Troyhand
12-26-2007, 12:54 AM
Semi-favorable article from North Carolina. Anybody know about this newspaper?
http://www.havenews.com/articles/paul_3571___article.html/constitution_one.html
December 26, 2007 - 12:26AM
Paul has some views worth considering
By Corey Friedman
Havelock News
"It’s not what the Founding Fathers would want.”
That sentiment’s been so often repeated by both Republicans and Democrats that it’s been reduced to middlebrow mush. The political equivalent of “Got milk?”— a once-successful slogan worn down by overuse — it’s actually a concept worth considering.
What would the Constitution’s cartographers do to mitigate modern crises? How would they handle the Iraq war, the national debt and social issues like gay marriage and abortion?
One man says he knows what America’s founders would want. He’s Congressman Ron Paul, a Texas Republican, and he hopes to take his message of strict constructionism to the White House.
Paul’s revolutionary message of returning to Revolution-era ideals includes slashing the scope of federal powers and overhauling the treasury system to ensure paper money is backed by precious metals. He wants to reduce taxes, balance the federal budget and work toward eliminating the United States’ debt to other nations.
The ongoing war in Iraq? A boondoggle sold with phony intelligence on weapons of mass destruction and a global police action that’s costing American lives and misusing a military meant to defend our borders from foreign attacks, Paul says.
A former Libertarian Party presidential candidate and a self-professed advocate of personal freedom, the congressman remains an outspoken opponent of abortion rights. Paul, an obstetrician/gynecologist who has delivered more than 4,000 babies, says on his Web site that, “there cannot be liberty in a society unless the rights of all innocents are protected. Much can be understood about the civility of a society in observing its regard for the dignity of human life.”
The message that the powdered wig and quill-and-scroll crowd had it right in 1787 is resonating with younger generations. The Web-savvy Paul has raised more than $18 million in campaign contributions, including more than $6 million alone on a Dec. 16 spree — supporters staged a re-enactment of the Boston tea party to mark its 234th anniversary.
I’m not suggesting we swallow Paul’s platform whole. Many of his ideas need some chewing, and one or two strike me as a little undercooked if not downright unappetizing. But as a candidate, Paul seems much more palatable than his Republican counterparts and Democratic rivals.
He’s consistent like no other politician. The Bill of Rights — which comprises the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution — was ratified as a single document. Why is it that so many champions of the First Amendment are antagonistic toward the Second?
Both major parties, in their efforts to sway darling special interest groups, take pains to slavishly endorse bits and pieces of the Constitution and deliberately exclude others.
The Founding Fathers weren’t infallible. They were hypocrites — white slaveowners who proclaimed the equality of all men and household tyrants who wouldn’t let women own land or vote.
The Constitution is a living document, and it should forever remain open to scrutiny and revision.
But, barring passage of new amendments, the Capitol Hill crowd shouldn’t do anything it’s not expressly authorized to do in the Constitution. That’s Paul’s political premise in a nutshell, and it’s one that would reduce taxes, bring back the gold standard, eliminate undeclared wars and obliterate restrictive gun laws.
Maybe it’s one that deserves our vote.
Corey Friedman is the Havelock News’ staff writer and photographer.
http://www.havenews.com/articles/paul_3571___article.html/constitution_one.html
December 26, 2007 - 12:26AM
Paul has some views worth considering
By Corey Friedman
Havelock News
"It’s not what the Founding Fathers would want.”
That sentiment’s been so often repeated by both Republicans and Democrats that it’s been reduced to middlebrow mush. The political equivalent of “Got milk?”— a once-successful slogan worn down by overuse — it’s actually a concept worth considering.
What would the Constitution’s cartographers do to mitigate modern crises? How would they handle the Iraq war, the national debt and social issues like gay marriage and abortion?
One man says he knows what America’s founders would want. He’s Congressman Ron Paul, a Texas Republican, and he hopes to take his message of strict constructionism to the White House.
Paul’s revolutionary message of returning to Revolution-era ideals includes slashing the scope of federal powers and overhauling the treasury system to ensure paper money is backed by precious metals. He wants to reduce taxes, balance the federal budget and work toward eliminating the United States’ debt to other nations.
The ongoing war in Iraq? A boondoggle sold with phony intelligence on weapons of mass destruction and a global police action that’s costing American lives and misusing a military meant to defend our borders from foreign attacks, Paul says.
A former Libertarian Party presidential candidate and a self-professed advocate of personal freedom, the congressman remains an outspoken opponent of abortion rights. Paul, an obstetrician/gynecologist who has delivered more than 4,000 babies, says on his Web site that, “there cannot be liberty in a society unless the rights of all innocents are protected. Much can be understood about the civility of a society in observing its regard for the dignity of human life.”
The message that the powdered wig and quill-and-scroll crowd had it right in 1787 is resonating with younger generations. The Web-savvy Paul has raised more than $18 million in campaign contributions, including more than $6 million alone on a Dec. 16 spree — supporters staged a re-enactment of the Boston tea party to mark its 234th anniversary.
I’m not suggesting we swallow Paul’s platform whole. Many of his ideas need some chewing, and one or two strike me as a little undercooked if not downright unappetizing. But as a candidate, Paul seems much more palatable than his Republican counterparts and Democratic rivals.
He’s consistent like no other politician. The Bill of Rights — which comprises the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution — was ratified as a single document. Why is it that so many champions of the First Amendment are antagonistic toward the Second?
Both major parties, in their efforts to sway darling special interest groups, take pains to slavishly endorse bits and pieces of the Constitution and deliberately exclude others.
The Founding Fathers weren’t infallible. They were hypocrites — white slaveowners who proclaimed the equality of all men and household tyrants who wouldn’t let women own land or vote.
The Constitution is a living document, and it should forever remain open to scrutiny and revision.
But, barring passage of new amendments, the Capitol Hill crowd shouldn’t do anything it’s not expressly authorized to do in the Constitution. That’s Paul’s political premise in a nutshell, and it’s one that would reduce taxes, bring back the gold standard, eliminate undeclared wars and obliterate restrictive gun laws.
Maybe it’s one that deserves our vote.
Corey Friedman is the Havelock News’ staff writer and photographer.