James4Ron2008
01-03-2008, 01:55 PM
...That was the email title in my inbox this morning. Thought this email exchange was interesting, thought I might share it here... My buddy wrote to me...
Kind of makes me nervous, especially since he is supposed to have a good sense of history.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T-iJKwskH4&sdig=1
An outsider looking in would say the only people who have the natural right to secure the physical borders of this land are Native Americans. Seems to me like this is pandering to white voters in the fly-over states. People think that illegal immigrants are clogging hospitals and schools but what evidence is there of that? A fence or a wall or whatever on the border of Mexico is not only impractical, but it reeks of Berlin during the Cold War.
If he wants to end granting Visas to countries that harbor and support terrorists, then he better be ready to give the middle finger to Saudi Arabia. That also means he needs to have a plan when OPEC raises the cost of oil to over $120 a barrel and gas soars to over $6.00/gallon. I've got no love for the Saudis and I wish we would tell them to fuck off, but we've got to have measures in place that ensure our infrastructure doesn't collapse. I know Dr. Paul doesn't support foreign intervention, but I don't think we can completely turtle ourselves immediately.
Getting out of Iraq is a completely separate issue. We had no business there to begin with. American, however, was founded by immigrants from Europe, as was, surprise surprise, the country now known as Mexico. It's not descendants from the Aztecs or the Incas or the Mayans crossing the border. No, those people's great-great-great-grandparents came from Spain, same with the bulk of the people living in California. You can't shed light on some decades while darkening others.
I just hope this is to get votes and not indicative of immediate policy.
I replied...
The greatest/worst thing about Ron Paul is that he never does things to "get votes".
I haven't been able to watch the vid cause I'm at work, but just by going off what you wrote...
If oil went to $6 a gallon rapidly, we would stop buying it. It's happened in the past, America adjusted. America is already adjusting. Toyota is predicting the Prius (despite its greater price) will compete with the Camry as their best selling vehicle of 2008. The Camry has been the best selling vehicle in the ENTIRE US for 9 of the last 10 years. Imagine how well a vehicle without the need for gas at all would do. The free market will eliminate the need for gas if gas providers continue to raise their price. As the largest consumers of gas in the world they need us as much as we need them. Actually, we need them less and less the more they raise their price. There's a reason WalMart is #1 in the US, and it ain't the happy-smile face or small town bully practices - it's the prices.
Besides, what if our infrastructure got a little bit of a shakeup? What would happen? Not much, methinks. Long lines at the pump? Car-pooling? (gasp) More people working digitally from home? Less people driving states away to see the Rolling Stone's re-unite for the 67th time? People waking up to the reality that dependency on other countries (as well as their dependency on us) is not always a good thing when it comes to a matter of survival? Geez, I sound like an isolationistic anarchist. What has RP done to me? :)
As far as prohibiting "student visas" from terrorist nations, that stance wouldn't surprise me nor does it upset me. The criteria of a "terrorist nation" has piqued my curiosity. If it was "any nation that has been known to breed terrorism" then we might as well give ourselves the middle finger too. As far as fence building, I'm not against it, and it has shown to work when implemented properly. Not work perfectly, there will always be exceptions - human ingenuity is a wonderful thing - but it will certainly make the process more difficult. The goal is to make the process of circumventing the correct way to enter the US harder than just doing it the right way in the first place. I agree with no amnesty for individuals not born in the US, certainly no special scholarships for foreign born children of illegal immigrants. I think this all falls into place with RP's strict constitutionalist stance. On one side you have everything on a level playing field where the rule of law is respected to the letter and allow the markets to sort out the rest. On the other hand there is literally no room left for compassionate government. I believe the danger in compassionate government is in those that lead it, not those that benefit from it. The opportunity for abuse is high, and well taken advantage of, as history has shown.
To which he replied...
Now imagine that the technology to make a car that has no need for gas has been around for longer than you and I have been breathing oxygen. So why aren't we driving in them now? Because basic human greed has let too many people stick their hands in the oil barrel. Toyota is not stupid, but they are also not an American company. I don't say this with any jingoistic scorn, but as a reminder of how much ingenuity and innovation America has lost since WWII.
I am not an isolationist anarchist, and I think neither you nor Ron Paul is. What I do hold, however, is compassion towards basic humanity. Shocking, I know, given the gross contempt I have for American laziness. I don't like the stance Republicans, and for that matter Deomcrats, are taking on immigration because it white washes America's culpability in the state of certain other countries. Ever wonder why Mexicans are so desperate to cross the border into this country? It's because their country is awfully depressed. What directly assisted in Mexico's depression? Why it was the North American Free Trade Agreement, a slap in the face to the sovereignty of both the United States and Mexico, engineered by corporations, built by Republicans, and sold by Democrats. NAFTA led to local American factories closing down and moving down south, where companies were able to pay rock bottom wages and not have to deal with any communist unions. The town I grew up in, Geneva, Al, was directly affected by NAFTA, and this led to my suspicion that all politicians were crooks no matter what color they wore. It's partly why I voted for Nader in 2000, because green was so much clearer than red or blue.
My point is this Us vs. Them rhetoric these ads run paints Americans as, well, it makes us look pre-19th century Japanese. Islamic extremism isn't as big a threat to the land of the United States as Mitt Romney or, *shudder*, Guliani would have you believe, but that doesn't mean it's a myth entirely. Anti immigration rhetoric in post modern America is a leftover from 9/11 fear. The idea that there is some "Other" threatening our way of life is the bastion of tyrant's rule, which is why I was so disappointed to see Ron Paul run that ad.
In spite of all this, believe it or not, I agree with most of what you said. I don't think people would up and up stop buying gas en masse were to suddenly sky rocket. I also don't think it would jump to that overnight, but remember the last gas crisis this country faced was over diplomatic and political snafus, not a natural resource crisis. America had already reached its Hubert peak in the early-70's, leading to the demise of George W. Bush's local oil company and to that family getting into bed with the Saudis. That's neither here nor there, just a friendly reminder of why we as a nation should never make this kind of fucking mistake again. ;-) The market, however, does not always make the proper choice. The market choose fast food over healthy living, causing a correlation between obesity and the price of healthy food. America is also grossly overpopulated, mostly with the children of legal citizens. The reason Holland and The Netherlands can do the things they do in government is twofold: 1) They don't have as many people in their smaller countries. 2) They don't have nearly the same kind of special interest bullshit polluting their capitals, something I attribute to mass populations and free market democracy.
The solution to all this is something I see eye to eye with Ron Paul on. We need to focus less on federal hand holding and more on local people taking care of local problems. We need to stop the homogenization of our land before it gets any worse. The ridiculous thing is that people from other countries actually help preserve the idea of America, that being a free land open to the world. Terrorists don't hate our freedom; they hate our presence in their countries. How ironic is it that America themselves hate the presence of foreign children on their soil when they have no right to bitch what. . .so. . .ever. You want to streamline legal channels to get into this country? Super, shut up and fucking do it. But don't kid yourself that you're going to legislate way the problem of Mexicans crossing the border or Cubans floating across the Gulf. The only reason most laws work is because people obey them. You give a group a big enough incentive like the choice between living in a dirt shack (Mexico) and an infested apartment with at least air conditioning and heat (America), then they're going to say, "Fuck your laws" even if they don't know about them.
Put up a fence or a wall or whatever, and you're going to embolden a lot of pissed off rednecks with too much time on their hands. People are going to die, just like in Berlin during the 1960's through the 80's. I hate it, always have, and always will. It's fear mongering, pure and simple.
I still support Ron Paul more than any other candidate, but even he drinks the koolaid sometimes. To be fair, sometimes I do too.
I'm trying to kick the habit.
If it were not for Ron Paul I firmly believe this conversation and many like it would have never taken place. If it were not for Ron Paul the Repub race would look exactly like the Dem race does at this point-- like the choir beating itself to death. If it were not for Ron Paul I wouldn't give a crap other than to be on the "winning team".
Any thoughts on that video? Fear mongering or strategic advertising? Fine line...
Kind of makes me nervous, especially since he is supposed to have a good sense of history.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T-iJKwskH4&sdig=1
An outsider looking in would say the only people who have the natural right to secure the physical borders of this land are Native Americans. Seems to me like this is pandering to white voters in the fly-over states. People think that illegal immigrants are clogging hospitals and schools but what evidence is there of that? A fence or a wall or whatever on the border of Mexico is not only impractical, but it reeks of Berlin during the Cold War.
If he wants to end granting Visas to countries that harbor and support terrorists, then he better be ready to give the middle finger to Saudi Arabia. That also means he needs to have a plan when OPEC raises the cost of oil to over $120 a barrel and gas soars to over $6.00/gallon. I've got no love for the Saudis and I wish we would tell them to fuck off, but we've got to have measures in place that ensure our infrastructure doesn't collapse. I know Dr. Paul doesn't support foreign intervention, but I don't think we can completely turtle ourselves immediately.
Getting out of Iraq is a completely separate issue. We had no business there to begin with. American, however, was founded by immigrants from Europe, as was, surprise surprise, the country now known as Mexico. It's not descendants from the Aztecs or the Incas or the Mayans crossing the border. No, those people's great-great-great-grandparents came from Spain, same with the bulk of the people living in California. You can't shed light on some decades while darkening others.
I just hope this is to get votes and not indicative of immediate policy.
I replied...
The greatest/worst thing about Ron Paul is that he never does things to "get votes".
I haven't been able to watch the vid cause I'm at work, but just by going off what you wrote...
If oil went to $6 a gallon rapidly, we would stop buying it. It's happened in the past, America adjusted. America is already adjusting. Toyota is predicting the Prius (despite its greater price) will compete with the Camry as their best selling vehicle of 2008. The Camry has been the best selling vehicle in the ENTIRE US for 9 of the last 10 years. Imagine how well a vehicle without the need for gas at all would do. The free market will eliminate the need for gas if gas providers continue to raise their price. As the largest consumers of gas in the world they need us as much as we need them. Actually, we need them less and less the more they raise their price. There's a reason WalMart is #1 in the US, and it ain't the happy-smile face or small town bully practices - it's the prices.
Besides, what if our infrastructure got a little bit of a shakeup? What would happen? Not much, methinks. Long lines at the pump? Car-pooling? (gasp) More people working digitally from home? Less people driving states away to see the Rolling Stone's re-unite for the 67th time? People waking up to the reality that dependency on other countries (as well as their dependency on us) is not always a good thing when it comes to a matter of survival? Geez, I sound like an isolationistic anarchist. What has RP done to me? :)
As far as prohibiting "student visas" from terrorist nations, that stance wouldn't surprise me nor does it upset me. The criteria of a "terrorist nation" has piqued my curiosity. If it was "any nation that has been known to breed terrorism" then we might as well give ourselves the middle finger too. As far as fence building, I'm not against it, and it has shown to work when implemented properly. Not work perfectly, there will always be exceptions - human ingenuity is a wonderful thing - but it will certainly make the process more difficult. The goal is to make the process of circumventing the correct way to enter the US harder than just doing it the right way in the first place. I agree with no amnesty for individuals not born in the US, certainly no special scholarships for foreign born children of illegal immigrants. I think this all falls into place with RP's strict constitutionalist stance. On one side you have everything on a level playing field where the rule of law is respected to the letter and allow the markets to sort out the rest. On the other hand there is literally no room left for compassionate government. I believe the danger in compassionate government is in those that lead it, not those that benefit from it. The opportunity for abuse is high, and well taken advantage of, as history has shown.
To which he replied...
Now imagine that the technology to make a car that has no need for gas has been around for longer than you and I have been breathing oxygen. So why aren't we driving in them now? Because basic human greed has let too many people stick their hands in the oil barrel. Toyota is not stupid, but they are also not an American company. I don't say this with any jingoistic scorn, but as a reminder of how much ingenuity and innovation America has lost since WWII.
I am not an isolationist anarchist, and I think neither you nor Ron Paul is. What I do hold, however, is compassion towards basic humanity. Shocking, I know, given the gross contempt I have for American laziness. I don't like the stance Republicans, and for that matter Deomcrats, are taking on immigration because it white washes America's culpability in the state of certain other countries. Ever wonder why Mexicans are so desperate to cross the border into this country? It's because their country is awfully depressed. What directly assisted in Mexico's depression? Why it was the North American Free Trade Agreement, a slap in the face to the sovereignty of both the United States and Mexico, engineered by corporations, built by Republicans, and sold by Democrats. NAFTA led to local American factories closing down and moving down south, where companies were able to pay rock bottom wages and not have to deal with any communist unions. The town I grew up in, Geneva, Al, was directly affected by NAFTA, and this led to my suspicion that all politicians were crooks no matter what color they wore. It's partly why I voted for Nader in 2000, because green was so much clearer than red or blue.
My point is this Us vs. Them rhetoric these ads run paints Americans as, well, it makes us look pre-19th century Japanese. Islamic extremism isn't as big a threat to the land of the United States as Mitt Romney or, *shudder*, Guliani would have you believe, but that doesn't mean it's a myth entirely. Anti immigration rhetoric in post modern America is a leftover from 9/11 fear. The idea that there is some "Other" threatening our way of life is the bastion of tyrant's rule, which is why I was so disappointed to see Ron Paul run that ad.
In spite of all this, believe it or not, I agree with most of what you said. I don't think people would up and up stop buying gas en masse were to suddenly sky rocket. I also don't think it would jump to that overnight, but remember the last gas crisis this country faced was over diplomatic and political snafus, not a natural resource crisis. America had already reached its Hubert peak in the early-70's, leading to the demise of George W. Bush's local oil company and to that family getting into bed with the Saudis. That's neither here nor there, just a friendly reminder of why we as a nation should never make this kind of fucking mistake again. ;-) The market, however, does not always make the proper choice. The market choose fast food over healthy living, causing a correlation between obesity and the price of healthy food. America is also grossly overpopulated, mostly with the children of legal citizens. The reason Holland and The Netherlands can do the things they do in government is twofold: 1) They don't have as many people in their smaller countries. 2) They don't have nearly the same kind of special interest bullshit polluting their capitals, something I attribute to mass populations and free market democracy.
The solution to all this is something I see eye to eye with Ron Paul on. We need to focus less on federal hand holding and more on local people taking care of local problems. We need to stop the homogenization of our land before it gets any worse. The ridiculous thing is that people from other countries actually help preserve the idea of America, that being a free land open to the world. Terrorists don't hate our freedom; they hate our presence in their countries. How ironic is it that America themselves hate the presence of foreign children on their soil when they have no right to bitch what. . .so. . .ever. You want to streamline legal channels to get into this country? Super, shut up and fucking do it. But don't kid yourself that you're going to legislate way the problem of Mexicans crossing the border or Cubans floating across the Gulf. The only reason most laws work is because people obey them. You give a group a big enough incentive like the choice between living in a dirt shack (Mexico) and an infested apartment with at least air conditioning and heat (America), then they're going to say, "Fuck your laws" even if they don't know about them.
Put up a fence or a wall or whatever, and you're going to embolden a lot of pissed off rednecks with too much time on their hands. People are going to die, just like in Berlin during the 1960's through the 80's. I hate it, always have, and always will. It's fear mongering, pure and simple.
I still support Ron Paul more than any other candidate, but even he drinks the koolaid sometimes. To be fair, sometimes I do too.
I'm trying to kick the habit.
If it were not for Ron Paul I firmly believe this conversation and many like it would have never taken place. If it were not for Ron Paul the Repub race would look exactly like the Dem race does at this point-- like the choir beating itself to death. If it were not for Ron Paul I wouldn't give a crap other than to be on the "winning team".
Any thoughts on that video? Fear mongering or strategic advertising? Fine line...