was an inside job". As far as the person who claimed "Ron Paul is not a 9/11 truther and never will be" that's a bit of a stretch don't you think? If Ron Paul TRULY supports and independent investigation AND if that investigation concludes members of the government were involved in 9/11 would Ron Paul not stand by those findings just because they make YOU uncomfortable? Personally I chalk anyone who doesn't buy the official "The government did everything it could to prevent 9/11" story as a "truther". There are just truthers at different levels.

On the 9/11 visa issue. Sorry to the Dennis Kucinich fans, but the lack of enforcement of visa issues is a 9/11 truth issue! Saudi Arabia had an "express visa" program where people were let in this country without being vetted. If 9/11 was an inside job wouldn't the conspirators want to be able to sneak their patsies into the country? Wanting people properly vetted is NOT the same as wanting to deport all immigrants. Further no credible 9/11 truther totally dismisses the role played by foreign patsies! The moron who wrote this needs to watch 9/11 The Road To Tyranny, Terrorstorm or Loose Change again. There are whole sections in each of the documentaries about how the FBI was taken off of the trail of the terrorists. Also some of the hijackers were training at U.S. military bases. People inside the government running interference for the hijackers is a BIG part of 9/11 truth!

On immigration. Ron Paul wants the borders defended. No matter what you believe about 9/11 you should support this. After all if 9/11 was an "inside job" than should we have the borders open so that the government can easily sneak their patsies in? Instead we're moving to a world where Americans rights to travel are being restricted (Chertoff wants to force everyone to have a national ID card just to go to the post office) but non Americans are given drivers licenses and can come and go as the please.

On "free trade" Ron Paul voted against NAFTA, CAFTA and every other "AFTA". NAFTA is NOT really "free trade". It's managed trade. Ron Paul doesn't want the U.S. to be a part of the World Trade Organization. Instead Ron Paul supports trading with everyone from the Cubans (shouldn't a Kucinich supporter like that?) to Egypt, Israel, France, whoever. But no massive "trade agreements" that really just undermine the U.S.

On th ICC and the UN. We shouldn't have to worry about our soldiers being tried for war crimes because they shouldn't be sent into elective wars. Elective wars themselves are a war crime. Ron Paul would stop "blank check" war. Further the U.N. is a joke. U.N. "peacekeepers" have been caught in child prostitution rings. But these soldiers aren't being tried by their own countries and the U.N. isn't holding them accountable. The U.N. needs to clean its own house.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article405213.ece

On abortion. Well you'll just have to forgive an obstetrician who's delivered 4,000 babies for pointing out the obvious hypocrisy of holding him criminally liable for accidentally harming a fetus while treating abortion as a "sacred right". Ron Paul would not end abortion but would rather try to give this decision back to the states.

On the number of issues Kucinich discusses on his site: Ron Paul does this and more at http://www.ronpaullibrary.org.

Finally Dennis Kucinich supports a total ban on handguns. If you REALLY believe that people within the government killed 3,000+ Americans on 9/11 why on EARTH would you trust those same people with disarming the American people?

Regards,

John M. Drake

[user]

So many things in that post are wrong, it's just scary.