torchbearer
07-16-2007, 06:30 PM
(sorry- I know it was posted in another thread, but the title didn't lend itself to letting people know what goodness awaited inside, please forgive me)
digg here:
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Ron_Paul_puts_love_in_the_Revolution
Ron Paul puts love in the Revolution
Who is Ron Paul? Why are random signs hanging around Utah County advertising a "Ron Paul Revolution"?
These are a few questions that usually come to mind when confronted by the unique, curiosity-provoking signs where the letters E-V-O-L are spelled backward in a different color than the rest of the word "revolution." (I realized, when looking in my rear view mirror at it, that it spelled "love" if read from right to left).
I asked a few of my friends if they recognized the name "Ron Paul" to see if I could discover the source of the seemingly spontaneous evolution of the "Ron Paul Revolution." "Wasn't he the last pope or something?" No, that was John Paul. "Sounds like that rapper." Hmm ... I think that might be Sean Paul.
Finally I asked a friend of mine in southern Utah, apparently notorious as a haven for extreme politics, who informed me Ron Paul is a congressman from Texas competing for the Republican presidential nomination.
A little embarrassed at my ignorance being exposed in an arena I usually keep up on, I buckled down to watch some of the debates (and other desultory political coverage) online.
Ron Paul was fascinating, a true anomaly in the political gallery. He really practices and votes what he preaches: doctrines quite fantastic compared to contemporary, mainstream, political agendas.
At one point during the South Carolina debate, Paul argued for non-interventionism, endorsing the inconvenient truth of "blowback" (a term used by the CIA to describe cause-and-effect of foreign policy). Paul's argument upset Mayor Giuliani to the degree that he demanded that Paul retract his statement, since it implied that the United States might have prevented the September 11 attacks if it had a history of better foreign policy in the Middle East.
Characteristically, Paul refused to compromise on statements he believed to be true. Later in the debate, when candidates referred to and approved of torture, in an extreme hypothetical situation from the moderator, calling it "enhanced interrogation techniques," Paul labeled it "newspeak," a clever allusion to George Orwell's 1984.
Most of the excitement Paul generates appears online. After each debate, online polls showed a surprising margin of people favoring Ron Paul. After the first debate, located in California, in an online poll by MSNBC, Paul finished first in every category except "most rehearsed answers" and "avoiding the questions."
Paul finished second in the South Carolina debate, according to a Fox News poll, garnishing 25 percent of the votes, quite an impressive feat for a man faring only around 3 percent in telephone interviews.
In the New Hampshire debate, Paul once again outpaced his opponents, again finishing first (this time, however, the poll was CNN's) in all but two categories: "snappiest dresser," which was Mitt Romney, and "most disappointing performance" went to Rudy Giuliani.
Paul's huge Internet popularity has sparked quite a controversy. Some claim his supporters are simply so passionate that they are spamming the polls. Others say his supporters merely use the Internet as a medium for communication because mainstream media mostly ignores Paul. And there are others who believe his message of liberty is inspiring enough to common people to get them to do something.
It's difficult to find traditionally political ad hominem criticisms of Paul. He served in the Vietnam War as a flight surgeon and has been a well-liked physician around his home district for decades.
He has earned the nickname "Congressman 'No'" around Capitol Hill because he so consistently refuses to vote on anything against his constitutional principles. Paul even refuses congressional pensions. A common criticism against Dr. Paul is his constant "No" votes against awarding congressional medals.
However, upon some investigation, he still conducts himself in a much more philanthropic way than his colleagues in Congress on this subject. House records show Paul's disagreement is not with awarding the medals, but the cost of the medal and ceremony to the taxpayer (sometimes as much as $30,000).
Whenever he feels the medal is still deserved, he offers, instead of using tax dollars, to contribute $100 of his own money, always asking if any other representatives will match him.
One instance, after they all refused, Paul commented, "It is, of course, easier to be generous with other people's money."
So what? What does any of this mean for American citizens? Well, most experts believe it is a long shot for Paul to win the Republican nomination, let alone the presidency; so it seems, at this point at least, unlikely that there will be a President Ron Paul in 2009.
However, Paul's presence on the national scene is refreshing. He offers a broader spectrum of choices for voters and an example of ideas making a difference without the backing of multi-million dollar campaign coffers.
Regardless of whether people embrace his political ideology, many are voicing their relief that there are still honest politicians, statesman after the tradition of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who both, consequently, also declined pay for their federally elected offices.
John Milton described the perspective that voters should have when considering candidates best when he said:
"Though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon the Earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously by licensing and prohibiting to misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse, in a free and open encounter."
Mainstream politicians, from both sides of the aisle, have been unremarkably dull and similar lately. Welcome, Ron Paul, to the political grapple.
digg here:
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Ron_Paul_puts_love_in_the_Revolution
Ron Paul puts love in the Revolution
Who is Ron Paul? Why are random signs hanging around Utah County advertising a "Ron Paul Revolution"?
These are a few questions that usually come to mind when confronted by the unique, curiosity-provoking signs where the letters E-V-O-L are spelled backward in a different color than the rest of the word "revolution." (I realized, when looking in my rear view mirror at it, that it spelled "love" if read from right to left).
I asked a few of my friends if they recognized the name "Ron Paul" to see if I could discover the source of the seemingly spontaneous evolution of the "Ron Paul Revolution." "Wasn't he the last pope or something?" No, that was John Paul. "Sounds like that rapper." Hmm ... I think that might be Sean Paul.
Finally I asked a friend of mine in southern Utah, apparently notorious as a haven for extreme politics, who informed me Ron Paul is a congressman from Texas competing for the Republican presidential nomination.
A little embarrassed at my ignorance being exposed in an arena I usually keep up on, I buckled down to watch some of the debates (and other desultory political coverage) online.
Ron Paul was fascinating, a true anomaly in the political gallery. He really practices and votes what he preaches: doctrines quite fantastic compared to contemporary, mainstream, political agendas.
At one point during the South Carolina debate, Paul argued for non-interventionism, endorsing the inconvenient truth of "blowback" (a term used by the CIA to describe cause-and-effect of foreign policy). Paul's argument upset Mayor Giuliani to the degree that he demanded that Paul retract his statement, since it implied that the United States might have prevented the September 11 attacks if it had a history of better foreign policy in the Middle East.
Characteristically, Paul refused to compromise on statements he believed to be true. Later in the debate, when candidates referred to and approved of torture, in an extreme hypothetical situation from the moderator, calling it "enhanced interrogation techniques," Paul labeled it "newspeak," a clever allusion to George Orwell's 1984.
Most of the excitement Paul generates appears online. After each debate, online polls showed a surprising margin of people favoring Ron Paul. After the first debate, located in California, in an online poll by MSNBC, Paul finished first in every category except "most rehearsed answers" and "avoiding the questions."
Paul finished second in the South Carolina debate, according to a Fox News poll, garnishing 25 percent of the votes, quite an impressive feat for a man faring only around 3 percent in telephone interviews.
In the New Hampshire debate, Paul once again outpaced his opponents, again finishing first (this time, however, the poll was CNN's) in all but two categories: "snappiest dresser," which was Mitt Romney, and "most disappointing performance" went to Rudy Giuliani.
Paul's huge Internet popularity has sparked quite a controversy. Some claim his supporters are simply so passionate that they are spamming the polls. Others say his supporters merely use the Internet as a medium for communication because mainstream media mostly ignores Paul. And there are others who believe his message of liberty is inspiring enough to common people to get them to do something.
It's difficult to find traditionally political ad hominem criticisms of Paul. He served in the Vietnam War as a flight surgeon and has been a well-liked physician around his home district for decades.
He has earned the nickname "Congressman 'No'" around Capitol Hill because he so consistently refuses to vote on anything against his constitutional principles. Paul even refuses congressional pensions. A common criticism against Dr. Paul is his constant "No" votes against awarding congressional medals.
However, upon some investigation, he still conducts himself in a much more philanthropic way than his colleagues in Congress on this subject. House records show Paul's disagreement is not with awarding the medals, but the cost of the medal and ceremony to the taxpayer (sometimes as much as $30,000).
Whenever he feels the medal is still deserved, he offers, instead of using tax dollars, to contribute $100 of his own money, always asking if any other representatives will match him.
One instance, after they all refused, Paul commented, "It is, of course, easier to be generous with other people's money."
So what? What does any of this mean for American citizens? Well, most experts believe it is a long shot for Paul to win the Republican nomination, let alone the presidency; so it seems, at this point at least, unlikely that there will be a President Ron Paul in 2009.
However, Paul's presence on the national scene is refreshing. He offers a broader spectrum of choices for voters and an example of ideas making a difference without the backing of multi-million dollar campaign coffers.
Regardless of whether people embrace his political ideology, many are voicing their relief that there are still honest politicians, statesman after the tradition of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who both, consequently, also declined pay for their federally elected offices.
John Milton described the perspective that voters should have when considering candidates best when he said:
"Though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon the Earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously by licensing and prohibiting to misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse, in a free and open encounter."
Mainstream politicians, from both sides of the aisle, have been unremarkably dull and similar lately. Welcome, Ron Paul, to the political grapple.