View Full Version : Ron Paul Roundup (01-03-08) PART 2

01-03-2008, 01:08 PM

Ron Paul Roundup (01-03-08)
by RS Davis (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=194780914&blogID=343948809&Mytoken=78A007CF-8816-4C75-9A72D47ED0E36AEF34195321)


CNET sent out a questionaire on internet politics to all the major candidates, and gave us (http://www.news.com/Technology-Voters-Guide-Ron-Paul/2100-1028_3-6224161.html) some of Ron Paul's answers:

Congress has considered Net neutrality legislation, but it never became law. Do you still support the legislation that was re-introduced in 2007 (S 215), which gives the FCC the power to punish "discriminatory" conduct by broadband providers?
Paul: No. Net neutrality legislation will hamper the development of new Internet services and harm consumers in the long run. The best way to address the concerns of proponents of Net neutrality is to remove government-imposed barriers to entry into the Internet provider market.

Telecommunications companies such as AT&T have been accused in court of opening their networks to the government in violation of federal privacy law. Do you support giving them retroactive immunity for any illicit cooperation with intelligence agencies or law enforcement, which was proposed by the Senate Intelligence Committee this fall (S 2248)?
Paul: No. I would in no way support giving them immunity for breaking privacy laws. One of the legitimate functions of the federal government is to protect the privacy of its citizens, not invade it. If private companies cooperated with the federal government in violating the Fourth Amendment rights of their customers, they should be held accountable.

The 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act's section restricting the "circumvention" of copy protection measures is supported by many copyright holders but has been criticized by some technologists as hindering innovation. Would you support changing the DMCA to permit Americans to make a single backup copy of a DVD, Blu-ray Disc DVD, HD DVD, or video game disc they have legally purchased?
Paul: While I have not yet made a full study of this issue, I would tend to protect the rights of consumers to make a backup copy of materials they have purchased, as long as the consumers complied with any contractual obligations they incurred when purchasing the product.

Jeff Taylor on Counterpunch tells (http://counterpunch.org/taylor01022008.html) liberals why they should vote for Ron Paul:

Not only does Ron Paul represent Jeffersonian values usually termed "conservative" or "libertarian" today (fidelity to the Constitution, frugal government, states' rights, Second Amendment, national sovereignty), but he is also a leading example of support for Jeffersonian positions nowadays described as "liberal" or "leftist" (e.g. opposition not only to the Iraq War but to war in general, anti-imperialism, ending the federal war on drugs, hostility to the Patriot Act and other violations of civil liberties). This accounts for the wide appeal of the Paul campaign. It's precisely the sort of trans-ideological, cross-generational populist-libertarian-moralist coalition that I was hoping to see with a Feingold presidential campaign.

If we stipulate that a candidate polling at least 5% in national polls is a "major candidate," there is simply no other major candidate in 2008 who is more Jeffersonian, more committed to peace, justice, and democracy, than Ron Paul. He puts pretenders like Edwards and Obama to shame. I like a lot of what John Edwards is saying on the campaign trail today, but I don't think he means a word of it. He's a limousine liberal phony when it comes to the rich/poor issue. He supported the Iraq War until it became widely unpopular. He voted for the Patriot Act. He claims to be against outsourcing of American jobs but he voted for permanent normalized trade relations (MFN) for China.

Reason's Brian Doherty will have a nice piece (http://www.reason.com/news/show/123905.html) on Paul in the February edition of the magazine:

On the morning of October 30, a large group of people gathered outside The Tonight Show's Burbank studio. According to GloZell, a local eccentric who attends every taping of the show, only the lines attracted by Hollywood heartthrobs such as George Clooney, Justin Timberlake, and Daniel Radcliffe had ever come close to matching the crowd's size and enthusiasm. But this throng had gathered to cheer Ron Paul, a 72-year-old obstetrician and Air Force veteran turned Texas congressman. Paul was there to hawk not a movie or a record but his long-shot campaign for the Republican presidential nomination.

During the broadcast, host Jay Leno respectfully attended to Paul's calls for hard money, withdrawal from Iraq, and a flat income tax of zero. Offstage, Leno got Paul to autograph his copy of the congressman's recent book, A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship.

Later in the show, while performing "Anarchy in the U.K." with a reunited Sex Pistols, punk icon Johnny Rotten gave Paul a thumbs-up and a "Hello, Mr. Paul," later adding, "When are we getting out of Iraq?" In between, more ambiguously, he waggled his ass in Paul's general direction. But he shook hands with the congressman afterward, and according to Paul supporters on the scene he expressed respect to him privately. Paul, watching the broadcast with supporters at a Hollywood Hills fundraiser that evening, shook his head at the aging punk's antics, noting, well, we do promote tolerance.

That day encapsulated Paul's surprising campaign. It featured a powerful show of grassroots support, respect from unexpected places, and an infiltration of radical ideas into American mainstream culture. There was the aging iconoclast Rotten, mixing the anarchy he stood for as a kid and the market capitalism he lived out as an adult (the Pistols had reunited to help promote the video game Guitar Hero III), symbolizing the range of liberties Paul represents to a movement that includes both Christian homeschoolers and heathen punks. And there was the question so many Americans want answered, the question central to Paul's campaign as the only Republican candidate opposed to the war: When are we getting out of Iraq?

And finally, Bill Haymin of The American Chronicle is endorsing (http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=47544) Ron Paul:

It wasn't long ago that I thought Ron Paul was a long shot candidate for president. But now, thanks to a groundswell of support from intelligent people all across the nation, Ron Paul is suddenly in the running. While the mainstream media continues to attack Paul and make it look like he doesn't stand a chance, Paul has actually become the top choice among thinking people across America. That's why the Ron Paul revolution is now being called, "The Revolution of the Intelligent."

But why Ron Paul in the first place? Isn't he a Republican? Like you, I despise most Republicans. They're mostly corrupt, criminal-minded rich fat cats who are destroying our freedoms and driving this country into unprecedented debt. They believe in criminalizing hemp farming, destroying the environment, promoting Big Pharma, defending Big Oil, monopolizing health care and waging illegal wars around the world. But Ron Paul is no such Republican.

Paul is actually a libertarian, meaning he believes in personal liberties and follows the commonsense economic philosophies of people like Ludwig von Mises (www.Mises.org). Right now, this nation desperately needs intelligent economic policies. We're facing an imminent financial wipeout due to out-of-control debt spending and steal-from-the-people financial policies run by the Federal Reserve -- a privately-owned institution controlled by rich bankers. The People of the United States, as usual, are being swindled by the rich. When the current housing market bubble pops and house prices collapse, this fact is going to become increasingly obvious to everyone. I believe the financial hard times headed our way will make the 1929 Great Depression look like a walk in the park.

Ron Paul is the only candidate who will attempt to restore fiscal sanity to this country. All the other candidates -- including Clinton and Huckabee -- will only deliver more debt spending and fiscal insanity. The popular mainstream candidates all believe in fighting our illegal, undeclared "war" in the Middle East. And they're determined to bankrupt the nation in order to fight that war. (Nearly 50 percent of all discretionary spending in the U.S. federal budget is spent by the Pentagon.)